I don't like Avedon's work

[Arthurwg]

I find that a strange idea. I think he could take photos of these people as though they are statues he doesn't really understand yet that doesn't suggest any kind of superiority. Is there a reason to feel superior to an oilworker? Do you feel superior to people who have to do manual labour? people who have to get dirty? (I know nothing about you personally, so this isn't an accusation - it's a genuine and general question. And a statement: I don't feel superior to any of those people, nor do I see a reason to in those photos.)

I was not talking about myself, only Avedon's intent, conscious or unconscious.

 

[MattKing]

Thanks for the small edit, as well as the return to civil disagreement/discussion.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I don't know why someone needs to "make their mark" in order to have a relevant opinion. Basquiat certainly made his mark all over NYC walls using spray paint. Some people call that genius, and maybe it is; but I prefer to call it vandalism. Am I disqualified from stating that just because nobody highbrow admires my own "street artistry"? - which happens to be nonexistent because I abhor that kind of thing.

Similarly, I don't need to emulate Avedon in order to warrant a certain kind of reaction to his work. I don't even want to be involved with his own particular genre of influence, though it is psychologically and historically interesting, repulsive as it can be. I trust my own eyes.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

When this thread started I was like, ain't gonna say jack... But as long as I know I am not alone....

The American West images by Avedon are just exploitation in my mind. You see the same type of thing today. Photograph the freaks. Blow them up huge.

I do like Avedon's fashion images and he was a good celebrity photographer. He probably should have stuck to those though.

 

[Richard Man]

Sorry, I don't check the gallery often, but I'd imagine there must be tons of amazingly great portrait photos from the esteemed members here....

 

[Don_ih]

I was not talking about myself, only Avedon's intent, conscious or unconscious.

I think Avedon's intent was closer to a kind of portrait-taking tourism. Instead of visiting places and taking pictures of landmarks, he took picture of people - but not just any people, particular "types" (for want of a better word) that he thought would be interesting. He probably thought he was being representative...

Photograph the freaks.

The portraits in The American West don't really look any different from a lot of the Portraits of famous people in his previous book.

What's being understood as his snobbish judgment doesn't seem to be restricted to The West.

 

[BrianShaw]

I look at his portraits, collectively, as a study in the diversity of humanity. Individually they might not be interesting but in groups they provide fodder to compare/contrast. We are all freaks in one way or another, perhaps. Nothing I’d hang on the walls, though.

 

[Milpool]

The "let's see you do better" argument against criticism never fails to turn up.

 

[BCM]

I've enjoyed this thread and have always been a fan of Avedon's American West book. I used to engage students who were in my Sensitometry classes and have them discuss about 10 images. These were experienced photographers who were studying BTZS and Zone System techniques as well as photo chemistry so they naturally looked at the technical nature of the shots. After that discussion ended, I would ask them to describe details about a few images. I'd ask about shirts, necklaces, hats, etc. Few could answer any questions. We then went back and looked again but only at one or two images. The beauty of Avedon is that the subject is stopped in time in all their natural beauty for the rest of us to examine on a level of fine detail for time ever lasting. They stare back at you while you stare at them. The larger format images (including one show in Manhattan about 2 years ago) were just beyond 1:1 in size lending even direct connections between viewer and subject. It is, IMHO, portraiture beyond photography and so much more personal. As others have said, you have to try it in order to see what he was able to accomplish.

 

[koraks]

I'd ask about shirts, necklaces, hats, etc. Few could answer any questions.

I can imagine that. I'd struggle, too.
Did you also questions like "how did that portrait make you feel," "how do you think the sitter views the world" etc?

 

[Arthurwg]

I do like Avedon's fashion images and he was a good celebrity photographer. He probably should have stuck to those though.

It was part of his intense competition with Penn, who was generally considered to be much more of an "artist." Avedon had a neurotic need to be thought of as more than just a fashion photographer, even though he was among the best at it and made millions of dollars.

 

[warden]

They stare back at you while you stare at them. The larger format images (including one show in Manhattan about 2 years ago) were just beyond 1:1 in size lending even direct connections between viewer and subject. It is, IMHO, portraiture beyond photography and so much more personal.

Sounds like you’re ready to start a new thread called I DO like Avedon’s work.

I agree with you by the way – I think the series works.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Don - which one of us has Avedon shown in the upper left of that set of four?

 

[warden]

.

View attachment 393063

I keep coming back to this one, Don. I think it’s a fantastic portrait and beautifully composed. I see my uncle in this image.

 

[Erik L]

I think Avedon's intent was closer to a kind of portrait-taking tourism. Instead of visiting places and taking pictures of landmarks, he took picture of people - but not just any people, particular "types" (for want of a better word) that he thought would be interesting. He probably thought he was being representative...



The portraits in The American West don't really look any different from a lot of the Portraits of famous people in his previous book.

What's being understood as his snobbish judgment doesn't seem to be restricted to The West.

View attachment 393061 View attachment 393062

View attachment 393063 View attachment 393064

I must be too shallow to really understand the mass appeal of this series? Printed huge I guess I can see an impact, but other than the bee covered guy it could be their passport photos. Granted, nobody comes to me for advice about good taste!

 

[Richard Man]

The "let's see you do better" argument against criticism never fails to turn up.

Yes, because the actual disdain, not "nah, he's not my cup of tea" criticism gets old, saying same old boring sh*t over and over again.

 

[koraks]

Yes, because the actual disdain, not "nah, he's not my cup of tea" criticism gets old, saying same old boring sh*t over and over again.

Apart from the disdain, which may or may not be present - I think the "try and do it yourself" argument really does make sense, especially (perhaps only) if it's stripped from any cynical subtext. Consistently producing compelling portraits (as qualified by many viewers, although perhaps not all) surely isn't easy. I can very well imagine that criticism of apparently deceptively simple images stems from the same sentiment from which some criticize abstract art - "my 4 year old could do that!"

Not for sake of the argument, but in all honesty and sincerity - try and replicate them. As far as I'm concerned, such an effort is in the same category as artists replicating the work of others in order to learn. I guess western society at this point has relatively little appreciation for copying - perhaps too little.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

"try and do it yourself"

He did :

 

[DREW WILEY]

I wouldn't phrase it as a fear of copying per se - everyone has certain influences behind their own work - but as being an over-obsession with "creativity" in Western culture to the point it turns into the marketing of mere novelty, of the sort which crowds out much that is finely nuanced instead, or perfected according to certain time-honored traditions, like in classical Asian art traditions where adherence to cultural
norms in prized.

Interestingly, the first showing I was ever given was set up by a person with a museum background specializing in bringing modern Asian painting, even in an abstract fashion, to Western audiences. But even those so-called abstract pieces clearly exhibited the flavor of their underlying Asian heritages. My Cibachromes certainly weren't abstract; they were objective, yet somehow fit in quite well with the those various painting selected for the venue. That wasn't the last time I was chosen to be displayed with painters instead of other photographers, and my work certainly isn't "painterly''; there was just a certain "Zen" quality to it early on.

In other words, I don't give a damn about needing to prove anything by trying to mimic Avedon's personal portraiture style, or his fame due to that. It's a whole different ballgame and genre, so to speak, more distant from me than certain works done on canvas. Why do any of us need to rely on such comparisons or any kind of one-upmanship?

But a comparison of genre to genre is often not only interesting, but informative, even in its emotional sense, reactively. What I've stated about Avedon in this thread certainly hasn't diminished him within his own context of background and genre; but I am at perfect liberty to express why I feel why that particular genre itself is a glaring misfit for certain demographic or human applications due to its callous flaunting of manufactured stereotypes. And I'm apparently not alone in that gut-felt impression.

 

[BradS]

While there is certainly value in trying something, whether large format portraiture or publishing a video to YouTube or writing a story, that activity is or can be entirely orthogonal to looking at and responding to a piece or a body of work and discussing its elements, its place in time, it effect, etc.

Certainly, "try it yourself" is not a necessary prerequisite for valid academic criticism.

 

[Richard Man]

...

Certainly, "try it yourself" is not a necessary prerequisite for valid academic criticism.

The issue though is that are these valid academic criticism, or Internet pile-on?

"photographing the freaks" - well, most of them look like portraits of famous people he did. So Carter and Friedlander are freaks?

"blast them with hot lights until they feel uncomfortable" - patently untrue in the case of American West series.

Zen? Sure I do 8 feet long Chinese calligraphy besides large format portraits. How's this for Zen. This is 6 feet tall.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Yeah, tit for tat, let's see Avedon try to replicate my own personal vision and print style, if he were alive today. Even with all his money and connections, he couldn't do it, no way. He had his own personality and visual objectives - a completely different yardstick. A lot of that is baked-in, contingent on our own emotional makeup and personal visual experiences. They can't be simply switched around.

And Richard, your attempt at snarking doesn't faze me at all. We've got scrolls laying around by the most famous living calligrapher in Beijing at the time. My wife briefly studied under him - not that she was any good at it herself, like you, but because she was his first American student. And I've had curators from major museums sitting at my dinner table, openly mocking their their own "academic" profession, along with its many droids, in words too vulgar to repeat here. My aunt, whose work is in many major museums including the Whitney and Smithsonian, who had a phD in Art History, ridiculed the "art speak" and pontiffs of her era, and told me even when I was a little kid to only to trust my own pair of eyes instead. Best advice I ever got.

You mentioned Friedlander ... well, more of the same. When he came to Yosemite he produced a few interesting pictures; but they only told me about Friedlander himself, and nothing about the place. He was superimposing instead of observing, with a kind of artsy objective in mind. That doesn't mean I'm yet another AA wannabee at all, and my hundreds of prints of the mountain prove that - I have my own way of looking at things and composing them. But I still want to discover rather than invent, and to soak-in rather than superimpose. But that takes quality time. Avedon and Friedlander were apparently both nervous urban types not well attuned for that kind of visual contemplation, and therefore out of their element. Two things I abhor : an advertising style "gotcha" mentality, and pretense.

 

[Richard Man]

I'd agree with that. "Copying" is just an exercise on the path to your own vision. My large format portraits certainly would not be mistaken for Avedon's.

 

[Richard Man]

IMHO, any arts is worthwhile, even if it is a New Yorker trying to find his way in the American West. We are all fish out of water. Valid criticism are fine if the opinions are based in facts.

One of the best living calligraphers is Fabienne Verdier from France and she is taking Chinese arts farther than most people dare to try.

Perhaps a point can be made that some artists get more fame and $$ than others due to whatever reasons other than the force of their art, but that's just endemic in this field.

 

[koraks]

your attempt at snarking

Hold it partner. We're not going there.