There is some sort of photo group here in Tokyo that goes by the name “Punctum” and they have just begun to publish a free newspaper (the Punctum Times) talking about how awesome Punctum is. There is even a page in or is it “of” English. On it they state:
For all those new talents looking to open the next generation, come together here at PUNCTUM. We don’t want PUNCTUM to become just another photography salon. PUNCTUM and the PUNCTUM TIMES will, and must be the knife edge of our art that we use to open up a new era.
This crap hurt my head last night.
There is a section called “BEHIND THE PHOTOGRAPHY” that features an interview with the owner of the Zeit-Photo Salon, Etsuro Ishihara. Apparently the Zeit-Photo Salon was the first gallery devoted to photography in Japan. I thought I’d share with you here some of what was written, just as it is in the paper:
Mind of Trick
Punctum: What is your advice for the up-coming artist? What is the most important for them do you think?
Ishihara: The mind of trick, I would say. If he wants to live as an artist, he just have to lay out works of 5 best-seller artists in then world and observe why their works are so prominent in the market. And scan and copy essential elements of work into his work, excepting something does not go along with his practice. Then he can make it. If I am impressed by something potential in his work, even if the artist is not popular yet, I will push him forward suggesting having a show in my gallery. That is my manner basically. This was also the case of Ryudai Takano. Art collectors are kind of people who have already done most of indulgence of life but art is the last dilettante for them. They are the adults who know anything so what they expect to the art is something goes beyond of their knowledge and imagination. Critics and curators are alike. Everyone wants to be tricked beautifully by the art. So what an artist can do is just trick on them with confidence.
Beauty of Photography
Punctum: What is the attraction of photography for you?
Ishihara: Whatever the subject of the photograph is, I like the one with sense of humanity. Through cold lens of camera, sense of freshness can be exposed so vividly especially when it is about people. Such kind of impression cannot appear without any conscious of photographer and I like such kind. Sometimes things on the photography appear much more beautifully and voluptuously than in the real. Photograph is so tricky and that makes photography more and more exciting. And, in addition, another good thing with photographs is it is so light and convenient that you can carry it so easily to anywhere.
———————–also:
Punctum: “Why were you interested in the gallery specializing photography?”
To which he replied,
Ishihara: “Simply to distinguish my gallery from others!”
Which is interesting because in a later part of the article Mr. Ishihara and the interviewer discuss Talent, where Ishihara states:
“I think the most tragic and funniest one is who never realize himself without any talent. However, I appreciate watching such artist playing the tragicomedy of who blindly believes in his ability even though he is not the gifted one.”
==========================================
The point is not the Yoda-speak nor the comically blind arrogance, but rather this idea that there is some set of ways to judge photography contrary to how pictures work. He, and countless others seem to only be able to see pictures of what they expect (the Tricks), or even worse confuse them with the content that is in them. The “sense of freshness can be exposed so vividly” is in your mind and in what you want to see, not in the actual picture. There is a vibe running through that INTENT of the ARTIST is something more important than it just might be.
They act as though we must respond to what the artist was trying to do the way it is expected that we will and that response to the Trick is only correct when it matches up with what the creator and groups like PUNCTUM have already decided it means.
After reading that kind of stuff and thinking this kind of stuff I start to get grumpy and stuck on the aspect of Form in photography - - and wonder if there can be any more to it than that.
For me, what makes a good picture is how it works as a photograph.
How well does it make use of it’s very nature? Is it a great picture of something, or is it in it’s entirety, something great?
If we were talking about film, the director that stands out in my mind as the one whose work is not just about what he makes but also how the meduim works is Michel Gondry. Think about the White Stripes “Hardest Button to Button” video, or any others on that sweet DVD of his. His work does employ “tricks” but again the trick deals with aspects of how film/video works (particularly with time) rather than the kinds tricks that can be done in film, like setting up drum kits for each beat vs. super detailed George Lucas digital space battles.
A good video game example would be Tetris. Tetris, and the experince that you have from playing it is something that could not be scccessful in any other medium, since the essence to it’s existence depends on how a video game works. Come to think of it, most early video games are good examples.
Screw it. I am going to go count some cameras.
And then read some Terry Barrett.
And then some Stephen Shore.
