Photo by Atget
I’ve seen Atget’s pictures a hundred times, and in many of them I can feel a subtle, mysterious power. But I’ve never been totally convinced as I am about say Frank, or Winogrand, or Klein. I’ve never been able to appreciate or see the consistent greatness of his work that would merit a huge exhibition at MOMA by Szarkowski. I fear that it is an example of a critic taking on an artist so that he can do criticism, not because the artist is in and of himself great. Szarkowski is the last person that I’d accuse of such underhandedness, or self-love so this is all a great mystery. I’m now sitting with the 4 volume set which accompanied the exhibition at MOMA which includes Szarkowski’s essay and so we shall see.
- He did not leave behind any writings. He did not say much. This has created a space for the critic to come in and establish a significant presence. Nothing is proven yet, but the environment is ripe for crime.
- Szarkowski argues that there is a unique sweetness to Atget’s representation of the world which avoids the ugly trials of the artist battling the world. That Atget saw the world as is in the purest photographic sense without force. That there is a subtlety of touch.
- Atget did not once out of 10,000 photos ever photograph the Eiffel tower. I’m beginning to like him already. It’s a good lesson in defining what you won’t photograph. What won’t you do? Fake, set up photos. Never. Never. Ok, maybe once.
- Atget did not shoot the products of the 19th century in Paris. Ancient, and current things were his concern. He did not acknowledge the powers of the times.
- He photographed the marks that people had left behind rather than the people themselves. A belief nearly that the product could conjure the reality of the situation. The same as what photography proposes.
- Interested in types not of individual personalities. He did not take one personal picture in the whole of the thirty years. Szarkowski questions that perhaps it was beyond his abilities.
- “Very early in his career Atget stopped trying to catch the world unawares.” In the beginning he shot with variety, but made a conscious decision to go down the path that he did.
- Purpose: the creation of a body of work that would describe the ‘authentic character’ of French culture. My goals of photographing Australia, or what it means reflects this. I have so much more thinking left to do on this. The clue is that is done in little pieces. With obsessions. It isn’t really Australia at all but what I want Australia to be.
- He liked doors.
- S. is very good, if a little unbelievable on the artist’s unconscious patterns and urges. Shape of the vines reoccur.
- Raises the very interesting question of returning to exact same subject at a different point in time. I never do that, do I? Should I? Am I interested? Probably not.
- The essential photographic task is essentially different to that of the affective representation of modern painting or art. In that photography can still be used to find out what the subject is, not how one feels about the subject. What a small but important purpose. I don’t know if I’m capable of it, but very very interesting. I’m not sure if it’s even true anymore.
- What makes a photographer (any artist) is the consistency of vision over a lifetime.
- S. suggests that A. made his own artistic desires and consistency subservient to his larger goal, his subject. And that when lesser photos or simple records were required he did that. Interesting but I’m not sure if I believe him. He gives other more pedestrian reasons for why half of Atget’s pictures aren’t particularly special. Of course, these are the pictures that he kept. Suggests a thinking and problem definition that comes from the subject rather than the artist or even the orthodoxy and expectations of the medium that he is working in.
- Idea: photograph one scene a thousand times. And pick the best 30. Different times, different places etc. etc. Atget went back to Saint-Cloud again and again over his lifetime. The anti ‘small world’ set.
- The majority of what is considered A. best pictures came from his last 6 years. He grew and grew more focused over the years. As he grew older he concentrated on less and less. “In his last years he seemed often to make thm out of almost nothing.”
- S. suggests a coil like returning to themes for artists over time. I hope so.
- “With few exceptions, the best photographers have completed their original contribution within a very short time—often within a decade.” Atget was different.
- “it would seem that most superior powers write their lyrics early in life, and then proceed to epic, dramatic, or philosophical works. In these forms, acquired skills, knowledge, and experience perhaps compensate for a falling off in sensibility.”
- My god, I’m in a desperate race against time!
- S. suggests that A. was able to produce so long and late because his purpose went beyond just self expression, to a moral urge.
- Great quote from Ansel Adams about the non-judgemental character of A. Need to look up Adam’s writings.
- A. as a counter weight to the thrust of Modernism. He looked back and looked at things as evolution, rather than revolution. I would not put him as part of the arc of modern art. He was something else, something aside.
- Stieglitz later in life suggested that an accurate photographic portrait should be made of many pictures not one. This is an interesting concept for the Australia work. Is this what I was getting at anyway with the plan for 10 photos of a person? Why not just make a video of them? Doesn’t provide the concentrated focus.
Posted 2 years ago
