OCA Level 3: Body of Work/Contextual Studies

Category: BoW Part One: Genres

Psychogeography

The course notes pose the question – is it possible to produce an objective depiction of a place or will the outcome always be influenced by the artist? My immediate response is why would anyone want to produce an objective work of art? Certainly I do not. It could be argued that any attempt to produce something which appears objective is a stylistic/artistic choice in itself. An example of artists using an objective style as a means of expression in itself that immediately springs to mind is the work of the Dusseldorf School

of photographers (see my thoughts on Thomas Ruff here.)

Although I am not a fan of the label psychogeography, I am attracted to many of the strategies that could fall under the term such as wandering, exploration and chance. Increasingly my choices about what to photograph are informed by my personal engagement with a particular place and my selection choices follow this. Anyone encountering a particular image brings their own thoughts and experiences to it and there is no way to judge how they will react and respond – the only choice we have is to make personal judgements and hope that others will share them. 

In my level 3 transition meeting, the work of the photography collective Inside the Outside was signposted for me to look at. On their website, the group describe their aims as “mediating the liminal space between the world before us and within.” To my mind, this quote succinctly sums up and defines psychogeography. As I struggle to find the direction I want to pursue with BoW, and more broadly, as a photographer; walking, looking and thinking remain the cornerstone of my practice.

Chapman’s Well:

I started BoW with psychogeography firmly placed as a strategy to employ which I hoped would yield results – I hoped that the process of walking and photographing would lead to a theme emerging. For previous projects where I have employed this approach, I have found exploring the same area over and over to be important – the familiarity with the same route has often helped with the editing process as I instinctively understand what is important to photograph. As an initial exercise for BoW, I began exploring an area close to home called Chapman’s Well. This is somewhere I have already walked extensively and one that I find fascinating – it is a mixture of rural, wild, cultivated and post industrial. Much if the site was formerly an open cast mine which was turned into a nature reserve following closure. The deep coal mines that make up much of the area also run beneath the site and there are strange metal structures above ground which are used to monitor landfill gas and ground water levels below ground and act as a reminder of the industrial history of the area. The woodland area that was planted following the closure of the open cast is well established and pretty wild, yet on closer inspection a uniformity can be noted in the planting which contrasts with the more established trees nearby. 

Nothing so far has come from the exploration of this area, although I did feature part of the site for A1: Hidden Stanley. I still walk the area and perhaps a body of work will form in the future, if nothing else I find the familiarity of walking the same paths and noting the subtle changes of the seasons or in lighting conditions endlessly inspiring and a stimulus for thinking through other problems I might face.

Links:

Research Task: Gregory Crewdson

See: Gregory Crewdson


In Why Photography Matters as Art as Never Before, Michael Fried argues against a type of image that he designates as ‘theatrical’ in style, that is, obviously staged and artificial looking. Fried’s aesthetic preference is for ‘anti-theatrical’ images, and he argues that overt theatricality interferes with the viewer’s ability to identify and empathise with what is displayed in the scene. (Bate, 2015: 50) 

Although Gregory Crewdson is not referenced by Fried, it would seem obvious that his overtly constructed images are exactly the kind of picture that Fried would describe as ‘theatrical’. Fried does discuss the work of Jeff Wall at length, he views Wall’s strategy of creating images that he describes as ‘near documentary’ to be “fundamentally, an antitheatrical ideal”. (Fried, 2008: 66) On the surface this is an innocent enough comment – aesthetically Crewdson’s draws deliberate attention to the constructed nature of his images both in terms of style and staging, but also because of the way the people he shows in his constructed tableaux seem alienated from their surroundings. Wall on the other hand, more often than not, strives to present authentic and naturalistic scenes that initially seem banal, common place and everyday. The post production work that is employed by both Crewdson and Wall is comparably complex, yet, Crewdson aims to highlight this (the signature impression is that the images have an uncanny, hyperreal quality) while Wall strives to make his final composites appear as natural as possible. This is a significant distinction of intent with Crewdson deliberately foregrounding artifice  and Wall attempting to disguise the heavily constructed nature of his images. Instinctively, it is Wall’s approach that I prefer, even though I know that all photographs are illusion. With this thought in mind, I wonder if I have missed something about Crewdson’s work – although his images are clearly constructed they are also clearly real world settings that we can identify and recognise. As well as the many references that are present in his work, Crewdson could also be making a comment on the very nature of photographic representation and the false way this relates to reality. The relationship to reality that Wall’s work displays is now more than carefully a carefully considered application of the conventions of photographic realism. It could be argued that Crewdson, by drawing attention to the artifice inherent in his work, is challenging the viewer to question everything they see in the images.  

Bibliography:

Badger, G. (2001) The Genius of Photography: How Photography Has Changed Our Lives. London: Quadrille Publishing.

Bate, D. (2015) Art Photography. London: Tate Publishing.

Berg, S. (2007) (ed.) Gregory Crewdson: 1985-2005. Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz.

Campany, D. (2013) Art and Photography. London: Phaidon Press Limited.

Campany, D. (2020) On Photographs. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd.

Colberg, J. (2020) Photography’s Neoliberal Realism. Mack

Cotton, C. (2014) The Photograph as Contemporary Art (3rd Ed.) London: Thames and Hudson

Dyer, G. (2021) See/Saw: Looking at Photographs. Edinburgh: Canongate Books Ltd. 

Crewdson, G. (2008) Beneath the Roses. New York: Abrams.

Fried, M. (2008) Why Photography Matters As Art As Never Before. Yale University Press New Haven.

Scott, G. (2012) Gregory Crewdson. The United Nations of Photography. At: https://unitednationsofphotography.com/2012/10/23/gregory-crewdson/ (accessed 27th June 2021)

Scott, G. (2021) Thoughts on Gregory Crewdson… The United Nations of Photography. At: https://unitednationsofphotography.com/2021/02/21/thoughts-on-gregory-crewdson/ (accessed 27th June 2021)

Soutter, L. (2018) Why Art Photography? (2nd ed.) Oxon: Routledge.

Warner Marien, M. (2014) Photography: A Cultural History (4th Edition) London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd.

© 2024 Michael Millmore

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑