Most Helpful Customer Reviews
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
What is Photography Criticism?, March 13, 2008
This review is from: Light Readings: A Photography Critic's Writings, 1968-1978 (Paperback)
The world of photography criticism is a confused one. Serious photographers often divide the process of image capture into two parts: technique and vision, or what most critics might call form and content. When a photographer thinks about criticism, he thinks about whether he had a worth-while vision and how and whether the techniques that he used, like framing, depth of field and shutter speed contributed toward conveying that vision to a viewer. At the other end of the continuum is critical theory which is mainly concerned with the social and historical significance of photographs in general and usually is approached from one or more philosophical points of view, like semiotics, feminism or formalism. Critical theory for the most part seldom addresses photographic technique, and rarely, except by example, deals with the individual picture. In between is what I call "public" photographic criticism which is usually written not from the point of view of the photographer but of the viewer. One might hope that such criticism, like the criticism of paintings or literature, would be aimed at helping other viewers to understand what a picture is about. (I suspect some people may already find me out on a limb by suggesting that a photograph is "about" anything.) Since technique often reveals what an image is about, or as literary critic Mark Shorer stated, "technique is discovery", I always hope that the public critic will explain the role of technique in the work of the photographer. Critics of painting will not only talk about the overall feeling of a painting and whether they cared for it or not, but also the way the light was used, and perhaps even the effect or use of brush strokes and other techniques. For photography, where many artists feel that viewers are not literate, the photography critic could serve a really important teaching role. That's a long introduction for a small book, but it may prove helpful in understanding how I regard this book. A.D. Coleman considered himself a photography critic and many of his articles appeared regularly in the Village Voice, Popular Photography, the New York Times and Camera 35. I primarily wanted to read this book, not to see if I could learn anything about the works he reviewed, but to see what I could learn about criticism. The short essays and occasional speeches and lectures of the author appeared between 1968 and 1978. (A book of subsequent writings, called " Depth of Field: Essays on Photographs, Lens Culture and Mass Media" has also been published.) Most of the works that appear in this book do not focus on particular photographs and their interpretation. When he does focus on a picture, as he does with Manuel Alvarez Bravo's "Striking Worker, Assassinated", it is to examine the content, and to speculate what the picture is about. He does note that the framing helped to convey what the picture was about, but there are few other references to Bravo's technique. Indeed, with the exception of references to the use of the range of light, focus and framing, there is practically no reference to technique anywhere in the book. Instead most of the essays and speeches are concerned with the state of the art, examining, for example, the role of curators and photography education in modern photography. Coleman devotes more criticism to John Szarkowski's role as the chairman of the Photography Department at the Museum of Modern Art then to the work of any particular photographer. Of course, this may be the result of the selection process for the essays in the book, which may have eliminated the reviews of the work of particular photographers on the grounds that such essays were transient. But given that Coleman himself frequently despairs of the lack of photographic literacy, this seems unlikely to me. Most of Coleman's work is closer to critical theory than to my ideal photography criticism. Coleman's essays are short and capable of being read in less than ten minutes, although a few of the speeches that he made to groups concerned with photography are longer. His style is simple and easy to understand. Often one feels he has a brief against the older schools of photography as embodied by Ansel Adams. His attack on Minor White is deliciously nasty. I found this book worth reading because of the insight that it provides into the nature of photographic criticism. For those interested in photography and its role in society, it suggests that photographic literacy is not just lacking in viewers, but to some degree, in photography critics.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
From a review by Taylor Holliday, The Wall Street Journal, July 18, 1999
By A Customer
This review is from: Light Readings: A Photography Critic's Writings, 1968-1978 (Paperback)
" . . . When [W. Eugene] Smith turned his activist attention to the mercury poisoning of the waters of Minamata, Japan, in the early `70s, then-New York Times photography critic A. D. Coleman wrote, `It seeks to be, and succeeds in becoming, not a product but a process, a tool for change.' While some may take issue with aspects of Mr. Coleman's oeuvre of humanist criticism, none would deny that as this country's first and foremost photo critic he has made a singular contribution to the field, broadening both the definition and discussion of photography. " A collection of his writings from 1968-1978 called Light Readings has long been a must-read for anyone serious about photography, and has now been reissued in an expanded second edition." --Taylor Holliday, The Wall Street Journal, December 4, 1998
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
2 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A quick read. Never turgid. Refrains from reading too much into the photographs., January 27, 2008
This review is from: Light Readings: A Photography Critic's Writings, 1968-1978 (Paperback)
LIGHT READINGS is 307 pages long and contains 25 separate essays, each from one to five pages. There are 34 reproductions in black and white. They are newsprint quality reproductions. The reproductions are large--full page--and include works by Wright Morris, Charles Gatewood, Duane Michaels, Geoff Winningham, Julio Mitchel, Jerry Uelsmann, and others. Thus, we have a nice selection of photographers familiar and unfamiliar to the interested public. The essays include these titles: Paul Strand, Jerry Uelsmann, Roy DeCarava, Roger Minick, Photography and Conceptual Art, Diane Arbus, Minor White, New Japanese Photography, and others. Regarding Paul Strand, A.D. Coleman writes, "There as been no change and little growth in Strand's image-making since the publication of The Mexican Portfolio in 1933, and his continued romanticization of the noble peasant seems increasingly mawkish and patronizing." (page 189). Regarding Yousuf Karsh, "his much-vaunted style appears to be a trap from which he is incapable of escaping even momentarily." (page 213). Regarding Lucas Samaras and Leslie Krims, "The subversion of expectations is central to all the contemporary arts, photography among them." (page 239). Regarding Wright Morris, A.D. Coleman writes, "Coming to terms with one's past is hardly an original theme . . . all is vanished [in the locations photographed by Wright Morris] the people moved or dead . . . only the photographs endure to prove that any was more than a dream, thus they take on an awesome significance, like a handful of scattered potsherds at an archaelogical site." (page 245). Regading the difference between black and white photography and color photography, "You can shoot a Buddhist monk burning to death in color and it's almost a pretty picture. In black and white, it's horrifying. Here lies the difference, you can hide in color but not in black and white." (page 87). (Here, A.D. Coleman refers to protests by the monks in the 1960s against the Vietnam war.) Regarding Ansel Adams, A.D. Coleman writes, "His prints are supreme examples in photography of the result of one-track technical perfectionism . . . emotionally and intellectually they fall into the same plane as the works of Rockwell Kent and Andrew Wyeth, they are almost aggressively accessible." (page 123). As one can see, A.D. Coleman has a certain axe to grind. For reasons unknown, he automatically likes to criticize his subjects for discovering a successful technique, and not wavering from it. Hasn't Mr. Coleman heard the expression, "If it ain't broken, don't fix it." Also, contrast A.D. Coleman's knee-jerk method of photo-criticism with an opinion from Richard Estes. In an interview, Mr. Estes was asked, "Have you felt pressured to stay within the rather limited parameters of your subject matter and painting method?" Mr. Estes answered, "What's wrong with doing the same thing over and over again? I think the most--the silliest thing to try to come up with some new gimmick each year. It's better to really develop and expand on one idea." page 22 in RICHARD ESTES:THE URBAN LANDSCAPE (1978) Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. Please note that Richard Estes is one of the most successful artists in America. To conclude, the book contains an abundance of short sections. If you don't like one, you can always move to the next. Any photographer will be able to find one or more inspirational comments within LIGHT READINGS.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
