Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Diane Arbus  (Read 4884 times)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16034
Re: Diane Arbus
« Reply #20 on: May 28, 2016, 04:45:02 AM »

I'm just going to pick this out of your quote. Is it possible photographers are just voyeurs? Not that being a voyeur is necessarily a bad thing, within reason. But we do observe and watch people, or for that matter, things around us. Maybe we've just channeled it in a positive way.


I think voyeurism is very much a part of it; that, mixed with a desire to alter what's there into something more akin to our own preferences - are we trying to project something or to receive something instead?

Rob C

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5127
Re: Diane Arbus
« Reply #21 on: May 28, 2016, 06:07:06 AM »

Street photography in particular would seem a natural vocation for those who are psychologically unable to function normally in life, so retreat to observe it through a viewfinder. There are probably a great number who are in the same situation without a camera, but we don't know about them...
Someone in a happy relationship is less likely to head off and prowl the streets alone.

I suspect it's much less true for someone who works with models, and therefore needs to communicate, reassure, inspire.

Wow I didn't realize that you are a psychiatrist. I am single but Russ who enjoys street is married and has an extended family by all accounts. I think most photographers find that they do their best work whilst alone. I certainly do. Nobody to worry about and nobody to interrupt when you see an image of a lifetime. Any evidence to back up your theory?

GrahamBy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1383
    • 500px
Re: Diane Arbus
« Reply #22 on: May 28, 2016, 07:14:43 AM »

The objective is to be as offensive as possible.

Maybe, but I suspect that the real objective is to conform to the expectations of their peers :)
Logged

GrahamBy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1383
    • 500px
Re: Diane Arbus
« Reply #23 on: May 28, 2016, 07:18:19 AM »

Any evidence to back up your theory?
a) I suggested street photography is something a misfit could well do, not that all street photographers are misfits.
b) I also take street photos, in case you haven't noticed.
c) Other types of psychopathology may also be present.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2016, 07:25:50 AM by GrahamBy »
Logged

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5127
Re: Diane Arbus
« Reply #24 on: May 28, 2016, 07:36:14 AM »

a) I suggested street photography is something a misfit could well do, not that all street photographers are misfits.
b) I also take street photos, in case you haven't noticed.
c) Other types of psychopathology may also be present.

Sorry....I don't get your reasoning. Apart from the photographers you know personally I don't see how you can categorize anyone.?

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16034
Re: Diane Arbus
« Reply #25 on: May 28, 2016, 10:37:42 AM »

Maybe, but I suspect that the real objective is to conform to the expectations of their peers :)

Insofar as the 50s were concerned, in Scotland, there was little opportunity for looking different to the rest of the herd. Cool hadn't been invented.

I saw my very first example of the blue jeans ensemble in 1957, during a term in night shift, a compulsory part of my mechanical engineering apprentice experience. (You will understand the irresistible lure of the alternative siren song of fashion photography.) On the shift, there was a young engineer who owned the whole deal: jeans and denim jacket! We imagined James Dean had joined the company. I believe he refused several offers to buy (the den¡ms). He had the clothes because he'd been on 'the boats' for a while, and had seen the other world. It was worse for the girls: they looked like their own mothers even after the first freedoms came along...

Italy was also an attraction, but I think the US drape suit came along first though; fully clad, we looked like apes: tiny legs and massive tops. I see the drape as a sort of zoot suit, but without the high-waisted pants.

America never got the Italian suit right: Playboy insisted in photographing it with too short legs and the wrong shoes. The leg deficiency is something that seems to exist, still, with trousers worn by German ladies.

Thank goodness that for most of my life I could get away with nothing much more than jeans, T-shirts and/or sweatshirts. How divine to work in fashion yet be able to scorn its demands! Oh - I did once buy a Cecil Gee leather coat. I felt sort of obliged: McDonalds in Buchanan Street was a very good client. I felt it a fair exchange of credits.

Rob C
« Last Edit: August 31, 2016, 06:26:10 AM by Rob C »
Logged

Ed B

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 178
    • Light Conspiracy
Re: Diane Arbus
« Reply #26 on: June 05, 2016, 09:14:11 PM »


I think voyeurism is very much a part of it; that, mixed with a desire to alter what's there into something more akin to our own preferences - are we trying to project something or to receive something instead?

Rob C
But isn't mixing our desires into our own preferences all a part of voyeurism? As far as projecting or receiving goes, from an artists standpoint, I think it's more about receiving something. Artists do art for themselves, it is narcissistic.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16034
Re: Diane Arbus
« Reply #27 on: June 06, 2016, 04:44:37 AM »

But isn't mixing our desires into our own preferences all a part of voyeurism? As far as projecting or receiving goes, from an artists standpoint, I think it's more about receiving something. Artists do art for themselves, it is narcissistic.

That's what I said; but I am not sure that 'as artist' one can measure the differences between what's absorbed and what's projected.

Yep, a little touch of Narcissus is essential. In fact, I think in some blessed cases it really is a manifestation of dashing good looks that pushed the careers: consider Avedon, Newton, Stern, Bailey, Lichfield, Sieff et al. Not only did/do these guys have ability, in addition they had the looks, especially in youth, to play the part of dashing young man about town and look credible. Some retained that all their life. Not many of us can claim that, and without it, the essential confidence and self-belief can't be as strong.

And that's no idle comment: you just need to consider, for a moment, the age-old saw about everything coming to the beautiful. It's how life is. Quasimodo had few clients, received few invitations to model agency soirées...

;-)

Rob C
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up