Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: Randy Carone on December 06, 2016, 03:49:36 pm
-
Captured in Central Park on July 7th. Comments?
-
Works for me.
Title maybe "The attentive attendant"?
-
Me too, and I like Eric's suggested title.
-
Works for me.
Title maybe "The attentive attendant"?
Nothing wrong with her. Those are the real heros in our aging society where family bonds have become literally meaningless. So if we outsource the care for our elderly we have to accept that the job will be done with a certain amount of casualness. I strongly believe that professional attendants must maintain a mental barrier to their patients in order to keep well.
-
I agree Harald, I had no negative feelings about the image. He's outside in the open air with lots of passing people out for a walk in the park. She's the reason, his means of transport and his caretaker. And he gets a little nap.
-
Nothing wrong with her. Those are the real heros in our aging society
Amen.
-
I have the greatest respect for such attendants.
My mother, at age 105, can do very little for herself. At her Assisted Living place she has a wonderful assortment of helpers who work tirelessly and cheerfully to tend to all of her needs. As a result, she is still happy and cheerful and grateful.
I'm sure I would never have the patience and perseverance to do what these attendants do. Bless them all!
-
That is a strong image.
-
I think it's a very strong image, and at the same time, one I wouldn't have made. Therein one of the spiritual conflicts of photography. You can put it in to the same catergory as Don McCullin's shots of the albino boy in Africa, starving to death holding a tin... McCullin wasn't happy at all but still felt compelled.
One of my personal safety devices is a resolute avoidance of situations where I will feel obligations that I have no wish to feel. Without that, I think I'd have been a wreck or dead a long time ago. Those situations can often appear very attractive at first glance. Poisoned fruit, then.
Rob
-
What Rob said. As just about everybody who'll read this knows, street is my favorite thing. But there are situations I simply pass by. This would be one of them. Sometimes it's necessary to intrude in order to tell a story that ought to be told. This isn't one of those times.
-
Thanks to Rob C and RSL. I too had mixed feelings about this shot, which is why it took so long for me to post it. I really appreciate the honesty of your comments. Shooting 'street' is something I try to do when the situation presents itself. This one was difficult but it told a story, but one that maybe should have been left untold. Thanks again.
-
I think this is a great image. Rob and Russ indicate that they would not have taken the shot. That's fine. Each one of us has to have our own sort of ethic when it comes to this sort of thing. However, I don't think the OP is under any compulsion to share individually derived 'ethics' that do not transcend the bounds of widely accepted broader ethics. I don't think that Rob and Russ are saying that directly but you cannot disassociate "I would not have done that" from "You should not have done that".
I would be interested in knowing exactly what about it makes it out of bounds for them? He is old. He cannot walk well, or at all. He may be asleep. He might be looking at the sky. A black woman is sitting beside him. She is looking at a cell phone. She is probably his caretaker. They appear to be in a park or other public outdoor space. I see nothing else that would make such an image out of bounds. I think anything else that is read into the image comes from the viewer. We do not know his or her level of happiness or pain. We do not know anything about either of their mental capacity. We do not know anything about either of their personalities. Any speculation about those things come from outside the image.....right Russ? ;)
-
I understand Russ and Rob's point of view. Having watched my father deteriorate and left to the care of others, was horrifying. We were not equipped nor trained to tend to his most basic needs. He required 24-hour supervision.
The home where he spent his last five years was the nicest one in his hometown. The daytime staff was better trained and higher paid than the weekend and nighttime employees. My sister and I live on opposite coasts. We wanted him to live close to us. He would not leave his hometown and familiar surroundings. Parkinson's disease robbed a dignified man of his dignity.
Once he slipped into dementia, the home became less attentive to his needs. If it hadn't been for his second wife's unsound logic, ulterior financial motives, and lack of empathy, he would have passed several years earlier.
It's heartbreaking knowing his life was unnecessarily extended due to two factors: greed and greed. Dad was ready to leave the party way before he did.
-
Don't beat yourself up, Randy. There was a time when I'd certainly have shot this. I used to shoot hoboes all the time in Colorado Springs. They're easier than what you shot here, but they pose some of the same spiritual problems. And I frequently shot people who obviously had mental handicaps, though I didn't post them.
But the problem is that there's not much of a story here, and perhaps more importantly no ambiguity to force the viewer to fill in some blanks. To me, those are the two things that make a good street shot.
And George, I understand that you saw ambiguity in this picture, but it's a situation we've all seen many times, and I don't see much ambiguity. The only question seems to be whether or not the woman is his keeper, and whether or not he rolled himself out here all alone.
Bottom line, I'm not moved as I was when I shot the picture "Dance," that I posted in late November. There are some similarities, but in Dance there are two people dancing in an open-front restaurant to music from a guitarist. The woman has a cigarette and a glass of beer in her hand. There's a handicapped kid in a wheelchair in that picture. I'll never know whether or not the dancers were the kid's parents, or whether the mom is single and dancing with a stranger. There are plenty of other questions that popped into my mind, but I couldn't stop the music and ask. The most important thing I grabbed from the scene was that two adults were having a good time away momentarily from a difficult situation. There's a story there, and it's loaded with ambiguity. To me that's what street should be. Unfortunately, too many people look at something like that -- or like your picture -- and say "I'd rather see a picture of a snowy mountain." Meaning, this is too disturbing. I need a safe space, a comfort dog, and some crayons.
Sorry for tooting my own horn, but I just grabbed the picture. I didn't set up the scene.
-
Well, just for the record, my Dad has severe, late stage Alzheimers with Parkinsons. He is in a local home. He gets good care. My Mom is there twice a day, I am there several times a week. I am also a physician. A large portion of what I do is geriatric. I spent 10 years as a nursing home physician in addition to my regular practice.
So I am not removed from this type of situation. I know first hand everyday and second hand every day what this portion of the aging process means.
But even if this image is exactly what everyone thinks it is, I do not see an intrusion here. He is in Central Park for goodness sake. I can also see blessings. Regardless of his condition, he is outside in nice weather. He has a caretaker. He looks cared for.
But I would also caution reading too much into any image. Even in dementia these folks can still retain personality, humor and enjoyment. Surely that all goes away, but we do not know that here. Furthermore, I have plenty of very old patients who look real old and real bad who retain full mental capacity, sharp wit and a perspective on life only they can have.
So when someone says an image like this is taboo, I can't see why unless they know (or think they know) more about it than the picture actually tells.
-
RSL, I was not beating myself up. Not my nature. My only question about posting it was the intimate nature of the image that I felt almost needed a signed waiver. A similar situation to you choosing not to post the shots your describe. However, I do think there is a story here and some ambiguity. At least thought provoking, judging by the responses. I've paid close attention to all the discussions on LuLa regarding 'street shots' and I carefully considered those factors before posting. I shoot 'pretty pictures' most of the time and have long tried to move into the street arena. ;). The fact that this image has motivated discussion is uplifting. Thanks. I'll keep working on it.
-
Here's an example of a shot I like from the same day. Not terribly street or interesting; no ambiguity and not much of a story. When I get home and look at a shot like this I only wish I knew the parents, who would love a print or file. Just fun.
-
"I think it's a very strong image, and at the same time, one I wouldn't have made. Therein one of the spiritual conflicts of photography. You can put it in to the same catergory as Don McCullin's shots of the albino boy in Africa, starving to death holding a tin... McCullin wasn't happy at all but still felt compelled." - Rob C
That's what I wrote.
It's not a condemnation nor does it purport ownership of any deeper knowledge of the photographed situation.
If anything, I suppose I see it as one of those things of which anyone over fifty is all too aware, and hardly needs documenting. For younger people the situation may well be invisible. So I guess that I see it as just another of the sad, almost inevitable aspects of living, and in no way something I'd want to put on film, as it were. I really prefer finding the beautiful aspects of life, even if I also find myself drawn irresistibly to the pictorial blues, but the latter usually do not include people. Frankly, I see a lot of sadness all around, every day. It seldom includes actual tears, but usually appears as evidence of someone's broken business dream, an abandoned home, a bar that's been on the market for several years, that kind of thing. It can even include the lies of beauty product advertisements. Yet, there's sometimes a flip-side: today, standing in the supermarket waiting my turn to pay, I saw a lady in front of me who used to run a small restaurant/bar which I frequented until last year, when it closed. She always looked to be at breaking point, and her daughter was constantly adding to the size of the family. Today, she looked happy, far healthier, and greeted me like a long-lost relative! So change can also be good, when you manage to get some things off your back. Or off your chest, as the case may be. (Sounds like a weak come-on line might be lurking somewhere in there.)
Rob
-
"I think it's a very strong image, and at the same time, one I wouldn't have made. Therein one of the spiritual conflicts of photography. You can put it in to the same catergory as Don McCullin's shots of the albino boy in Africa, starving to death holding a tin... McCullin wasn't happy at all but still felt compelled." - Rob C
That's what I wrote.
It's not a condemnation nor does it purport ownership of any deeper knowledge of the photographed situation.
Two thoughts. First, I get that you did not intend what you said as condemnation. But I still contend that when we say to someone who did something that we would not have done it, it is very hard to remove that element of judgement even if it is not intended. However, the OP has already said he did not take it that way, so my point is moot. Second, being in the middle of this life event with a loved one I cannot see this image in the same light as one of a starving child. That seems a stretch to me.
If anything, I suppose I see it as one of those things of which anyone over fifty is all too aware, and hardly needs documenting.
Now that seems a little unfair. What needs to be documented? Especially among amateur photographers? Depending on one's perspective we could claim that nothing needs documenting. Anyway, I see lots of reasons that documenting an image like this is valuable. Matter of perspective, I guess.
For younger people the situation may well be invisible.
Seems to me that is reason enough to document it.
So I guess that I see it as just another of the sad, almost inevitable aspects of living, and in no way something I'd want to put on film, as it were.
You could say this about almost any aspect of life, no? That beautiful rosy cheeked toddler is going to end up like this just as the 19 year old fashion model. Life is life.
I really prefer finding the beautiful aspects of life
Of course. Me too. The danger there is of course the saccharin and the overly sentimental. But I have to say, along with the ancient Greeks I would guess, that there is beauty in pathos and tragedy. I think of the chapter in Fred Chappell's book, I Am One of You Forever when the telegram comes to tell the family that their adopted son was killed in a military training accident. Each family member metaphorically tries to hide and destroy the yellow telegram but it keeps reappearing. Sometimes in a jacket pocket, sometimes on the dining room table, sometimes folded into a rose shape. It is among the most beautiful things I have ever read. Likewise his chapter in Farewell I'm Bound to Leave you where the matriarch of the family is dying a natural death and all the clocks start turning backward, the wind shakes the old house and in her delerium tells the daughter what she is experiencing as she passes on to a better place.
Do I need that sort of sadness in my life right now? No. But again, possibly the most beautiful things I've ever read. Helps me deal with the events in my own life too, though.
That's sort of what I see in this picture. I'm a perfect example, I suppose, of what Russ says about art in general. I took the ball and ran in my own direction. I see my father sitting in that chair, in the sunshine, being cared for. In his current situation, this is as good as it gets and would be better than most days. Sad but silver lined maybe?
In any case, as the OP mentions, it has spoken to a number of us in a meaningful way.
-
Thank you George.
-
Okay. Here's another one. Let's see if it speaks to you in a meaningful way. This woman is drifting around the city with all her worldly belongings. In a sense, she's at least as helpless as the elder in the wheelchair. The only reason I'm posting it is that you can't see her face, and so she's an anonymous example of a particular kind of problem. Is she as meaningful as the elder? She doesn't have a caretaker engrossed in a cellphone. She's on her own. When I shot this picture she was getting a bit of help from one restaurant in the city that gave her free lunches. I could go on and talk about the stupidity of a system that eliminated institutional care for folks like this one on the basis that the institutions were degrading. But I won't.
I love street photography, but I'm with Rob all the way on this one.
-
I don't understand what your point is Russ. And why compare this image with the OP's? Is it exploitation you're concerned about? Why the concern about anonymity? Who here would know her? There just seem to be some rules being set out here. I understand they are your own; I just don't understand them. Neither you nor Rob have articulated them very clearly. Not trying to argue or poke anyone with a stick. Just trying to understand.
-
I don't understand what your point is Russ. And why compare this image with the OP's? Is it exploitation you're concerned about? Why the concern about anonymity? Who here would know her? There just seem to be some rules being set out here. I understand they are your own; I just don't understand them. Neither you nor Rob have articulated them very clearly. Not trying to argue or poke anyone with a stick. Just trying to understand.
That's the doctor in you speaking, George. You could be my late father-in-law, his son, or any number of sensible people who also failed to grasp the reasons I became a professional photographer rather than follow other, more stable and dependable life-routes that my reasonable education would have permitted me access.
The two situations, or rather my feelings about the OP's pic and my life-choice are the same: the call of instinct, George, and instinct doesn't conveniently follow written regulations nor does it follow precise, articulable lines of other people's sense of logic. It simply is what it is, and is no more clear to me than to anyone questioning me about it: I just know how the emotion makes me feel. And in this instance, for me, it would have been don't do it. I can't put it any more clearly than that, I'm afraid. And again, it is not an implied criticism of the OP. Had I wanted to make a statement to that effect, I would have done exactly that, no messing about felt necessary. Or, alternatively, I would just have remained silent. But, as this isn't a post in Without Prejudice, I felt it legitimate to comment beyond the level of liking or disliking the aesthetics of the thing.
Rob
-
George, my point is that that kind of picture is exploitation, but more importantly exploitation that doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know. It's a strong picture, meaning it jumps out at us and shocks us -- at least to some degree. It shocks us because we rarely see that kind of picture.
I don't know how familiar you are with the works of the really great street photographers, but I'd suggest you view or review some of them in order to see or see again what it is that makes a good street shot. It isn't shock.
-
George, my point is that that kind of picture is exploitation
I don't see any exploitation here whatsoever. The photographer did not gain anything unfairly. Money is not changing hands. Nothing was taken unfairly from the subject.
but more importantly exploitation that doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know.
Unfair. You could say this about any photograph ever taken.
It's a strong picture, meaning it jumps out at us and shocks us -- at least to some degree. It shocks us because we rarely see that kind of picture.
It did not shock me at all. It is two human beings being human in the way they are human every day.
I don't know how familiar you are with the works of the really great street photographers, but I'd suggest you view or review some of them in order to see or see again what it is that makes a good street shot. It isn't shock.
I'm familiar with the greats, but admittedly am not drawn to street photography any more than any other type. You can claim it isn't shock, but I don't know how true that actually is. But as mentioned, I see not one single thing shocking about this picture and the only way it could be shocking, it seems to me, is if one is so far removed from this part of the human life cycle that it seems foreign or alien. I do not.
Rob has said that his 'ethic' is internal and difficult to express. I get that. But I'm still not sure what you are getting at. It seems that you have a very stringent set of rules for street photography. They seem to be based in the past and they seem hard to qualify. You are also of the opinion that the value and meaning of art are primarily determined by the viewer. That kind of boxes you into a corner in regard to what is and isn't street photography as one opinion is as good as the next. So here's my opinion:
I see an old man, probably with dementia, but still able to see and comprehend some things (since he has glasses on). He is sitting in a public park in nice weather. He does not appear combative or agitated. He may even be sleeping, but he might also be looking into the sky or trees. Ha appears well tended. His caretaker is sitting very close to him. She is black and probably not a family member. This says volumes in itself about who gets care and who provides it. She is looking at a cell phone, which is yet another contemporary story. This makes me wonder what the story is between them. Is she dedicated to him? Does she love him like a family member? Does he return the affection? Can he? I like the composition and exposure. I like the potential stories. I like what it tells us and makes us ask ourselves about ageing. Nothing in this image shocks me. Old people are not shocking because they are old. No one's dignity has been compromised. Is there a pathos here? Certainly and it is one to which we all should or will at some time relate which gives the image a universality.
Is this valid? If not, why not.
-
Strong story, strong picture. Black and white, both figuratively and literally. I also probably wouldn't have taken it, but glad someone did. Then again, I am over fifty, with a late father who suffered from dementia.
P.S. Do not really care about ambiguity in this case
-
Okay. Here's another one. Let's see if it speaks to you in a meaningful way. This woman is drifting around the city with all her worldly belongings. In a sense, she's at least as helpless as the elder in the wheelchair. The only reason I'm posting it is that you can't see her face, and so she's an anonymous example of a particular kind of problem. Is she as meaningful as the elder? She doesn't have a caretaker engrossed in a cellphone. She's on her own. When I shot this picture she was getting a bit of help from one restaurant in the city that gave her free lunches. I could go on and talk about the stupidity of a system that eliminated institutional care for folks like this one on the basis that the institutions were degrading. But I won't.
I love street photography, but I'm with Rob all the way on this one.
Russ, your point is well taken. Your picture digs a lot deeper than the picture at the top of the thread. I like how you recorded a heinous scene without compromising the woman's dignity. ... It is a discomfiting image. It speaks loudly and clearly about suffering and neglect. It's unacceptable that a our wealthy country turns its back on those who suffer.
-
Strong story, strong picture. Black and white, both figuratively and literally. I also probably wouldn't have taken it, but glad someone did. Then again, I am over fifty, with a late father who suffered from dementia.
P.S. Do not really care about ambiguity in this case
Exactly, Slobodan. You personally had a reason to be hit by the picture. How about if you'd had a sister with the kind of mental illness as the woman I photographed? Would that make you sensitive to pictures of people with mental illness? The point is that if a street photograph requires a particular personal event in the viewer's life in order to be appreciated, it's not much of a street photograph.
-
Speaking of dignity, exploitation, and ethics, I took this self-portrait very early in the morning, the second night I stayed with Dad at the hospital. At the time, the consensus among his attending physicians was that he'd pass within a week or two. He rallied back and ended up "living" for another two years.
At the time I took this photo, I figured it would be our last picture together. Although I was ambivalent, my mentor (20 years my senior) encouraged me to submit it to a jury for an art exhibit. It got accepted. I did not go to the opening.
Every time I think about this picture, I feel torn. Unlike the woman in the photo that Russ posted, my father had excellent insurance and the medical industrial complex prolonged his life unnecessarily for two years. Dad wanted to "go." Unfortunately his wife (who had durable power of attorney) did not honor my father's wishes. Her visits to the home agitated him. The doctors, hospitals, home, and his wife prolonged his misery and profited.
I wonder if it's appropriate to share this or to exhibit it again. ... Dad passed away last March.
-
The point is that if a street photograph requires a particular personal event in the viewer's life in order to be appreciated, it's not much of a street photograph.
This is an absolute. I don't buy it and I don't think you can rationally justify it. Not absolutely. Especially in this case. It is not like the aging process is something unusual or rare. It is a universal human experience. It seems you have this standard for what constitutes "street photography" but the standard is all over the place and at times irrational.
And you never answered my question. Was my assessment of the photograph valid or not? I know that I sound confrontational here, but I'm not laying down absolutes about what measures up as good street photography. I'm just looking for clarity.
Heck, screw "street" photography. It seems like the concept, at least as it is being presented, is unnecessarily overburdened. I'll look at the photograph and measure it on its own value. Label it however you want to.
-
Speaking of dignity, exploitation, and ethics, I took this self-portrait very early in the morning, the second night I stayed with Dad at the hospital. At the time, the consensus among his attending physicians was that he'd pass within a week or two. He rallied back and ended up "living" for another two years.
At the time I took this photo, I figured it would be our last picture together. Although I was ambivalent, my mentor (20 years my senior) encouraged me to submit it to a jury for an art exhibit. It got accepted. I did not go to the opening.
Every time I think about this picture, I feel torn. Unlike the woman in the photo that Russ posted, my father had excellent insurance and the medical industrial complex prolonged his life unnecessarily for two years. Dad wanted to "go." Unfortunately his wife (who had durable power of attorney) did not honor my father's wishes. Her visits to the home agitated him. The doctors, hospitals, home, and his wife prolonged his misery and profited.
I wonder if it's appropriate to share this or to exhibit it again. ... Dad passed away last March.
Yes, it's distressing to be lying in a hospital bed. I've twice found myself in Intensive Care Units due to heart attacks, and strangely enough, the mental problems were not about survival at all - I can't remember giving that a thought. The problems were all physical, such as wanting to take a dump and having to try that lying on my back in bed; having nurses give me a wash as I lay there, and the huge, persistent discomfort that the body develops from just lying down for a long period: like something eating your back. It must be said that having a drip plugged into a vein doesn't stay painless for long, either, if it turns to phlebitis. In sum, one develops an entire system of minor discomforts that build and build until you could scream with frustration. If there was one positive beyond survival, it's that I entirely lost my earlier fears about invasive needles.
Wish I'd never had high cholesterol, though!
Rob
-
Yes, George, it's an absolute, and you're quite free not to "buy it." And you're right: I can't justify it rationally, if by "rationally" you mean with a reasoned argument. But I can suggest you make a serious study of the works of Cartier-Bresson, Kertesz, Chim, Doisneau, Ronis, Brassai, Evans, Erwitt, Riboud, Winogrand, Levitt, and Frank, for starters. Once you've done that you may understand what I'm saying.
I'm not saying that these two pictures aren't street photography. They certainly are. They're just not very good street photography. There's a subtlety in good street photography that's missing in these pictures. But the difference isn't something you can describe in words. It's like the difference between a prose description of a child's visit to a farm and Dylan Thomas's "Fern Hill." The first may tell you what a farm looks like. The second gives you something beyond that; something priceless and beyond what prose can describe.
-
Thanks Russ.
-
What Rob said. As just about everybody who'll read this knows, street is my favorite thing. But there are situations I simply pass by. This would be one of them. Sometimes it's necessary to intrude in order to tell a story that ought to be told. This isn't one of those times.
I have to disagree with you on this one, Russ. As soon as I read your comment, Elliott Erwitt's "Colored's Only drinking fountain series came sweeping into my feeble brain. Did his series bring an end to segregation? Not likely but did his photographs bring perhaps a sliver of social awareness that preceded the segregation movement? I think so.
I would have titled it the"Inattentive Attendant." Perhaps an image like this will bring a change in how we do eldercare.
-
So what, exactly, was the "attendant" supposed to do, Chris, while the guy's absorbing the sun? Stare at him? She's right there, ready to spring if necessary. Yes, Erwitt's drinking fountain picture is something I saw frequently in the deep south back in the day. I think it did help to make a point. But I don't think this picture made a point except that here's a cripple out in his wheel chair. My answer to that is "so what?"
-
So what, exactly, was the "attendant" supposed to do, Chris, while the guy's absorbing the sun? Stare at him? She's right there, ready to spring if necessary. [/agreed]
Agreed. There is no evidence of neglect here. A wife or girlfriend sitting next to a young healthy husband would probably be doing the same thing. But THAT is a point of interest in this photo and in itself a reasonable social commentary.
But I don't think this picture made a point except that here's a cripple out in his wheel chair. My answer to that is "so what?"
Disagree. (Russ is not surprised. ;)) I think there is a statement here and it IS racial. And it has nothing to do with abuse or neglect. It has to do with who cares for whom and why. A loaded topic. I also don't see this person as a simple "cripple". I see someone that someone else loves and grieves over. Is it his caretaker?