JeffWallJeffWallJeffWall

Michael Fried talks about the changes in photography which he believes started in the 70s that brought photography more towards art.  In the first chapter of "Why Photography Matters Now More Than Ever" Fried splits it up into three different ideas One being three artist who focused on Cinema within their photography.  The Second Fried focused on the "Tableau" form in photography and the third he focuses on three texts in which he thinks focus on imagery and ideas of voyeurism that he then relates to photography.

Fried compares Hiroshi Sugimoto, Cindy Sherman and, Jeff Wall in a discussion about how these artist were working similarly in the fact that they were all three focusing on ideas based around the cinema.  I see the relation between Jeff Wall and Cindy Sherman in the fact that they are both focusing on these looks that occur in films and those in a trance while watching films but his start with Sugimoto I do not relate as much.  Fried claims that he does not want to challenge the veracity of Sugimoto's account but goes on questioning if it didnt have something to do with Wall and Sherman.  I feel these two artist are working in extremly different ways and seem to me to be concerned with very different things then what Sugimoto was concerned with.  That being, seeing a elapsed time in a single moment and the amazing  environment which these pictures portray.

  I am not 100% shooting down Frieds comparison as I can see where you could relate the work through the fascination of the cinema screen which occurs in Sugimotos photographs and then the gaze of the viewers but I do not believe this was Sugimotos original intent.  (That then brings up in my mind at this point is the original intent needed when looking back at movements or comparing works?  This question will take this post far off topic so I will let it lay for now.) Yes I believe that Sugimoto was more concerned with thinking of photography as art but I think that adding him in Sherman and Wall as Fried does and the way he does it just left a bad taste in my mouth.

Next Fried begins to talk about this idea of seeing photography as art and shooting to hang on the wall. Fried once again talks about Wall with his style of displaying photographs with a backlight and the mere act of printing them as large as possible.  He also talks about Thomas Ruffs Portrait series and his use of color.  How Fried talks in this section is that if you want to shoot photography for art bigger is better so go out shoot with a 8x10 and print as large as you possibly can.  There is a notion about the death of street photography and the search of catching a person when they are not putting on a act.  Fried then goes into talking about voyeurism in his third section.

The most interesting part of this chapter to me would be the discussion of Susan Sontag and the exhibition of the black lynching victims.  I thought the transition from why do these images needed to be displayed and what is expected from the viewer into Jeff Walls (what a surprise) Dead Troops Talk was brilliant.  I am thinking I need to reread this chapter and give Fried another chance.  At this point I think I have hit a Wall.

Bling, Hip Hop, and 16th Century Paintings.....

Music, entertainment, and celebrities have largely been influences for not only other forms of art but culture in general.  Youth very often portray those who they see in the media i.e. their favorite bands, artist, and actors.  This is what Manthia Diawara focuses on in his essay talking about theof James Brown and other soul artists influence on the youth culture in newly liberated Mali in Malick Sidibes photographs.  Diawara starts off explaining the transformation of the way which studio photography changed due to the change in independence and the want to be portrayed more luxurious then previously. The youth then of course rebelled against these thoughts and against the influence of the adults.

Martha Cooper

Malick Sidibes then a studio photographer saw the transformation of the youth and decided documentation was needed and wanted.  These kids in this highly religious area started to be heavily influenced by soul artist like James Brown.  Not being allowed to dress like the artists they saw in the magazines from America and other larger countries due to the highly conservative and religious backgrounds and government they often snuck off dressed, danced, and discussed these influences in secret.  This movement and the documentation was largely looked down upon by adults, religion, and the government.  This movement, lifestyle, and even more so photographs reminded me of those of Martha Coopers documentation of the hip hop/graffiti lifestyle in the late 70s early 80s.

Martha Cooper

Diawara talks about how the dances, artists, and style portrayed by those that the youth in Malia idolized were very similar to the rituals and thoughts of early religion.  I found this comparison to be very interesting and without the knowledge that Diawara had about these religions I would most likely have never came to that conclusion.  These rituals not only theoretically brought these kids closer to their ancestry but gave these youths a sense of belonging and community.  Similarly to that which hip hop and graffiti did for those documented by Martha Cooper.

From this we can segue into the article by Krista Thompson and influence of bling, hip hop, and 16th century oil paintings in contemporary art.  First off and largely I want to talk about the amazing comparison that Kenhinde Wiley forces us to see between 16th century paintings and that of the hip hop/bling culture.  Wiley finds men on the streets who he feels put off a sense of power through there walk, style, and overall portrayed personality.  He then will show these subjects a number of paintings done through the 1500s and 1600s of kings, dukes, and other high figures and ask them to pick one and pose like the subject in the painting they choose.  Wiley will then paint them in a highly glorified manner like those of the paintings the poses are based off.  This comparison forces us to see not only the similarities of the portrayal of the appearance of wealth but also the differences of the two subjects.  Wiley as a gay black man also questions what it is to be a black man/powerful/and the stereotypes of the hip hop culture through these works.

Kenhinde Wiley

Johannes Cornelisz Verspronck