Close
Cart is empty
Licensing
Photographers
Blog
Events
Store
Sign in / Register
Advanced Search
Magnum Photographers
Abbas
Christopher Anderson
Eve Arnold
Olivia Arthur
Micha Bar Am
Bruno Barbey
Jonas Bendiksen
Ian Berry
Werner Bischof
Rene Burri
Cornell Capa
Robert Capa
Henri Cartier-Bresson
Chien-Chi Chang
Antoine D'Agata
Bruce Davidson
Carl De Keyzer
Raymond Depardon
Bieke Depoorter
Thomas Dworzak
Nikos Economopoulos
Elliott Erwitt
Martine Franck
Stuart Franklin
Leonard Freed
Paul Fusco
Cristina Garcia Rodero
Jean Gaumy
Bruce Gilden
Burt Glinn
Jim Goldberg
Philip Jones Griffiths
Harry Gruyaert
Philippe Halsman
Erich Hartmann
David Alan Harvey
Tim Hetherington
Thomas Hoepker
David Hurn
Richard Kalvar
Josef Koudelka
Hiroji Kubota
Sergio Larrain
Guy Le Querrec
Erich Lessing
Herbert List
Alex Majoli
Constantine Manos
Peter Marlow
Steve McCurry
Susan Meiselas
Wayne Miller
Inge Morath
Dominic Nahr
Trent Parke
Martin Parr
Paolo Pellegrin
Gilles Peress
Gueorgui Pinkhassov
Mark Power
Raghu Rai
Eli Reed
Miguel Rio Branco
George Rodger
Moises Saman
Alessandra Sanguinetti
Ferdinando Scianna
Jerome Sessini
David Seymour
Marilyn Silverstone
W. Eugene Smith
Jacob Aue Sobol
Alec Soth
Chris Steele-Perkins
Dennis Stock
Zoe Strauss
Mikhael Subotzky
Nicolas Tikhomiroff
Larry Towell
Peter van Agtmael
John Vink
Alex Webb
Donovan Wylie
Patrick Zachmann
Looking at Photographs: Certain assertion and ambivalent ambiguity
[CarrouselCaption]
View photo details
Fullscreen
January 16, 2013
by Richard Kalvar
View profile
A few years ago, I read this very interesting piece by Philip Gefter in the New York Times, "In Portraits by Others, a Look That Caught Avedon’s Eye":
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/27/arts/design/27geft.html?pagewanted=all
It spoke about Richard Avedon as collector of photography rather than as photographer.
The article was accompanied by a few photographs, in particular the ones shown above this post. The small part of the text that referred to them said: “A century of advances in technology allowed Avedon to do things Nadar could not, like capturing the finest detail with instantaneous exposures. Yet ‘Evelyn Avedon, 1975,’ a portrait of his wife, echoes the guarded tenderness of ‘Ernestine, 1854-55,’ Nadar’s portrait of his young wife that is in Avedon’s collection.”
I read this description, written with all-knowing self-assurance, and thought, “Wait a minute; that can’t be right.” Have a look at the two portraits. Would you call the expressions of these two women “guarded tenderness”? Well maybe, but it could just as easily be annoyance, anger, or even fury, no? They reminded me of the pictures that I used to take of my wife, when I was testing a new developer and needed a warm body to hold up scores of signs that said Tri-X 400 ASA Xtol 1:3 9.5 minutes, TriX 800 ASA D76 1:2 7,5 minutes, etc., etc. After half an hour, I would get looks similar to Mme Nadar’s and Ms Avedon’s. So who are you going to believe, Philip Gefter or your lying eyes? And what was true for one of the women was not necessarily true for the other.
How do critics come to make statements like this? Isn’t the very nature of photography ambiguous, where different interpretations of the frozen moment are possible, with no certainty about what was really going on? I don’t believe we should be told what to think and how to see, but rather encouraged to look for ourselves, and bathe in the ambiguity.
PS: I wish I had kept all those strips of negatives that had been developed in different developers for varying lengths of time. I could have put a few hundred of the pictures together and become a famous conceptual photographer.
© 2012 Magnum Photos - All rights reserved
About Magnum
FAQ
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions
Contact us
Built by Orange Logic
Design by AREA 17
Magnum Photos is a photographic cooperative of great diversity and distinction owned by its photographer members. With powerful individual vision, Magnum photographers chronicle the world and interpret its peoples, events, issues and personalities.
Browse
Join us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter