On The Release Of Sebastiao Salgado's "Genesis" As A Book

[Guest malland]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...Quite early in the thread I explained why, in my opinion, some of Nachtwey's photos of similar subjects are more successful..

There is an issue over the role of a critic. It seems to me that a critic provides his or her view of the photographs, but it's not really up to the critic to tell the photographer what he should do instead, such as, "I really think Salgado should shoot some of his pictures more like Nachtwey in his "X" series. Ingrid Sischy's article has been widely read and her criticism on the anesthetization of poverty has been broadly discussed and, as I read in another article, Salgado is aware of this type of criticism and doesn't like it. Sischy, as far as I know is not a photographer, and should not be telling Salgado specifically how to shoot. If Salgado wanted to act on her criticism he certainly would know how to do it, particularly considering that Sischy has provided a clear and extensive critique.

 

The Lee Cummins review of Genesis in the London Observes that I linked in post #78 criticizes Salgado for sometimes being too obvious, for looking at life rather than into life and for too much "evenness of tone", but she certainly does not tell him specifically what to do. Incidentally, on the evenness of tone: in a postscript to one of his monographs photographer and teacher, Ray Metzker, makes a strong statement, in a discussion concerning tonalities of photographs, that Salgado's photographs all have the "same sensibility" (by which he means gradation). By the way, this may not be true of the Nenets pictures.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Bangkok Hysteria (download link for book project)

[Peter H]

There is an issue over the role of a critic. It seems to me that a critic provides his or her view of the photographs, but it's not really up to the critic to tell the photographer what he should do instead, such as, "I really think Salgado should shoot some of his pictures more like Nachtwey in his "X" series............

 

Mitch, I agree 100%.

 

I wouldn't presume to tell any photographer, let alone one of Sebastião Salgado's abilities, how to take their photos. Not that they'd listen anyway, but that's a different matter! I do, however, feel that we're all free to say how we feel about photos and any other artistic creations, to say what we like or don't like and so on, and this applies equally to the world's greatest artists and to outright beginners.

 

Photos, like all works of art and creativity, are what they are. The artist shows them to us. We respond to them. We talk about how we respond to them, which may be positive, negative, and an infinity of other things. But when we start saying what they should be, or challenging others to do so, we are straying way off track into a barren area of thinking.

 

 

I apologise if I've responded tersely to the challenge to say how Salgado should do it better, but its a irrelevant distraction from a potentially very interesting and actually, in an age of ubiquitous photography, important and topical subject.

 

But I know the question was intended seriously, so I have tried, as briefly as possible, to give an idea of the type of concern I have with some of the photos, and I'm happy to talk more about it, but not in the spirit of trying to tell Salgado how to take his own photos!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Guest malland]

...I do, however, feel that we're all free to say how we feel about photos and any other artistic creations, to say what we like or don't like and so on, and this applies equally to the world's greatest artists and to outright beginners.

 

Photos, like all works of art and creativity, are what they are. The artist shows them to us. We respond to them. We talk about how we respond to them, which may be positive, negative, and an infinity of other things. But when we start saying what they should be, or challenging others to do so, we are straying way off track into a barren area of thinking...

Peter, yes, anyone who puts his or her work before the public must expect comments, critique and criticism. And critics play a useful, I would say essential, function. It's when you put out work and no one comments that's the real problem.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Bangkok Hysteria (download link for book project)

[stickan1]

I have missed this thread until today. But I do have read Genesis and have seen the TED interview. So when I read this thread now and the discussion about Sischy's 22 year old article it makes me puzzled. Her article may be of some interest and can be an object for an analysis in itself as typical for a certain style and époque that may be called postmodernism. But I will not continue that discussion and it has nothing or very little to do with the book Genesis.

 

So lets talk about Genesis and that project which I really like and find impressive. Salgado says somewhere that he wanted to show the beauty of Nature and the people who live close to nature. I think that he really achieves this goal and that he has a very consequent style and tonality in his images. It is beautiful but very far from any postcard beauty. I would say that he has for six years kept a definite style while traveling all over the globe in order to document Nature that is still pristine and not touched by man. The project has a clear objective to show us the beauty of unspoiled Nature and he made a choice to go for beauty, but in a very personal way.

 

He wants to make us concerned about the threats to nature. But there are no oil spills, there are no dead albatrosses with plastic in their bellies. He seems to believe that the beauty of Nature can make us aware of the necessity to protect nature.

 

I think that he has achieved his goal and that the book Genesis, to me is one of the more important photography books, ever published.

[pico]

Critics' intended audience is other critics.

[azzo]

...

 

.. And critics play a useful, I would say essential, function.

 

...

 

That depends!

[pierovitch]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I find critics easy to ignore but not a good image.

[azzo]

When one day I saw the ''works'' of one photography critic and judge, I said to myself, ''WTF !''

 

 

Seriously !

[IkarusJohn]

... I will not continue that discussion and it has nothing or very little to do with the book Genesis.

 

So lets talk about Genesis and that project which I really like and find impressive. Salgado says somewhere that he wanted to show the beauty of Nature and the people who live close to nature. I think that he really achieves this goal and that he has a very consequent style and tonality in his images. It is beautiful but very far from any postcard beauty. I would say that he has for six years kept a definite style while traveling all over the globe in order to document Nature that is still pristine and not touched by man. The project has a clear objective to show us the beauty of unspoiled Nature and he made a choice to go for beauty, but in a very personal way ...

 

Thanks, Stig. This is the sort of comment I have been looking for. I have absolutely no chance of ever seeing the original exhibition, so I have the book on order.

 

I am familiar with Salgado's other work, particularly the collections which Sischy refers to in her hatchet job.* I don't really agree with her comments on those works, so I have been hoping that the Genesis project will stand up on its own merits.

 

Cheers

John

 

* I say hatchet job as it seems to me that her critique was preconceived. She may have a point about the quality of his style intruding into what should be disturbing images, but I don't see that as a justification for the nature and tone of her criticism.

 

If I had paid to do a photography course, and this was presented to me as part of my studies, I'd be pretty unimpressed.

 

I should add that I was in London for Magnum's In Our Time exhibition. I bought the catalogue (it's still one of my favourite photography books), and I bought a post card of Salgado's image of the women walking through the desert wrapped in their robes, in a time of famine, if I recall correctly. I liked the image as it was reminded me of one of HCB's monsoon in India pictures. I posted it to my girlfriend - she threw it out as the image was too disturbing ...

[Guest malland]

Re posts #86-88: What's with all the one-liners beating up on critics?

 

The first critic in Western literature was Aristotle. In his Poetics, written around 335 BCE, he admired the narrow focus of the Illiad: while the Illiad is about the Trojan War, it is limited to one episode from the tenth, and last, year of the war, and on one theme, the rage of Achilles; it doesn't cover the abduction of Helen, the Wooden Horse, the Fall of Troy, or the death of Achilles from an arrow shot to his heel. Had Homer covered all of these and other episodes, Aristotle says that this the epic would be "too extensive and too long to grasp all at once".

 

I wouldn't write off critics in a set of one-liners; and Aristotle's discussion of the economy and narrowness of focus of the Illiad is relevant to some of the things that Sischy writes about Salgado — and is also relevant to the recent review of Genesis by Laura Cumming's in the London Observer, which in turn is certainly relevant to IkarusJohn's statement that he has "been hoping that the Genesis project will stand up on its own merits."

 

Well, I linked the the Observer review by Cumming in my post #78, and I'll repeat the quotes from it here: Laura Cummings says a lot of good things about Salgado's work and calls the photos of the Nenets people in northern Siberia "superb" and writes:

The Genesis photographs...are conspicuously the size and shape of easel paintings and with a full emphasis on photography as art. And not just any art: caimans float in the water like Monet's waterlilies. A forest of ferns becomes a Jackson Pollock. Look at Salgado's photograph of the snowcapped peak of Mount Hudson floating like a mirage across the waves and you are looking straight at a Japanese watercolour.

But then she writes something similar to some of Ingrid Sischy's criticisms:

...Salgado doesn't always resist the obvious...The difficulties start when people begin to appear...Salgado has often said his work is political. So it is, in a human rights, save-the-planet kind of way. But his images have grown quite neutral by contrast, as if showing the untouched world in a democratic fashion, image by image, simply spoke for itself. This principle has two adverse consequences. First, it means that there always have to be hundreds of images: everything must be shown or the democratic point is lost. But this has an opposing effect, for the eye cannot sustain the same level of interest (his Grand Canyon looks like anyone else's, his giant tortoise staring curiously back is superb).

 

But more signally, it leads to an evenness of tone. No let-up in energy, no shift in pace or aesthetic, the same regard for everything he sees. This leopard might be about to leap but Salgado looks as calmly back at it as a field of wheat. The Genesis project looks at – but not into – life. It shows us the wonders of the world, to be sure, but it declares nothing beyond the irresistibly obvious, that we all co-exist.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Paris au rythme de Basquiat and Other Poems [download link for book project]

[stickan1]

I can partly agree with this critique of Genesis as cited by Mitch "The Genesis project looks at – but not into – life. It shows us the wonders of the world, to be sure, but it declares nothing beyond the irresistibly obvious, that we all co-exist." But that we all co-exist and have a common future that is threatened by mans exploitation of Nature is, unfortunately, not obvious to all persons. If it were like that the world would look radically different!

 

The book, Genesis, is a massive piece of work, and I believe that this massiveness and the even style is part of Salgado's artistic idea. Even though he switched from film to digital during the project he has printed in a way that the style is the same during this six-years project. He wants to use the "weight" of the collected material as an argument.

 

You can always ask for more, but what this man, 60+ years old, and some assistants have achieved is to my eyes enormous and I look forward to see the actual exhibition which I will try to do this autumn when it comes to Paris as I will be staying there a couple of days.

 

And a short side note on critique: Critique is a necessary and often useful part of our discussion about art (and science). But you must analyse the position and objectives of the reviewer. If he/she is without a consequent position from where to formulate the critique it may only be an exercise in criticism. Much of the so called postmodern critique could be blamed for that.

[Guest malland]

Hej, Stig. Jag ser att du förstår vad jag menar...

 

I agree, according to Laura Cumming in the Observer review, Salgado has made a superhuman effort in completing the Genesis project, and his goals are highly admirable. Nevertheless, I feel that both Ingrid Sischy's and Laura Cumming's criticisms are valuable because, over the year's starting with the New Yorker article, there has been a wide-ranging discussion on "concerned photography" — and this has influenced photographers to think more deeply, which is healthily. Not, however, Salgado, who has hated these criticisms, apparently wanting at one point to sue a critic (don't know whether that was Sichy); but that doesn't matter because Salgado has something that is well liked on a popular level.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Bangkok Hysteria (download link for book project)

[wattsy]

Not, however, Salgado, who has hated these criticisms, apparently wanting at one point to sue a critic (don't know whether that was Sichy);

 

Do you have a reference for this anywhere, Mitch? Even if true, I'm not sure what relevance it has to the wider discussion about aestheticising tragedy or the more specific critique of Salgado by Sichy.

 

but that doesn't matter because Salgado has something that is well liked on a popular level.

 

I'd be careful not to allow a prejudice about popular art (the instinctive reaction by many of us that because something is popular it must therefore be, at best, a bit middle-brow) to cloud an assessment of Salgado's artistry. Sometimes art can be both popular and good.

 

Incidentally, I finally got round to reading the Sichy piece and I must confess that I too found it rather unconvincing. Her criticism that some (many?) of the photographs have too much "compositional beauty" is overdone and IMO is a fair criticism only if you share her interpretation of Salgado's artistic intent. I don't share it and, in fact, don't even view Salgado as a "photojournalist". As for the rest of Sichy's criticisms, these seem unnecessarily personal and, thus, uninteresting: for example, her perception of Salgado as self-aggrandising and her irritation with the curatorial eccentricities she apparently observed (which seem rather unexceptional to me, albeit twenty years later). I suspect Sichy's real problem with Salgado is that she is simply uncomfortable with the religious symbolism that he seems keen on. From her presumably secular perspective, she is clearly troubled by what she might see as Salgado's Catholic mission. At one point she argues that "Salgado's strategy here fits into a long and convenient tradition of coupling human suffering and God's will". She also writes (rather tellingly I think) that "his religiosity appears to be catching".

[Guest malland]

Ian, the reference to wanting to suing someone — I simply don't remember whether it was Sischy — is in another New Yorker article, a very favorable one, written at the early stages of the Genesis project, around 2006, I believe, based on a long interview with Salgado.

 

What was your reaction to the Observer review?

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Lanka Footsteps [M-Monochrom/Sri Lanka]

[wattsy]

What was your reaction to the Observer review?

 

I haven't yet seen the exhibition but if the book is a fair representation of the show, the Observer review seems perfectly fair.

[shootinglulu]

I find it hard to see beyond the digital 'Look' of digital bw photography in print..this work looks very digital to me.

[aesop]

...saw the "Genesis" exhibition at the NHM. Twice. Free the first time. Felt compelled to see it again. So I paid - best GBP 10.00 I've spent in a long time. Then went ahead and bought the book from Señor Bezos. Money well spent.

 

I'm at a total loss as to what is being discussed on this thread. Perhaps I am not learned (enough). Then again, perhaps that frees me of baggage. I know a good image when I see one. Arguably, that is all that matters. For me.

 

I shoot film only. I do all my processing and printing. Digital rocks.

 

Salgado is awesome. See the exhibition if you can.

[zlatkob]

I can't blame Salgado for hating these criticisms, if that's true. When you've worked as hard as he has at creating something, it must hurt to hear a critic tear it down, especially when the critic shows such misunderstanding and ignorance. For example, a critic has a problem with religious symbolism in photos? Well, the symbols happen to be common in the lives of some subjects. A wise critic would understand that. What is the alternative: go and photograph the world with an avoidance of religious symbols wherever you see them? That would be absurd, of course. But, realistically, what should the photographer do? The critic has no answer. Offering no reasoned alternative, the criticism reveals itself as unfounded and lacking in substance.

 

Now, with Genesis, a critic has a problem with "an evenness of tone. No let-up in energy, no shift in pace or aesthetic, the same regard for everything he sees." Wow, this is a problem?! A photographer's work has "no let-up in energy" — think about that. "No shift in pace or aesthetic" — think about that. "The same regard for everything he sees" — think about that. These are faults? If so, what exactly should the photographer have done? If the photographer had done differently, the criticism could just as easily have been switched to: "There is a lack of evenness of tone. There is an unfortunate let-up in energy. The pace and aesthetic are inconsistent. His regard for subjects lacks coherence." ... Not very profound either way.

[pico]

I find it hard to see beyond the digital 'Look' of digital bw photography in print..this work looks very digital to me.

 

Please elaborate.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pico]

The critic was not there. She exists in the urban insular space of literature. Photography today is about being there!

Edited June 11, 2013 by pico