Dan:
I think this post could use some clarity.
First let’s get “vernacular” photography out of the way. I am using that as a kind of shorthand for what Blake Andrews calls “the photography-integrated-into-life method.” This is what started the whole discussion in the first place. It’s also exactly what John describes. (Blake’s post is here, it’s a good read: http://blakeandrews.blogspot.com/2009/05/observation.html )
As for what is “at stake,” I wanted to show that Ume Kayo’s photographs are relevant to the broader discussion about work that might be unfairly ignored by ‘serious’ ‘contemporary’ ‘art people.’ Her work is similar in spirit to the photographs that were being talked about, and she is notable in that she’s had a very positive response from the Japanese mainstream—a response which I think is totally deserved by the way. I don’t want to be too dramatic about this. But hey, if you’re trying to eat from your photography, then there’s definitely something “at stake” for you.
Garry is probably right, although again, if I were trying to eat off of my work, I wouldn’t sit back and hope the trends swing my way. Eggleston is also relevant here, as an American exponent of this method, but even he isn’t a great beacon of hope. In the first place, he’s not of this generation, and also he had a rough time of things at first. (I wish I knew about Friedlander’s initial reception, if anyone knows please enlighten me.)
The thing on the table is that a bunch of new photographers feel like they are being ignored. It’s worth paying attention to that kind of discussion. Is there an American Ume Kayo with the recognition to match? Patrick Tsai might be the closest, but still I don’t know how far he’s broken beyond the internet. And so we wait!
on Jun 4, 09:26 PM · #
