Robert Frank - Don't Blink

We have thieves of course, but the thieves in Tennessee, they have some REAL Machismo. :)

 

And thus a whole group and subset is defined by a single photo.....

That sounds like you already made up your mind about folks who dare question your premise.

Partly true, partly not. I made up my mind about what Vincent said based on carefully reading and thinking about what he’s said and based on some discussion back and forth. That’s usually how reasonable people help make up their minds about things. I’ve questioned Alan’s making assumptions about the meaning of a title and then Vincent suggesting his own looking to see if a book shows “the majority of Americans” in a book not claiming to be about that, in other words projecting a theme to look for that there is no good reason in advance to believe is what the book’s about.

 

Had I made up my mind about Vincent’s approach to the book before hearing anything he had to say about it or by listening to the way others characterized his thoughts before hearing him out, you might have a valid comparison between what I’m doing and what Vincent is doing. I have no idea what he’ll ultimately think of the book. I’m talking about Vincent’s approach to the book which he’s talked about, which we’ve discussed, and which I feel intellectually very capable of having an opinion of since I’ve heard his first-person account of his intended approach and he writes clearly and understandably.

 

Vincent is talking about something very specific he’s going to look for in the book which comes out of left field (majority of Americans) and he’s made it an issue before the book even arrives.

 

I can say that if I looked at The Americans to see whether it shows the majority of Americans, my answer would be no. Then again, I’m familiar with it already and I have no desire to impose “majority of Americans” onto “The Americans.”

Partly true, partly not.

 

Good enough.

Good enough.

Hahaha. Guess it has to be in order for you to avoid taking responsibility out loud for the false comparisons you’ve made. What I’ve done may be good enough. You, not so much.

Hahaha. Guess it has to be in order for you to avoid taking responsibility out loud for the false comparisons you’ve made. What I’ve done may be good enough. You, not so much.

OK Nor....uh Gary.

You're back to your Old Self.

The well is poisoned now.

I'll just keep my opinion of the book to myself when it arrives.

I'm Moving On.

Edited October 13, 2018 by Moving On

' Les Américains was first published on 15 May 1958 by Robert Delpire in Paris. Text from Simone de Beauvoir, Erskine Caldwell, William Faulkner, Henry Miller and John Steinbeck was included.'

I have been trying to locate a translation of the original book without luck. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

I have the 1949 camera magazine that introduced a few of the images. I also have the 1st english version of the book, one of my first photo book buys. But I have never seen the original text from the book that Frank intended.?

The photos were and remain less significant for me than the historic and contextual impact. The style of Frank's take in this book resonates for me because it seems so natural. I have always long been drawn to the book format in photography and many of my favorites have a characteristic in common The individual photos may not stand alone imo but they become an important piece of the whole. The Americans is a very good example.

The original text would be fascinating to me to read.

OK Nor....uh Gary.

You're back to your Old Self.

The well is poisoned now.

I'll just keep my opinion of the book to myself when it arrives.

I'm Moving On.

 

Me too. I have a degree in English, so I pretty much understand what words say, and the title "The Americans," DOES imply that the book is about a majority of Americans and not any one subset.

 

I'm done with this thread.

And thus a whole group and subset is defined by a single photo.....

Sorry you made that assumption.

My comment was simply in jest, and not made with any definition......hence the smiley face.

For The Record.....I have seen cars jacked up and wheels stolen in California as well. So that photo IS representative of at least the criminal ability of two states. I hope i did not offend the pride of any thieves outside the Tennessee boundaries.

No doubt the criminals of my area are just as clever, and have a similar "machismo". :)

Nice try on the conflation though.

Sweet Dreams

I have a degree in English, so I pretty much understand what words say, and the title "The Americans," DOES imply that the book is about a majority of Americans and not any one subset.

Being an English major doesn’t help here. First, because even English teachers are capable of misreading or reading too much into or certainly taking too strictly and literally the title of a book. It might be wise to talk, instead, to an Art teacher, or a Photography teacher who might suggest not letting a title so influence your viewing of a photo series that it will prejudice you into looking to find something that simply was not, is not, and never will be there, which is a photo essay about the majority of Americans. It’s not what Frank’s photos are about. Frank’s photos are not a majority report on Americans and it’s incredible to hear the book reduced to a quantitative analysis of Americans.

 

If you have access to some English students, ask them if they watch the popular TV series of the same name, The Americans. It’s about a somewhat typical-appearing American family where the husband and wife are major spies. Then ask those kids if they think the program is about the fact that the majority of Americans are average family people who are spies. You will get your answer. And you will learn something about the different ways in which titles function and the kinds of literary license that are often at play when a title is conceived.

Edited October 14, 2018 by The Shadow

Gary, why not give it a rest. What wonderful set of characteristics makes your views any more valid than any others? Language is sharp - it cuts both ways and gives away a lot about the writer.

Everything about The Americans is in that final image, the way everything to be gathered from a great poem is in its final line. The car is the body that breeds the culture. The people inside (the family from Frank’s perspective) are shielded in a way but are also made more vulnerable because of the car/thing they're in. Embryos in a constant state of becoming and decay.

 

My reading of this photo is in line with what you described. The bright headlight and the reflecting edge of the windscreen bear special meaning to me. The simple geometric profiles (cold and cruel) are in sharp contrast with the organic beings inside. It highlights, as you alluded to, the animalistic, techno-futuristic aspect of modern society that is both unleashed by us and which in turn make us. We are inside it, being pushed and tumbled around (the tilted interior), but there is also a sense of acceptance and excitement of joyride involved, I think. By picturing his family inside it, I think the photographer is showing how much he is part of all this, rather than being a mere observer.

 

This also reminds me of another photo in the same book, that of the baby lying before a towering jukebox. That one is darker though I think, for it shows the macabre irony of poverty next to technology and commercialization.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Supriyo

On a different note, I think it is highly possible for one to not know one’s own country, even after living a whole life in it. Extending that argument, I think it is quite possible for an outsider to know a country in unusual ways, specially for someone with a pair of eyes like Robert Frank. The way this is possible is, there are many things that appear familiar and unimaginative to the insider, and in stark contrast to the outsider, who can find those things eye opening. There are also many things that the outsider will interpret differently, even erroneously so, and those differences/errors in interpretation can often teach the insider certain things about the country he wasn’t aware of. That only, if we divert our attention from the word ‘the’ in the title and look inside :).

is the open ending of it.

 

What wonderful set of characteristics makes your views any more valid than any others?

Well, for one, I’ve actually seen the photos! Hope that helps.

:rolleyes: Bob & weave.

You asked a question. I answered it straight. I can’t help your inability to process simple things.

Many years ago I read a book called "The Russians" by Hedrick Smith. Written before the collapse of the Soviet Union, the one point I remember is his belief that Russians like strong men regardless of the government in power. He seemed to be right about that. When I read it, I understood it to be a text on who the Russians really are and took that for granted. Not being a Russian, nor haven't spoken to Russians about the book, I assumed it was accurate. I don;t really know if it is.

 

Photo captions can influence what we think the meaning of the photo is. How often do we tailor the caption we compose to affect the viewers of our photos. This is especially true with editorial and photojournalistic photos. We can even twist the true meaning of a photo into something totally different then what was photographed. A book called "The Americans" can have the same effect. Certainly I believe it did. I respect others opinions of the work but maintain my position that the book's photos reflect a narrow view of the true nature of Americans. The title is presumptive and all-encompassing. Of course, I suspect his editors may have selected the title for him knowing it would create controversy and subsequently increase sales. Certainly the title and his photos have had an effect as we're still talking about them decades later.

Many years ago I read a book called "The Russians" by Hedrick Smith. Written before the collapse of the Soviet Union, the one point I remember is his belief that Russians like strong men regardless of the government in power. He seemed to be right about that. When I read it, I understood it to be a text on who the Russians really are and took that for granted. Not being a Russian, nor haven't spoken to Russians about the book, I assumed it was accurate. I don;t really know if it is.

 

Photo captions can influence what we think the meaning of the photo is. How often do we tailor the caption we compose to affect the viewers of our photos. This is especially true with editorial and photojournalistic photos. We can even twist the true meaning of a photo into something totally different then what was photographed. A book called "The Americans" can have the same effect. Certainly I believe it did. I respect others opinions of the work but maintain my position that the book's photos reflect a narrow view of the true nature of Americans. The title is presumptive and all-encompassing. Of course, I suspect his editors may have selected the title for him knowing it would create controversy and subsequently increase sales. Certainly the title and his photos have had an effect as we're still talking about them decades later.

Certainly plausible.

I suppose we will never know how "covert" the choosing of the title was.

 

On the other hand.......I have Seen/Read ALL Kinds of books with titles like -

The History of Spain

The History of The usa

The Muscle Cars

The Great Moments in Sports

The Railroads of North America

I never once thought that (this) One Book was The Definitive word on any of the subjects.

Again, why does Frank's book get (some) people so wound up.?

What should it have been called.? .....(Some Of) The Americans

ALL the above books leave out all kinds of people, cars, trains, events. It's just one book. Nobody is trying to bamboozle anybody else.

We all know that Frank's book does not have pictures of EVERY type of "American". ;)

I respect others opinions of the work but maintain my position that the book's photos reflect a narrow view of the true nature of Americans.

“Narrow” is a loaded term. I’d say The Americans is Frank’s stream of consciousness view of America. But I do agree it’s not about a majority of Americans. All else is wishful thinking, unrealistic expectation, manipulation of words for political posturing, and showing a blind allegiance to some fairyland American ideal that doesn’t and never existed at the expense of the rather more humble view of one photographer at a moment in time.

"The Americans" arrived today, and I spent more than half an hour taking in the photos. I don't think the book deserves all the criticism it received. To me, it gives somewhat of a negative view of Americans, but "anti-American"? That's a stretch. Since there are few recognizable landmarks, these photos could have been taken anywhere. For example, there is a photo of many people walking along a street. The caption says "Canal street - New Orleans." But there is no way to tell what street it is... no recognizable stores, architecture, not even part of a New Orleans street car to give some bearing to the photo. The photo could have been taken in Germany, for all I know.

 

Being as the photographic style was one that was previously unseen, that was sure to generate at least some negative feelings in the viewers. Since "The Americans" came out, there have been many many similar photos taken over the years. The familiarity with the style now can dull one to the negative reaction toward the style when it first appeared.

 

Hmm... tempest in a

teapot. Leave it to

humans...

http://bayouline.com/o2.gif

Vincent Thanks for your review. Maybe I was over-arching in my opinion.