Henri Cartier-Bresson

“Instinct has a priority on intelligence.”

I’m probably not the first to post this YouTube link. If you have not seen it, it’s worth the 49 minute watch:

 

@davidrosen: no, I didn't know about this video. I haven't watched it yet but I certainly will. My thanks for posting this link.

 

These are the kind of posts that really help me broaden my knowledge/understanding of photography and photographers. They are what make PN membership valuable for me.

 

Regards,

Mike

“Instinct has a priority on intelligence.”

I’m probably not the first to post this YouTube link. If you have not seen it, it’s worth the 49 minute watch:

 

I’ll watch the documentary but want to challenge the introductory quote which I find wanting. Neither instinct nor intelligence has to take priority. As a matter of fact, instinct is often supported and enhanced by intelligence and intelligence often furthered and deepened by having good instincts. They often work hand-in-hand, sometimes being more or less emphasized at different times in the process.

The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination. —Albert Einstein

Creativity is intelligence having fun. —Albert Einstein

Being busy does not always mean real work. The object of all work is production or accomplishment and to either of these ends there must be forethought, system, planning, intelligence, and honest purpose, as well as perspiration. Seeming to do is not doing. —Thomas Edison

No doubt, photographers like Stieglitz had great instincts. But I don’t think he’d be as important a photographer as he is without his intelligence and imagination, which allowed him to relish a Pictorialist approach at first for very intelligent reasons and then reject it and move photography toward Modernism with just as much intelligent design behind it. This takes nothing away from what must have been incredible photographic instincts. I feel no need to prioritize either.

Twee

I gotta say, I’m enjoying your posts. I feel like you’re slowly becoming the urban dictionary of PN!

Ludmilla, I just looked in your gallery to get a sense of where you are coming from...I saw exactly zero photos.

Ludmilla, I just looked in your gallery to get a sense of where you are coming from...I saw exactly zero photos.

Ludmilla’s been posting a lot to No Words. If you do a search of her name in No Words, you’ll see them. They’re worth checking out.

We cannot overlook the fact Cartier-Bresson was an artist before he ever picked up a camera and after he put it down. As a soldier, a prisoner of war, a French underground fighter, and much more, I am not worthy to judge him. I look at his photos and take away what I can.

I am not worthy to judge him.

Perhaps not. I don’t judge him but I do judge his work. He’s an important figure in the history of photography. I’ve learned a lot by looking at his work and appreciate his singular voice. His stuff, as a whole, impresses me but also leaves me a bit cold.

 

Thanks for linking to the video. So far, I haven’t found it all that well done. His hunting analogy is apt. I’m still not sure what he, himself meant by “the decisive moment” but suspect it’s been misinterpreted by many. What he has said so far in the video—his knowledge of art, his collaborations with filmmakers, the effects museums have had on him, his very articulate way of speaking—confirms my suspicion that the quote supplied in the OP misses the mark. He’s as intelligent as he is instinctive and it’s clear that his intelligence has informed his approach to photography.

 

The one thing I do judge negatively is something he’s well known for having said, though I don’t hold it against the much bigger person he is than this one statement conveys ...

The world is going to pieces and people like Adams and Weston are photographing rocks!

First off, I think Weston was the superior photographer among them. That’s beside the point, and the three were different types of photographers. Art or photography itself, whether it engages politics or social concerns, is an important aspect of our lives. Even if the work of Adams and Weston just boiled down to a sort of contemplation of beauty (and their work is much more than that), that’s as vital to the universe as is whatever social commentary Bresson provides. And there are photographers who did social commentary a hell of lot more seriously and deeper than Bresson.

 

Certainly, Adams can be credited with a not insignificant degree of raising environmental consciousness or at least an appreciation of nature and the importance of the US National Parks system. In addition to his photos, his long and pivotal association with the Sierra Club and John Muir would suggest that he was doing a lot more than photographing rocks. And, I feel much about Adams’s photos as I do about Bresson’s. I recognize their historical importance and appreciate them in many ways while they, too, leave me a bit cold.

Perhaps not. I don’t judge him but I do judge his work. He’s an important figure in the history of photography. I’ve learned a lot by looking at his work and appreciate his singular voice. His stuff, as a whole, impresses me but also leaves me a bit cold.

 

Thanks for linking to the video. So far, I haven’t found it all that well done. His hunting analogy is apt. I’m still not sure what he, himself meant by “the decisive moment” but suspect it’s been misinterpreted by many. What he has said so far in the video—his knowledge of art, his collaborations with filmmakers, the effects museums have had on him, his very articulate way of speaking—confirms my suspicion that the quote supplied in the OP misses the mark. He’s as intelligent as he is instinctive and it’s clear that his intelligence has informed his approach to photography.

 

The one thing I do judge negatively is something he’s well known for having said, though I don’t hold it against the much bigger person he is than this one statement conveys ...

 

First off, I think Weston was the superior photographer among them. That’s beside the point, and the three were different types of photographers. Art or photography itself, whether it engages politics or social concerns, is an important aspect of our lives. Even if the work of Adams and Weston just boiled down to a sort of contemplation of beauty (and their work is much more than that), that’s as vital to the universe as is whatever social commentary Bresson provides. And there are photographers who did social commentary a hell of lot more seriously and deeper than Bresson.

 

Certainly, Adams can be credited with a not insignificant degree of raising environmental consciousness or at least an appreciation of nature and the importance of the US National Parks system. In addition to his photos, his long and pivotal association with the Sierra Club and John Muir would suggest that he was doing a lot more than photographing rocks. And, I feel much about Adams’s photos as I do about Bresson’s. I recognize their historical importance and appreciate them in many ways while they, too, leave me a bit cold.

I guess the decisive moment was based on instinct. ;)

I guess the decisive moment was based on instinct. ;)

That’s the best you got?

Cartier Bresson gave an interesting interview in 1971.

In it he denigrates “spray and pray” machine gun like image shooting, color photography, reflex cameras with motor drives, any lens other than 50mm, and exposure meters!

See Henri Cartier-Bresson: 'There Are No Maybes'

 

But like most street photographers I do agree that he produced some great images. I'm 71 years old now, but I still remember how impressed I was studying his images when I was a teenager.

“Instinct has a priority on intelligence.”

I like that quote, but then I perceive instinct as being a part of intelligence that in some ways encompasses intellect.

Ludmilla, I just looked in your gallery to get a sense of where you are coming from...I saw exactly zero photos.

 

Ludmilla posts regularly on No Words threads.

Ludmilla posts regularly on No Words threads.

This is an answer to Sanford’s saying he couldn’t see any of Ludmilla’s pics, which he seemed to think would tell him where she’s coming from.

 

Phil, Jeff’s supplying info to Sanford on where her pics can be found isnt necessarily an endorsement of her views on HCB.

 

ANYONE, regardless of their being a photographer and regardless of their own portfolio, is entitled to express an opinion of HCB. The rest of your post is projection and rant, just as undesirable as a “cool” person being dismissive of a master.

As much as I greatly admire his photos (and respect the position Bresson's work historically fits in) I find it easy to understand Ludmilla's simplified Master of Twee take. It gave me pause... but after looking up twee it made me smile and feel it added a little something to my relationship with his work.

Due credit. The quote is from HCB... hunters, after all, aren't cooks. A quote I also think is simplified but informative in context of the man.

I always have problems with "masterpieces", "legends" and those "in the canon", as it seems so often thoroughly subjective and era-dependent. HCB was an important and often great photographer, but not everything he did is great and sometimes is probably not worth the amount of time devoted to intense analysis. I feel the same about Ansel Adams. But equally it is so easy to rubbish a famous person's work based on today's standards that bear little resemblance to the era in which they worked.

hunters, after all, aren't cooks.

Thanks for that quote. I hope I have a genuine view of HCB’s work, which I appreciate but sometimes just don’t love. I also hope I have a respect for his place in history and his importance in it. The thing about this quote, which is not always the case with famous quotes, is that it’s born out in his work, quite obviously so to me. With what he’s saying, he seems extremely self aware. It comes through in the video and it comes through in his body of work. I admire this kind of commitment, even if the results do less than ring all my bells. The one constant I’ve found in my own photographic path has been a sometimes difficult want to discover and assert an authentic and revealing voice and maintaining a commitment to that in my work. HCB may not be my hero, but he’s a good role model in that respect.

• "Actually, I'm not all that interested in the subject of photography. Once the picture is in the box, I'm not all that interested in what happens next. Hunters, after all, aren't cooks."
  

hunters, after all, aren’t cooks

I don’t understand that quote nor in what context it applies. Can someone please explain.

 

"Actually, I'm not all that interested in the subject of photography. Once the picture is in the box, I'm not all that interested in what happens next. Hunters, after all, aren't cooks".

HCB was the first photographer that I can remember having been taught about in photo school. He was alway brought up in discussions of composition . We have to remember that today we have millions of photographers all doing pretty much the same thing. In his day , It was all new. Even the simplest artistic photography technic was a giant leap forward and the best of the best are held high by those who have an appreciation for the roots of our craft. Personally I hold Edward Weston and Helmut Newton a bit higher then the rest but thats just me ;)

Tough crowd.

Also one in which many seem to have no sense of history-- judging past workers by the debased and faddish present.

Being the first do try something new counts for something. Who cares about a recent photo of a pepper now, but Weston making it into fine art was revolutionary at the time.

the debased and faddish present.

“Debased and faddish” is how old geezers have often looked at the present compared to their pasts.

 

These could have been the exact words Nikolai Rubinstein used to trash the young Tchaikovsky’s First Piano Concerto.

 

On the other hand, Tchaikovsky loved Mozart, who long pre-dated him. As a matter of fact, he wrote musical homages to Mozart.

 

I think I’ve found a healthy mix of looking at older photos on their own merits and also considering their historical place. I can simultaneous appreciate the contexts in which those photos were made while still allowing some of today’s sensibilities into my reactions. I may marvel at the originality and importance of something in its time while still recognizing that a 21st-century eye could find something wanting in what may have been considered brilliant a century ago.

 

My own respect and appreciation for Bresson’s work is also relative to other street photographers of that era, like Brassai, whose vision and take on the street I find more nuanced, more intimate, and more layered.

 

Late-breaking addition:

I’ve learned to recognize the art of provocation for what it is!

Genetic engineering has created the perfect pepper and made it nearly impossible to find a provocatively distorted example to photograph these days.

I’ve learned to recognize the art of provocation for what it is!

 

Then, why do you always respond to it? :eek:

;)