How can photography be thought as a Postmodern medium?

Hello everyone. I'm doing my paper on the following question: "How can

photography be thought of as a postmodern medium? Your discussion should define

and discuss various strategies used by 3 photographic artists working post

1960."

 

I did a lot of reading concerning this subject bit still a bit lost how I

should organize my essay to fully answer this question.

 

This is the concise plan of my essay: (Do you think I'm going into right

direction?)

 

1. History of that time. (End of war, end of colonianism, the rise of mass

media and technology. etc).

 

2. At the same time demise of Modernism and rise of Postmodernism.

 

3. Photography appered to be a watershed between Modernism and Postmodernism.

 

4. In modernism ph was treated as a tool for representation, as a medium to

document while in postmodernism it became central. (here I plan to write that

ph. couldn't be central because it contradicted with modernist's idea of art

practice that should be autonomous, because ph. participated in so many other

different practices. However, postmodernist artists sterted using ph as a

medium for making art like Rauschenberg, Warhol did etc.)

 

5. It also became postmodern because ph. embraced all the postmodern ideas:

appropriation, banalty, humour - parody, irony, playfullness, self-reference

etc.

 

I chose to discuss the following three artists like: Cindy Sherman, Diana Arbus

and Sherry Levine and their strategies.

 

What do you think, guys?

 

Any more ideas why ph is a postmodern medium?

Imo, it can't. Vermeer painted pictures that look an awful lot like photographs to me when I look at them. And even Nicephore developed his famous picture a good long while before postmodernism...whatever your partcular definition of the term. <p> I challenge the accuracy of speaking in absolutes about any label without at least acknowledging it's a label. That goes triply so for postmodernism.

This is all about how many angels can dance on the head of pin, which, incidentally, was never a topic of medieval theological discussion but was probably invented out of the whole cloth by Benjamin Disraeli in the 18th century.

 

Much more healthy to get a camera, go out and take picures.<div></div>

<p>As James has alluded, the problem with addressing post-modernism lies in understanding its definition as nearly everyone approaches it from a different angle. Some consider post-modernism in temporal terms as anything contemporary i.e. after modern. Others discuss post-modernism in strictly stylistic terms i.e post-modern aesthetics. Yet others refuse to consider anything post-modern that doesn't reflect a complete departure from traditional values--whatever that is. Sane people of course would rather gnaw their own arm off than fall into the self-referential black hole that is post-modern discourse :)</p>

 

<p>I guess what I'm saying is that it could be prudent to define the terms of reference for your examination of post-modern photography. Certainly acknowledge the different definitions in your assignment whether they be philosophical or aesthetic but make it clear that for the purposes of your assignment you will be interpreting post-modernism as... <your definition goes here>. This will help to establish a baseline for qualifying your analysis, interpretations and conclusions.</p>

 

<p>Additionally, I think any qualified examination of post-modern photography should not be in isolation and should canvas developments in other fields including philosophy, society and politics. Don't forget that the term post-modernism had been around for some thirty years before the altered realities of Sherman, Witkin, Skoglund and Groover were thrust into the limelight during the 80's.</p>

 

<p>I would argue that some of the philosophical tenets of post-modern thought were established some 60 years before that by the cubist poet

<a title="Introduction to Rexroth?s translation of Pierre Reverdy?s

Selected Poems" href="http://www.bopsecrets.org/rexroth/essays/reverdy.htm">

Pierre Reverdy</a> and echoed in Andre Breton's <i>

<a title="Read an online translation of the Manifesto of Surrealism" href="http://www.tcf.ua.edu/courses/Jbutler/T340/SurManifesto/ManifestoOfSurrealism.htm">

Surrealist Manifesto</a></i>:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p><i>"The image is a pure creation of the mind. It cannot be born from a comparison but from a juxtaposition of two more or less distant realities. The more the relationship between the two juxtaposed realities is distant and true, the stronger the image will be -- the greater its emotional power and poetic reality..."</i> --Pierre Reverdy (Nord-Sud, March 1918)</p>

</blockquote>

 

<p>Hope some of this helps.</p>

 

<p>Cheers...John.</p>

It seems like a lot of ground to cover, but without seeing some writing it is hard to know.

How about writing a few pages and posting them here?

 

1, 2, and 3 on the outline are not necessary and do not sound fun to either write, nor,

eventually, to read. I would start right in on the three photographers you have chosen and

show why

they should be regarded as postmodern. I would stick to one simple question for each of

the three, such as,

"How does Diane Arbus use irony to attack prevailing meta-narratives?" or, "How does

Diane Arbus deconstuct certain symbols through her photographs in order to reveal

something about our assumptions?" or, "How does Diane Arbus use captions to create a

sense of skepticism about what might otherwise be taken for granted in her photographs?"

or, "How does Cindy Sherman's break with stylistic unity help convey her ideas?"

 

Is your teacher a postmodernist who does not allow you to state postmodernism might be

a hoax? Can you argue that there is no such thing as postmodernism? Could you argue

there is no break with the past, only continuity? (This last paragraph contains real

questions for you, but is also a stage-whisper to other eventual contributors to this

thread).

>>> probably invented out of the whole cloth by Benjamin Disraeli in the 18th century<<<

 

Pretty good trick by Disraeli, considering he was born in 1804.

 

--Mitch/Bangkok

Thank you a lot for some ideas. I will write a couple of pages and post them in here. As a non-native speaker I found it really difficult to write about this topic.

 

Anyway, I kinda of follow the idea expressed by Douglas Crimp in his book "On the Museum's Ruins" and the idea that when artist started using photography as a medium for creating art like Ruschenberg and Warhol did, this is when new artistic approaches (Pop, Minimalism, Conceptualism) appear and this is when that considet to be the end of modernism.

"Pretty good trick by Disraeli, considering he was born in 1804."

 

Hehehe, Mitch. I wondered whether any of these 'academics' would spot that.<div></div>

I look forward to reading those pages, Ms. Gubareva.

Several very thoughtful comments were made. Nicely done:) Here's my more pedestrian take on your questions. Consider my comments in the light of the protest vote:)

 

In regard to number three.

 

Photography developed parallel to the rest of the arts so it has it's own separate history and to me, isn't a "watershed" product. Postmodern photography is, as was pointed out by Kevin, (my view) a continuum of development as opposed to a change brought about because of outside external forces, even though the outside external forces created the change in the continuum. Life does have dynamics. I drive from point A to point B with no real track in mind as I let traffic decide the route I take. The rush hour traffic is a force in my travels but not the gensis of the need for the trip. Same thing here. Artistic forces are just that a molder but not the genesis of the product. A political coup could be the molding force but not the gensis as the protest might have already been there.

 

In the rest of the arts, the change (Modern to Postmodern) was an intellectual protest if you will whereas in the case of photography, it's just an infusing of intellectualism (going back to Stichen's "Milk Bottles," 1915 and Minor White's metaphorical equivalents) into the content of the photographic effort; a photographic intellectual awakening.

 

We're now on a cusp in regard to the photographic continuum; I see a blending if you will of the two thinks; Photographic Modernism and Photographic Postmodernism. For me, in order to understand, the term Postmodern and how it applies to photography, "photographic" or "photography" needs to be placed in context to any descriptors such as Modern or Postmodern so as to intentionally separate the genre of photography away from the rest of the arts. If this isn't done, then the what's what of photographic think become lost in the artistic descriptors; Modern Vs Postmodern.

 

FWIW, I don't see Cindy Sherman as Postmodern. I see her as one might see a movie director casting themselves as an egocentric subject in a blatantly pedestrian fashion, the making of stills; I don't see avant garde other then a touting the party line which came later. Later still, she did became Photographic Postmodern in her protest series and then it became about her (egocentric) again. But by your above "...self-reference...", she becomes photographically Postmodern. When used as widely as you do in your above, it sweeps up pretty much everybody in contemporary times.

 

I see Diane Arbus as the first Postmodern photographer for I see her inserting herself into her subjects and she's looking back at you via her freaks; very avant garde. This, even though I see photographic Postmodern changes in the continuum as far back as Steichen and 291.

 

As to Sherry Levine, I see her efforts in the light of the WPA projects; a thoughtful mime recording of what's there; very "modern." How ever you wish to see her efforts, copying of others, that's not mine, as I don't see avant garde in intentionally redoing that which has already been done (Andy Warhol, the first contemporary artistic mime?) and for what ever reasoning, given notoriety.

 

"What do you think, guys?"

 

In the end, sadly, it all becomes about self-promotion; crass, bill paying commercialism of no import other than the pseudo hype which promotes it all; Hollywood or Disneyland style theme park. But I digress; nuff said:)

<p><em>the idea that when artist started using photography as a medium for creating art like Ruschenberg and Warhol did</em></p><p>Basing paintings on photos, you mean? I think I read that John Singer Sargent (for example) was doing that at the start of the 20th century.</p><p>PoMo used to be a wonderful marketing slogan. (Maybe it still is, in some quarters.) What, if anything, does it mean? Until you decide that, the question can't be answerable in any intelligible way.</p><p>Natori was a Modern, perhaps; and he had a big and much publicized little row in the pages of <cite>Asahi Camera</cite> with the then-young Tōmatsu in 1962 or thereabouts, so maybe Tōmatsu is post-Modern; you might want to look into that. Start with <a href="http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=0300106041">this book</a>; it has well-informed and interesting essays.</p>

"In the end, sadly, it all becomes about self-promotion"

 

Very well said, Thomas. The reason I'm so dismissive of the whole academic analysis thing lies in those words. All these theses aren't about advancing knowledge, they're about advancing the writer's career. It sometimes seems like the dafter the proposal the more kudos the author collects, which is rather sad really.<div></div>

I don't really see Diane Arbus as being "post modern" . Her critics , yes, but her work, no.

I'd choose Stephen Shore, Richard Misrach, Mark Klett, and others in the so-called "New

Topographics " movement over Arbus in your survey.

 

So the initial deconstructing question for you to answer is: Why have you included no men

in your survey?

 

Have you should read "On Photography" by Sontag , "Beauty in Photography" by Robert

Adams, and "Looking at Photographs" by John Szarkowski?

 

The premise of #4 is bunk.

 

Photography is just an artistic medium like any other. it is no more an exclusively post

modern medium than painting or sculpture are modern, surrealistic or Romantic

mediums.

 

Some last word of caution: be wary of applying literary theories of criticism and language

to non literary endeavors. The fit is usually lousy.

One other suggestion for a strongly "post modernist" photographer:

 

Annie Leibowitz.

 

Her work is very strongly post modernist in structural and conceptual ways.

correction: the correct spelling is

 

Annie Leibovitz

<i>Much more healthy to get a camera, go out and take picures.</i><p>

 

Do you really think that is going to help Natalia write her paper? I don't. If you're not interested in philosophy and only in taking pictures, that's fine. But post on a forum for picture posting, not one on philosophy, no matter how loose the definition may be.

<i>Annie Leibovitz</i><p>

 

Post-modern? I find her unbearably commercial, commercial in a way that her work never gets beyond it, unlike other commercial photographers like Albert Watson, Ellen von Unwerth, even Newton. Her work strikes me primarily as self-promotional in the sense of building the cult of celebrity, which is crass, not post-modern.

I'm not sure you've seen a lot of her non-commercial work. And even in reference to the

commercial and editorial assignments, I think she still is very much a "post modernist"

photographer in approach -- for many of the reasons you cite.

 

There are several

other editorial/commercial photographers whose work is deeper and richer than

Leibovitz's ; Gregory Heisler, Mary Ellen Mark, Jodi Cobb, and Dan Winters (he's also a post

modernist) to name four quickly, and other portrait photographers whose work is more

challenging and deeper; Thomas Struth and Nicholas Nixon for example, but Leibovitz is a

very strong interpretive portraitist.

 

I think of a lot of the truer nature of her work has been lost in the flood of Annie

wannabe's and imitators , and a lot o fo the fault for that lies with srt directors who

encourage photographers to imitate the lighting style of A.L.'s work and aren't interested

in anything else a photographer might bring in the way of a new vision, or really anything

else that might challenge anyone to think.

I've seen her non-celebrity work and I can't say that it moves me in any way. I haven't even encountered anyone not into her celebrity work who likes it. I'm not sure why you would put her in with other post-modernists, her non-celebrity work is fairly "arty-farty" in an old-fashioned way and her celebrity work seems mostly about making her a celebrity. While the latter does have some resonance with other post-modernists, it hardly makes her work any more than celebrity portraits.

 

If you compare AL's work with that of Richard Prince, the Starn twins, or even Cindy Sherman, you can see a huge difference. AL is a traditionalist, and a not very imaginative one at that. She has mastered celebrity, however, and I give her a lot of credit for that.

<p><em>building the cult of celebrity, which is crass, not

post-modern</em></p><p>I'm very weak on the meaning of "PoMo", but I

was laboring under the impression that (a) celebrity (fame for being

famous), (b) crassness,

and © what's trumpeted as "PoMo" were intimately linked.</p>

Today the most common used strategy in post modern practices around the world would have to be appropriation /Quoting. Appropriation/ Quoting involves borrowing symbols, styles and forms from any other artist, which they choose. Artists tend to reconfigure or redefine the meanings of the symbols used in order to suit their own needs or raise questions in society.

 

Can be considered from this that Robert Mapplethorpe was a post-modernist artist by borrowing Edward Weston?s style?

I also a bit confused about what postmodern strategy used Diane Arbus and Cindy Sherman in their work?

I?m still deciding which 3 photographers post 60s I should discuss. I can?t choose between Diane Arbus, John Baldessari, Robert Mapplethorpe, Cindy Sherman, Sherrie Levine or Ed Ruscha (it?s kinda confusing because I though he is more painter than a photographer, however our lecturer made a strong emphasis on him making him a postmodern photographer).

"however our lecturer made a strong emphasis on him making him a postmodern photographer)"

 

It sounds to me like your lecturer knows little more than you do about the subject. Here it is in a nutshell...

 

In the beginning were cave painters. They also painted outside caves but only if they lived in Australia and so were out of touch with modern techniques. Then came the classical painters. They were the ones in north west Europe, as everyone knows that was the only part of the world which had art. The Modernists were, basically, those painters who lacked the drafting skills of the classical painters (or pretended they did) and who were, in any case, determined to prove that they weren't photographers. The post modernists are those who, realising that all the other tags were taken, invented a new one in order to get more money for their products.

 

See? It's really simple. You can cut and paste the above into your paper and it should get a grade 'A' or whatever other rating stands for "you've out bullsh*ted the bullsh*ter".<div></div>

<p>Natalia,</p>

<p>Cindy Sherman used her untitled film stills series to have us consider the female role clichés prevalent in female Hollywood movie roles through the vehicle of staged self-presentations. In that sense she reinvents herself as the prototypical starlet. As Andy Grundberg writes about her in his book Crisis of the Real:</p>

 

<p><i>"Appearance is all, she seems to say, yet she also demonstrates how conventionalised and delimited appearances ultimately are" </i>(Grundberg p. 118)</p>

 

<p>In that sense her work points to the difficulty perhaps in creating and maintaining meaning in today's image saturated society. For Andy Grundberg then, he see this strategy of undermining the conventions of mass culture as that which <i>"places Sherman's photographs squarely among the postmoderns. </i>(Grundberg p. 121)</p>

Here is first couple of pages I wrote. Probably the most dificult writing I've ever done in my whole life :-) Thank you a lot.

 

The early 1960s was an important time of structural and cultural change in the world. The most significant of these changes were the rise of mass media communication and fast development of technologies. The end of World War 2, the destruction of Europe and its empires, the struggles for independence by its colonies had culminated in a new set of political, cultural and ethic ideas. The success of various social movements had increased the sense of identity by women, gay and lesbians, African Americans, and other previously discriminated groups. The world of art experienced a major alteration, the demise of modernism allowed for the bloom of new complex and ever-shifting ideas that led to an artistic climate of ?unprecedented intellectual ambition? known as postmodernism.

 

Keith Davis states that the leading artistic trend of postmodernism was ?a dematerialization of the traditional art object?. Artists started exploring the value of the idea of art and its place in society more than creating art of monitory value. However, the new ideas required new modes of expression and representation and photography has become one of the most important ones. As critic Andy Grunberg writes: ?Conceptual artist sough to rescue art from dominion of precious object, and photographs were considered ideal because they were so little valued ? until Conceptual Art helped them make them valuable?. Artists no longer viewed photography as a secondary instrument used for art?s reproduction and the medium to document. Instead, it has become central amongst contemporary postmodern artistic practices.

 

According to Douglas Crimp, photography can be seen as ?a watershed between modernism and postmodernism?. In the modernist sense photography couldn?t be considered an art because it acquires its autonomy and should be an independent form of expression from other disciplines to become a traditional medium. By understanding photography in this way, it can no longer be a tool for documentation, reportage, illustration etc. John Szarkowki attempts to make photography a modernist medium in terms of ?an art form that can distinguish itself in its essential qualities from all other forms? by saying: ?the pictures reproduced in this book [The Photographer?s Eye] have in fact little in common?these pictures are unmistakably photographs. The vision they share belongs to no school or aesthetic theory, but to photography itself?. However, photography is too multiple, too useful to other practices to be an art form within the traditional definition of art. Thus when photography was revaluated as a modernism medium, photography seemed to be one of the causes of the end of modernism due to its subversive nature.

 

Photography?s allowance to the museum on par with other traditional mediums, the growth of photography courses in university art departments, and rapid dissemination of a series of new approaches like Pop Art, Conceptual Art, Book Art, Body Art, Performance Art, Earth Art, Photorealism and many others let artists embrace photographic form of expression enthusiastically. The most famous painters in Pop Art era, Robert Rauschenberg, Andy Warhol, and Ed Ruscha, were amongst the first who started using photographic images and techniques in their works in the early 1960s. For example, Robert Rauschenberg began incorporating photographic reproductions of the originals to the canvas by means of silkscreen process. In Retroactive I (1964) he uses incompatible pictures of an astronaut, oranges, a portrait of John F. Kennedy and a stroboscopic photograph of Gjon Mili and overlaid them with bright strokes of paint. Like Robert Rauschenberg, Andy Warhol started using photo-silkscreen process to make paintings composed by means of photographs taken from the popular press. His most striking works include the repetitive images of Campbell?s soup cans, the bottles of Coca-Cola, S & H Green Stamps and others. Since that time more and more artists from various disciplines working in the postmodernist era started using photography as their medium.

 

Postmodernist artists made a strong emphasis on the nature and the power of representation which made photography the key postmodern medium. According to Walter Benjamin, the mediums of film and photography played a central role in the new cultural experience of media-dominated society characterized by mass production and expansion of images. He pointed out that in the world where everything is duplicated, there is no reality, there is only representation. Posmodernist artists sought to undermine this idea of representation. Since all the images referred to other images, copies of the copies, their favourite artistic strategies were appropriation, simulation, and pastiche. These strategies involve copying of already existing styles, images and symbols from other artists whom they admire to create a unique piece of work. This copying ?highlighted the status of representation as a perpetual re-presentation?.

 

 

Further I plan to write about Sherrie Levine and her appropriation. Then about Cindy Sherman and Diane Arbus.

 

thank you a lot for your ideas and help.

I take it that English isn't your first language and that you aren't handing in the paper in English. If I'm wrong on either of those counts, I fear you have problems...<div></div>