"Equivalence" / Minor White / about images

luis_g · December 15, 2009

Fred - " For some reason, a few posts ago, you said my questioning you about the "range of experience and potentials" was moot"

Actually, that is incorrect. Allow me to quote myself: "I've made myself misunderstood, rendering the point moot."

Not your questioning, my inept phrasing.

FG - " Talk about photographs and the range of experience relative to a certain method of seeing isn't terribly persuasive to me"

It shouldn't be. I have zero interest in selling or persuading you or anyone into trying this, or anything else, for that matter. I have no agenda other than sharing my experience and knowledge. Frankly, I can't see MW's Way being very popular. It's too demanding, and very old-school.

If someone was interested in meditation, and they asked, I would do my best to help them get started. Or if they, like Todd, asked about something of MW's method to start on, I'd freely give it, as I have. I've only been addressing the topic of this thread, and meditation played a large part in MW's method. I said you could try it and see for yourself, not that you should.

LG - " ....you could easily find out if this might work for you..."

FG - " I want to know about the method used, the method you are claiming shows a broader range of experience than you think I am willing to allow for."

Wait, it is you who clearly states above what you are willing to allow for, not me.

I've done my best here, skirting around the copyright issue, (and the fact that the estate may be working on releasing the unfinished large book) to reveal as much as possible about MW's method. Meditation you can find out about anywhere. If you deny the possibility of something out of hand, then, it follows that's a possibility you are not allowing to exist in your universe. If you deny the possibility of experiences beyond your own, then that universe is not open-ended. Your own experiences define its limits, which are your own.

FG - " What I do not see in White's photographs is any sense that he has experienced something beyond the range I have or beyond the range I think I have or think anyone could have ."

I am convinced that the range of human experience far exceeds my own, for which I am personally grateful, as it leaves a lot of room at the Inn for me to grow into, and new ways of experience to explore.

Fred - " I know more Christians for whom it's all posture. Hollow words and hollow descriptions. They might all tell me very similar things when talking on this board. The talk would be unpersuasive."

Perhaps you should then assume that I'm posturing, and all my words are hollow. I'm dead serious, and, no, I won't be offended. Or even mind. In a way, it's a comforting idea for me too (I can hear a sonic boom from John zooming in), as it would reduce tension.

Trust me, I am not trying to persuade you, or anyone else here, of anything (I can hear Rebecca Hmmpff-ing in the background).

I have told how things worked out for me. I, referring to the OT, discussed how my experience under one of MW's 1st-gen students affected me. I have never made claims about meditation giving me superpowers, making me or my work special, better than anyone else's, unique or original. Frankly, my own experience is relatively common for practitioners of both meditation and MW's Way, by what I've been told firsthand and read. BTW, I do not consider myself peculiarly adept at meditation.

FG - " And, as far as White's pictures, they do illustrate something about his method but they don't appeal to me as a motivation for trying those methods myself, to be honest."

...and that awareness is good, and a time and energy saver to realize before devoting oneself to the training (or meditation, for that matter).

FG - " I don't see anything in his pictures that speaks to me of the quality or quantity or level or range of White's experience, though the pictures do speak to me of White's experience."

How? What do they say to you?

mizore · December 15, 2009

Fred, the negative capacity that Keats was talking about seemed to me that he didn't want to have his certainties block his perceptions (his letters are his discussions of his life and writing with various friends and family and show a pretty much sane poet for once who's not remote historically the way Chaucer is). The contemporary religious traditions don't seem to go very far back into deep time, for most of human history, there was no Christianity, and even the Buddha was late (circa 600 BC). I've had friends who believed in and followed various traditions that seemed to come from societies that had very harsh regimes, very hierarchal societies. If you as upper class ruler can persuade your peasantry that this is the way life should be, whether it's Christian resignation or that dharma did this to you, then you've reduced challenges to your dominance.

When someone like Keats comes up with something spontaneously, then I'm more likely to feel it's real rather than not. It makes sense to me that our preconceptions get in our way, that trying to take a photograph like other photographs or one that matches our idea of high art, can be a problem. It's not certainly always a problem.

Taoism, modern linguistics theory, and what you've just said agree that words are not the things they point to, that one of the problems with language is confusing the map for the territory. Photography, art, dancing, skiing, playing tennis, and breaking horses can't be done to a book, as my grandfather pointed out.

I think most of the people attracted to the various esoterica come from fairly comfortable lives. In evolutionary terms, believing in these things is proof of their superior fitness that they don't have to be rational all the time (try being poor and telling a therapist outside San Francisco or certain circles in NYC that you've reached a space where you have no thoughts, much less mention enlightenment). We're pattern-seeking animals. We want to make sense of things. Historically, in any given age, we've believed fervently things that other ages see as superstition. We can be sure that we are all doing that now, believing in something that isn't so.

The trick for all of us humans is to be aware of that. Our minds look for patterns. Cognitive science says that we make lot of what we see up, that we only see the world in time slices, that we are blind periodically without realizing it.

When I'm in the presence of people who believe that there are those who are saved/enlightened/good/ and those who are not, I'm suspect that what's really going on is a primate dominance move.

I notice that most of us don't take one of the spiritual paths for craftsmen that often, if at all, in the West -- even though _Art and Fear_ mentions it. We could all get jobs taking baby pictures and trust that the art in us would transcend the medium and that the constant repetition would reduce the pride and self-absorption that keeps us from photographing the photograph rather than our mental image of what the photograph should be.

If anyone is taking this path, they aren't here, and perhaps no one can take it deliberately. We don't want to be people who grind out baby pictures or wedding photographs or even ad art for a living. Except for Luis, we have chosen not to be anonymous. But Luis is concerned that he has done some good pictures, which would be like the anonymous Japanese craftsman trying to make historically important tea pieces, rather than working to make bowls, some of which turned out to be transcendently beautiful.

The counter argument to the premise of "The Unknown Japanese Craftsman" would be that the premise comes from a rather ruthlessly hierarchal society that taxed peasants far more (up to 40% of the rice crop) than other Asian cultures did (average rice tax in most SE Asia was something like 10%) and so peasants had to make things to sell to their masters to survive. Putting the evaluation of the work in the hands of the patrons also put considerable power in their hands.

So maybe we in the West are right not to follow that practice, and to use words to shape what patterns people find in the work.

Or not.

Or both.

Norma Desmond · December 15, 2009

"I've done my best here, skirting around the copyright issue, (and the fact that the estate may be working on releasing the unfinished large book) to reveal as much as possible about MW's method." --Luis

</blockquote>

Lius--

I want to hear about Luis and Luis's photographs and photographing. Just like I want to hear about John's. This topic interests me, as it seems to have interested a few others, as the various concepts relate to my own processes and work.

I've read and re-read this thread. There is a lot of academic information about White's views and practices, about White's students, about who's been taught by various of White's students and had access to various of White's writings. There have been a lot of sources provided, very helpful ones to those interested in finding out more.

Among all that you've written, I find two short statements about your own work and photographic process:

"Still thinking about White's influences on me, probably the most significant was the potential for breaking with the seemingly tyrannical issue of the medium always being indexed to a referent, and transcending it without having to resort to abstraction."

"Others can imagine (and draw) any view in a room from any other viewpoint, without moving, including their self-portrait. I can, and am able to fantasize it also when photographing with no problem."

</blockquote>

Some of these things you say will only make sense when and if I see your photographs*, especially the first statement just quoted. Your words are almost by necessity abstract compared to what your photographs might show me (which you say will not appear abstract), regarding photographs having been indexed to a referent and regarding transcending without abstraction. It is a compelling concept, one I already told you I have considered and work with . . . with quite a degree of specificity and reference to my own photographs. What it means to you would have to be shown to me or described much more personally.

*I am not trying to, nor do I think I could, pressure you into showing your photographs. I am, however, increasingly aware that not having your photographs to see and, more importantly, your not even talking about your photographs, is a disadvantage in advancing many of these discussions beyond the academic who's who of photography and beyond the purely theoretical.

jtk · December 15, 2009

NOTE re: the OT

"Thoughts? Were you previously aware of Minor White?" - John K

My primary reason for posting here, and on Conversations, was simply to mention White's name and solicit some experiences. I'd browsed Photo.net and was amazed to find virtually no mention.

I didn't post in order to claim Minor White's work was central to my own, or that I reflect his teaching. I did mention two of his students who'd influenced me as human beings, as well as stimulating me photographically. I referred to an army of other students who provided a sort of backdrop...some left photography entirely without leaving what they learned, others did well in commercial photography or in galleries.

Here's how I was influenced by my osmosis relationship to the shade of Minor White:

1) I came to regard photography as a very important life activity, regarding some aspects reverentially 2) I came to see congruence of photography with other media (as did White, as did Weston and many others). 3) Because I wasn't comfortable with the term "Equivalent", I started to understand photographs as non-verbal metaphors. 4) I experienced Minor White-organized lessons in "reading photographs," recognized that they were the same as the lessons taught forever by art historians...I think that can be a distraction. 5) I arrived at the idea that White's best work was teaching of teachers 6) I considered White's use of "Spirit" (which he ascribed to certain images)...and rejected it.

Again, I rejected "Spirit": Because I think the significance in a photograph is assigned by our brains to a stimulus (photograph) that a perceptive person (photographer) shared appropriately, either by chance or by decision (targeting the right kind of viewer). It's interpersonal when it works, not magical, not "spiritual." Fred said "communication"...I think that's the point. As well, I think that when White used "spiritual" he might better have used "metaphor"...I don't think he meant anything airy fairy any more than he did by practicing zen and other physical disciplines.

He seems to have been a physical man more than a word man...that's just my second hand impression. His teaching methods may have been little different from those used to teach welding or archery or zen meditation. From what I've seen, their effectiveness depends on a the effectiveness of a flesh and blood teacher.

Norma Desmond · December 15, 2009

""Thoughts? Were you previously aware of Minor White?" - John K My primary reason for posting here, and on Conversations, was simply to mention White's name and solicit some experiences."

</blockquote>

I wish I'd have known this from the beginning. I would have stayed far away from the thread. I thought we were about more than "mentioning" names. I thought we wanted substance, philosophy as it relates to photography and both of these as it relates to our own work. Boy, did I misunderstand.

John, for the most part, it seems you got exactly what you wanted here. A lot of "mentioning" and a bunch of six-degrees-of-separation-type experiences. I can't imagine what you've been complaining about.

Here's what you said in another thread just yesterday, in complaining about how others deal with this very forum: "I'm interested in my own current photography. I'm not interested in handy-dandy quotes from popular photographers."

But you're interested in handy-dandy quotes or little experiential tidbits about NON-popular photographers . . . like White? Huh?

If Minor White isn't central to your actual photographs, is he relevant? In what ways? And if not, if you just brought him up because his name fails to come up around here, indeed it should have been brought up in THE MOST CASUAL CONVERSATIONS EVER forum!

luis_g · December 15, 2009

Rebecca - "If anyone is taking this path, they aren't here, and perhaps no one can take it deliberately. We don't want to be people who grind out baby pictures or wedding photographs or even ad art for a living."

Huh? You're confusing your wild fantasies with reality. I didn't do baby pictures, but I did tons of polaroid at fairs, worked for a local weekly, set up small studios, managed a larger one, did an in-house corporate publication, did portraits, too many weddings, tabletop, catalog, studio and location ad work, before realizing I wanted to do something else for my daily bread. Maybe you don't want to do those things, but it doesn't mean everyone doesn't want to, hasn't, or won't. Try speaking for yourself, and you'll probably be miles closer to the truth than you are now. For all you know, others here may have taken that path as well.

RB - " Luis is concerned that he has done some good pictures"

Really? That's news to me, but thanks for the wrong and fictitious mind-reading, anyway. Rebecca, what are you doing making up things like this? Why? No career gazing at the crystal orb for you, I'm afraid. All you are doing is pushing me away from reading or replying to your posts, if not the whole forum.

RB - " which would be like the anonymous Japanese craftsman trying to make historically important tea pieces, rather than working to make bowls, some of which turned out to be transcendently beautiful."

No, the above is completely fictional garbage, at least as it applies to me. It is exactly this kind of personal thing that leads to nasty exchanges. Read the terms of use sometime, specially #4. I've never done anything like this to you. Please stop.

As stated above, I've made thousands of bowls, and continued to make my own work. Where do you get all this from? What compels you to make it up? It has nothing to do with me, or this thread, and no, I don't appreciate you divining what I'm thinking, and putting it up as fact! What nerve. I realize nature abhors a vacuum, but please do your best to resist filling mine, thank you.

Fred - Feel free to consider my contributions on this site and this forum in particular, from here on, as strictly "within the academic who's who of photography and the purely theoretical" or anything else you come up with. I'm good with that.

I am struck by the realization that my contributions to this thread weren't as helpful as I thought, so there's no sense in my wasting my own time or anyone else's by being here. A special note of thanks to John for abstaining, and a sincere and heartfelt thanks for putting this up, it brought back a lot of memories, and gave me some new ideas from stuff I hadn't had the depth to understand back then but appreciate better now.

Todd, if there is anything else I can be of assistance with, feel free to ask.

toddr · December 15, 2009

Luis, I appreciate your input... this is how these threads tend to go, nothing unusual...those looking can pick out the good bits...and there are some here.

Do you know why White's estate hasn't published his teaching materials etc? Or at least let others use them for research? Seems very strange....I've always been surprised that there's not more on White here too. Very few photos on the web in general.

John, even if White didn't intend "Spirit" to have any transcendental meaning, Loori does seem to have found it through White's teaching, which is interesting to me. I just found this talk by Loori about White and his own methods.

jtk · December 15, 2009

"...even if White didn't intend "Spirit" to have any transcendental meaning, Loori does seem to have found it through White's teaching, which is interesting to me." - Todd R

Todd, I don't claim to know White's intentions, though he seems to have been an explorer...which is more important than having "become" anything, IMO.

I wouldn't question what Loori said about his experience. Evidently a photographer until the end. That's a great thing. I linked related to obit in Casual Conversations but I didn't know much beyond his name until that news.

Another student of Loori's vintage, Bob Boni, dedicated much of himself to the Tassajara Zen Center in CA... much of his photography seemed humble, exquisite B&W scientific illustrations of plants, which I do think was his intent... I don't recall him talking in transcendental terms. He sat za zen, delivered the US mail, and gave me a good deal on a transcendental Agfa Ansco 8X10 view camera...

toddr · December 15, 2009

that's funny, maybe I just need an 8x10 to get all transcendentally :)

that's the neat thing about Zen as a practice, it's soooooo ordinary.....and no compulsion to do anything like what I'm talking about....

the thing that makes me think that it is possible to make photos that have this quality is that Loori used to give projects in Dokusan (private interview with the teacher) and would accept a photo as an "answer" to a koan. knowing a bit about zen teachers and koans, a photo w/o this quality would not have been adequate I think...

but mostly, I love the process of photographing and want to see how much I can pull out of myself.

mizore · December 15, 2009

Todd

The thing with view cameras is that they slow you up, probably even more these days than when most cameras used manual focus lenses. Very meditative. The classic joke about 8x10 photographers is that they go out, frame and focus, just look at the ground glass, and don't take a photograph at all. Then they move the camera and do it again. When they do take photographs, the negatives make great contact prints.

Luis, I'm not your student; we have no personal connection; and your tone to me has been rude from the beginning. If you can't see that what you've said to me could be construed as rude, then you've got self-conceptions about yourself and your role in the world that I don't share.

jtk · December 16, 2009

Todd, I think we're on the same page : "soooooo ordinary" ...and somehow so important. Your "pulling something out of yourself" and enjoyment of "the process" are the heart of all of this for me, too. (Plus a little gloating when I make an image somebody else applauds.)

I screwed up this thread at the beginning by assuming that, like me, others think of Minor White first as a teacher, or teacher of teachers, more than philosopher or photographer. Happily a few folks who responded did understand that.

My mistake led to a litany of quotations by various standard references to popular photographers.

I didn't mention anybody's name because they were photographers, I mentioned them because they were White's students, who themselves became teachers or mentors...which was precisely what White "intended" with his teaching, as far as I can discern.

I didn't say much about their photography, wanting instead to refer to them as teachers or mentors. My original topic should have emphasized White's influence and system as distinct from his photos. However I did want to get that 1963 essay into the Photo.net record :-) I would have liked to hear more about how/why some of White's methods didn't work for one of us, who evidently taught photography. My own way of approaching instructional methods as a student has been to try to pull something out of every lesson. Takes two to tango: teacher (good/bad/indifferent, makes no difference IMO) and eager student (crucial IMO).

I know first hand that it's true that White upset many of his students, and people who write about him usually express anxiety about his sexuality and his interests in multiple disciplines, exaggerating their relevance. Many have difficulty with John Cage, Merce Cunningham, Andy Warhol for similar reasons. White pointed out that upsets like these were useful because they pointed us to something in us.

I hate it when my sentences begin with "I" :-)

toddr · December 16, 2009

Just for fun or to continue this investigation, please post a photo that you feel is an Equivalent in the lines of Steiglitz and Minor White in a No Words threads...

http://www.photo.net/no-words-forum/00VGnP

Sign In

"Equivalence" / Minor White / about images

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in