Can one learn anything about themselves from their own photographs?

albert_richardson1 · April 17, 2010

Arthur - Fred: Where are planning and problem-solving in all this? While you're busy exploring your inner selves, how do you get down to the business of making the decisions needed to get the damn thing to look right? Is this really all that deep? How much introspection is actually transportable from one photographic project to another?

I must be the only person who sometimes discovers for myself what I think and feel clearly when I hear my side of a conversation with another person. Self-awareness is overrated. There is always some uncertainty or complication, some distraction perhaps, to muddy the waters making it unlikely that anyone other than me will completely agree with my assessment of myself. Human beings are always more or less lost when it comes to understanding themselves.

So the question for a photograph would be how you get beyond an appreciation for vision and craftsmanship to be able to say anything personal about the photographer at all. How about something basic like whether the photographer is a man or a woman, or what language he/she speaks? Would you like the person if you ever met in person? I contend that there is very little one can learn about being in another person's shoes from the photos they make.

As for oneself, we are so easily deceived and entrenched in our favorite lies about ourselves, there is little hope of learning much at all. It's true that we have the experience of completing the project. It's also true that a project can teach us something about the world by making us look at it carefully. But positive lessons will get more traction than negative ones throwing the whole premise. Who wants to come face-to-face with some personal unpleasantness such as one's own prejudice, or incompetence, or a discovery that others find one to be boring or difficult to be with?

Julie H · April 17, 2010

But Albert, I already know my gender and what language I speak (see thread title: this is about what I know about myself, not what I know about others). What Luis wants to know is what the shell looks like to the snail that is inside it.

On the other hand, I sort of agree with your (Albert's) "we are so easily deceived and entrenched in our favorite ..." Uh oh. We can't use "lies." That's perspectival (see all previous discussions of "truth"). But whatever you call it, there is a problem of confirmation -- somebody is being deceived since we never seem to agree on much of anything. If you want to talk about the personal view, for example or in particular from the above, "empathy" what exactly is it that we're talking about?

I am currently watching (it takes me two nights to watch a movie -- because I'm old and sleepy and trying to do too many things at once) ... a documentary about Fellini (called "Fellini: I'm a Born Liar" ... heh!). In it there is a long interview with the elderly Fellini during which he describes himself as having (in beautiful Italian, pretend you're reading subtitles) a wonderful relation to/with all his actors. He says that other directors have trouble with actors; he never had trouble with actors. This, he says, is because he understands them, he loves them and they know that he loves them. They are comfortable with him. No problems, everything is always wonderful [he goes on and on about this].

Shortly thereafter, the film switches to an interview with Donald Sutherland (star of Fellini's film, Casanova]. Sutherland describes Fellini as a tyrant, a brute, abusive, threatening, humiliating, -- I can't remember all the words; Sutherland sort of sputtered trying to find superlatives sufficient to describe how hideously unpleasant and vile Fellini was to work with. Footage of the set/shooting of Casanova seems to support Sutherland's claims. (As do the less virulent, but still less-than-loving descriptions of Fellini in an interview with Terence Stamp.)

I know more than a few instances of couples who got divorced where each side was convinced that he/she had perfect empathy for the other (in a negative sense; it was probably positive when they got married). I know of parents and children ... What about the old ladies shown photographing African children that I posted to another thread? Did they not feel empathy?

[Also in the Fellini documentary, he describes making art as "effortless" and "inevitable," like fruit that is ripe and ready to be picked. I often feel that way after I've made something; almost never before or during.]

Norma Desmond · April 17, 2010

"Where are planning and problem-solving in all this?"

Not a bad idea for a topic. I know it's come up in other threads as well. They're in the archives.

"I must be the only person . . ."

We are all unique in our own ways. It's a good reminder.

"Self-awareness is overrated."

I'm self aware when I'm aware of myself. When I'm not, I'm doing something else. Sometimes I'm self aware while I'm also doing something else. Multi-tasking.

"There is always some uncertainty or complication . . ."

Yes. I agree. I said something similar above: "As a photographer (and person), it seems that being very deliberate and intentional will still always be accompanied by some level of accident or spontaneity, something no matter how small we simply can't control."

"I contend that there is very little one can learn about being in another person's shoes from the photos they make."

An interesting point. As a matter of fact that was discussed in the thread about what you can learn about other photographers which spawned Luis to start this thread about what we can learn about ourselves. I like the shade of difference you address between what I know about a photographer from my own vantage point and whether I feel I can get into his head or see from his perspective. Two levels of knowing: Knowing someone and knowing what it's like to be them. The latter may be akin to the "empathy" Arthur and I are talking about but, you're right, it's not the only kind of knowing.

"we are so easily deceived and entrenched in our favorite lies about ourselves"

That can be so true. One thing I like about photography is that I feel it's opening me up to myself a little more. I could be fooling myself but I don't worry about that too much. After all, I learned in early Philosophy classes that we could all just be puppets on a string of some evil genius. But your own doubt is healthy and I try to subscribe to it myself. I often think doubt and even self doubt can help move the universe along.

"positive lessons will get more traction than negative ones"

This I don't find true for myself. I've talked a lot (not here but in other recent threads) about negation. I think that what's not, what doesn't happen, and what goes wrong are very influential.

Speaking of negation, I heard a good aphorism quite a while ago: "What others think of me is none of my business." Now, like any aphorism, it has a lot of truth but you can look at the other side of it and say that how others judge us can be very important to us. Depends who's doing the judging and of whom . . . and why.

Norma Desmond · April 17, 2010

Julie, Tippi Hedren was interviewed a while back at the Castro Theater in San Francisco (grand old theater, still has the organ played before each film) before a showing of The Birds. She talked about her mistreatment at the hands of Hitchcock and his treatment particularly of his actresses in general. She actually had a contract to do seven films and broke it after Marnie and The Birds. Hitchcock talked about treating his actors like cattle. He would have chuckled and agreed with Hedren.

luis_g · April 17, 2010

Albert - "So the question for a photograph would be how you get beyond an appreciation for vision and craftsmanship to be able to say anything personal about the photographer at all."

No, Albert, that is decidedly not the question in this thread. That's another post. This one is:

"Can one learn anything about themselves from their own photographs."

The post/thread your response belongs in is this one:

http://www.photo.net/philosophy-of-photography-forum/00WClO

___________________________

Julie, I loved that documentary. Fellini was, like most of us, many things to many people. Compare what Sutherland said to what another of his actors, Roberto Benigni said:

"“He treated me, for the first time in my life, like I was a real actor. Or better - actress! I was in the center, and to everybody he say, ‘This is my Kim Novak.'"

Fellini said something relevant to what Arthur & Fred have been circling, and what Albert and Julie have touched on on the subject of self-deception and lies about ourselves.

“For me, the things that are the most real are the ones I invented.”

Even in an intimate relationship, like family, marriage, love, or friendship we realize that while we have much in common, not only are we partial strangers to one another, but unto ourselves.

The bandwidth of the dialogue between the us and others is sometimes too vast for consciousness, so we skim, and weave our own version. Other times, there's only a trickle, too little for our thirst, so we add and expand on what is there.

The author of one of my favorite books, (one that simultaneously irritates and tantalizes me) Invisible Cities, Italo Calvino, said wrt one of Fellini's less realist sets:

“To a psychoanalyst, whether you tell the truth or whether you lie, isn’t very important. Because even lies are interesting, eloquent, revealing, just as much as what is considered truth. I distrust a writer who claims to tell the whole truth about himself, about life, or about the world.”

The same could be said about photographers.

albert_richardson1 · April 17, 2010

Fred: Thank you for taking the time to make such a careful response to my remarks. I do like the aphorism you closed with.

Luis: Why should a photograph one makes be any more instructive for his understanding of himself than a casual remark from a friend? I remember a period of introspection I went through when I was a student. Looking back on it, I spent rather a lot of time reinforcing notions I already held about myself and my place in the world. It was "Self-talk gone wild!" I guess this sort of thing is just part of growing up. The truth is that I don't look at my own photographs as a way of discovering myself. They are a way I use to apply myself to the peculiar challenges they offer to make. This addresses the second part of your question by suggesting that the technical lessons one learns from a project are the ones with lasting value for future projects.

Julie: Of course we already know our gender and the language we speak, but this information is not saved in a photograph we make. The fact that we are already familiar with ourselves and our surroundings hides the deceptive part of the question. Generally one would expect to reinforce an understanding he has of himself when he reviews his own work.

The point would be what unexpected new and valid insight have you gained into yourself through the review of your own work? This notion connects your photography with other introspective techniques you might use for self-improvement. I'm adding the notion that there is some personal benefit in one's efforts to know himself to Luis' OP. I believe that this is true in that I would not like to make my life worse through an improved understanding of myself. In the end I think that this is a personal not a professional matter.

Norma Desmond · April 17, 2010

"Why should a photograph one makes be any more instructive for his understanding of himself than a casual remark from a friend?" --Albert

First off, glad you like the aphorism. It's a favorite of friends of mine in Alcoholics Anonymous. Helps keep them sober. I don't find Luis suggesting that a photograph is more instructive about oneself than other things? I thought he was simply asking whether or not they were instructive to us about ourselves and, if so, how and in what ways. I get the sense from having read Luis over the months that he learns about himself from a variety of sources and might not even choose to pit those sources competitively one against the other.

albert_richardson1 · April 17, 2010

You know Luis much better than I do. What you say is certainly reasonable and sensible.

I was just outside working on a project for my business. My mind wandered a little. In a somewhat unrelated vein, I could see the value for photography as part of a course of therapy designed to help the patient form a more positive opinion about himself. It could draw him out to interact more with the world around him, and give him an opportunity to learn a new appreciation of himself through the positive reactions of others. This person might be learning things the rest of us already know about ourselves. This isn't my field, so my rumination is as far as I can take it.

Norma Desmond · April 17, 2010

Albert, cool observation. I've discovered some things to appreciate about myself and I've also been occasionally upset by what I've seen of myself in my photographs. I like ruminations, even among non-experts. They lead us to unexpected places. Glad to hear yours.

sobeystudio · April 18, 2010

Luis-

I apologize for not reading the rest of this conversation, so bear with me. What you are asking is like saying 'can you learn anything in college?'. You can and you may, but it doesn't have to nor does it happen to everyone. We can learn from everything, it just depends on what you consider substantial enough. Are you not learning? If your not learning your not looking. You may be seeing, but not looking. One is passive the other has intent.

Wouter Willemse · April 18, 2010

I'm late to the party, thanks to some Icelandic dust covering European skies...so I'll first react 'blank' to the original question.

Yes, you can learn, and speaking for myself, I think I have, in various ways;

- When I developed an interest for photography, it made me appreciate nature more as a side effect (since that's where most of my photography took place). These silent, quiet nature areas became a shelter for the more hectic life, and as a result, photography became a more intense hobby. It turned out to be a nice self-serving circle.

- It made me appreciate many art forms way more, because I learnt to look better and see more. In every way, I learnt to look more, and somehow it gives a sense of experiencing the world around me more (whether this is true or not, I don't care, it's a pleasant thing usually). So, made me observe more and that feeds back into my system.

- Having a decent amount of photos now, I see I tend to rather mathematical, empty pictures. Not often people in them, but far more looking for a balances, shapes and structures in what I see (which comes back to the first point - I seek peace and quiet in doing photography). I rightfully got the remark once "but where are the people?". Yes, they're not in my photos. I'm an observer and object photographer - that I learnt too behind the viewfinder.

- To underline part of the dialogue between Arthur and Fred: the use of cultural-specific information, symbols, viewpoints.. I'm seeing it back in my own photos. It's very obviously there, to me. But also because it is very me, I am result of that culture. Yesterday I visited the Duomo of Milan, and it was crowded with Asian visitors. I am quite curious about their photos. A huge catholic church, overloaded (to me) in symbols, religious and cultural implicits - how do they capture this, without knowing/sensing these specifics? (I mean the better pictures, since I only had a compact camera with me, I have the tourist snapshots myself too). It would be nice to observe, I think.

So, plenty to learn, and I'm sure I'm nowhere near full circle yet. However, I think none of these have got anything to do with photography as such, but more with being creative (or trying to be). It's the type of activity that should lead to some introspective, some more 'taking the world inside' and finding a way to translate those inner concepts.

Throughout various threads, the question of the photographer in his photo comes up in a shape or form. When we look at works of others, we try to discover what is behind the photo; with which intent was it made, who made it? When we look at our own productions, is it that much different? We have some more clues, true. But just go out, and shoot just whatever you think is nice/interesting/worth seeing, without too much thought on what exactly you wish to show, and look at those photos. You will still find an intent, still. Now tome, that 'sub conscious intent', that's very revealing. Is that self-awareness, or finding and defining a role for oneself in the larger whole? Close related, but I think not the same.

A second point on this: it does sound overly self-centered, and while it is to some extend, it is also just being introspective. Maybe just my perception, but the me-ism has a certain negative sound to it, while I think these inner observations are not that selfish (but maybe I interpret it wrong).

Julie H · April 18, 2010

I am running late and I haven't had time to read Wouter's comment, above, which looks tasty. Anyway, I wanted to throw in two contrasting quotes that I think are relevant. The first is from the book Friedlander; from an essay in it by Peter Galassi. He's talking about Friedlander's book, Self Portrait:

"One thing is certain: the title of the book is a misleading misnomer. [ ... Gallasi describes two contrasting portraits from the book] ... Is this the real Friedlander? Having been wised up by the rest of Self Portrait, I'm not buying. The Friedlander in the pictures is just a model taking direction from the photographer."

</blockquote>

Next is from an essay, The Question of Belief by Sandra S. Phillips in the book, Diane Arbus: Revelations (2003):

" ... Everybody has this thing where they need to look one way but they come out looking another way and that's what people observe. You see someone on the street and essentially what you notice about them is the flaw ... Our whole guise is like giving a sign to the world to think of us in a certain way, but there's a point between what you want people to know about you and what you can't help people knowing about you. And that has to do with what I've always called the gap between intention and effect."

</blockquote>

Given that bit from the Arbus book, which I think is quite true, I suspect that though Galassi may not have learned much about Friedlander from his Self Portrait book, Friedlander himself may well have found out a lot about himself -- in spite of himself.

billangel · April 18, 2010

"Can one learn anything about themselves from their own photographs?"

I believe that self-portrature can be very illuminating. When studying my self portrits, I have noted that how I appear in an image does not necessarily correspond to how I felt, what my thoughts were, when I snapped the shutter. My (internal) "self image" did not necessarily correspond to the perception of me that another person would pick up of me, if all they knew about me was what they could glean from my outward appearance at that moment. This has helped to explain to me why some of my relationships with people had become skewed in uncomfortable or undesirable ways. So now I rely more on photography, especially on my self portraits, and less on personal meetings with people, to get my "message" across as to how I think and feel about things.

luis_g · April 18, 2010

Albert - "You know Luis much better than I do. What you say is certainly reasonable and sensible."

Fred does. He nailed it. I don't think I could have said it better.

________________________________________

Martin- We'd had another thread in what we discussed we could learn about another person by looking at their photographs. This one is about what, if anything, you could learn about yourself from looking at your own pictures.

Martin - " You can and you may, but it doesn't have to nor does it happen to everyone. We can learn from everything, it just depends on what you consider substantial enough. Are you not learning? If your not learning your not looking. You may be seeing, but not looking. One is passive the other has intent."

This is not about me (I've already replied with what I've learned about myself), we, us, them, and everyone we know. It is about you and your pictures. Have you learned anything about yourself through your own work?

______________________________________

Wouter- Lots learned from the experience and feedback from your work. Like you, I've seen rows of tourist buses pulling up to the Grand Canyon disgorging hundreds of Japanese tourists and also wondered what their pictures look like, though many are of their travelmates and spouses, just as one would expect.

Wouter - "Now to me, that 'sub conscious intent', that's very revealing. Is that self-awareness, or finding and defining a role for oneself in the larger whole? Close related, but I think not the same."

Not the same, but to me more the former than the latter, at least in the sense that it precedes it.

Wouter -"A second point on this: it does sound overly self-centered, and while it is to some extend, it is also just being introspective. Maybe just my perception, but the me-ism has a certain negative sound to it, while I think these inner observations are not that selfish (but maybe I interpret it wrong)."

Wouter, you interpret it right. I can assure you that when I posted this, it was about the small loop between the photographer and his own work. Normally I get chided here for not being me-istic enough.

____________________________________

aplumpton · April 18, 2010

I sort of regret coining the term "me-ism", as it seems to be used here not as I defined it (as the current "over-glorification of the individual and selfish pre-occupation with self at the exclusion of altristic or empathetic relations with one's society"), but rather in the context of the simple perception of ourselves through our images, and how that is related to the very fruitful feedback on our personal existence normally associated with the quality of "know thyself".

Albert raises the valid point (April 17, his last paragraph) of the problem we have in being honest or insightful when it comes to ourselves. That is certainly a roadblock and perhaps one related particularly to self portraiture, as Bill mentions, but also in photography when one attempts to make a personal statement and/or is less aloof from his or her subject. It is too tempting in some photo competitions to betray who we are to present who we wish to be or who the judges might wish us to be. Photographing for a market, even fine art photography, is not always inducive to present one's real self, although it is something I try to attain. Independent objectives, thoughts and actions are perhaps the best guarantee of expressing oneself as one is.

fate_faith_change_chains · April 18, 2010

Thinking about it, I haven't learned anything about myself from my own photographs, nothing that I didn't already knew and which may have been the reason and motivation for taking the pics in the first place. So, first I may learn something about myself, and then I go out and take photographs accordingly, in this spirit of being.

sobeystudio · April 19, 2010

Luis-

Your so right. Well, about me- I've learned more about myself through my photography than any other single entity.

Wouter Willemse · April 20, 2010

Luis, full agree on your comments. Indeed, without at least a bit of self awareness it's hard to find or define your role in a bigger whole.

Phylo, intriguing comment, and sounding very logical. Yet, I find it hard to believe completely. So you never amaze yourself via your photos? Never look back on series/periods and find a 'hidden common theme' that underlines something you maybe knew about yourself, but never saw confirmed all that much?

Where possibly I made it seem like photography created relevations, allow me to put that a bit in perspective... It reveals in a sense that some aspects of your personality do come out, without consciously putting it in there. It underlines or exemplifies aspects in a way that makes me wonder to what extend it is saying something about me - so more a matter of scale than a matter of new-ness.

So, aren't we both maybe talking too much black and white?

fate_faith_change_chains · April 20, 2010

a 'hidden common theme' that underlines something you maybe knew about yourself, but never saw confirmed all that much?

</blockquote>

Wouter yes, I agree that it probably isn't that black and white on either position, saying that our photographs don't tell us anything about ourselves might be a bit too easy a statement indeed. A hidden common theme or thread connecting the work as a whole, that might reveal some things. But I still think, that prior to this theme unfolding, there already must be an intention and knowing about as the aspiration for the theme to unfold. In that sense there's nothing more to be "learned" about ourselves besides the materialisation of some of it in photographs. In that way things are learned and confronted with, like dreams.

Norma Desmond · April 20, 2010

Socrates: "All learning is remembering."

<a href="http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Anamnesis">Anamnesis.</a>

fate_faith_change_chains · April 20, 2010

That's an interesting link Fred. The funny thing is, when I typed "But I still think, that prior to this theme unfolding, there already must be an intention and knowing about as the aspiration for the theme to unfold", I wanted to change knowing about to "feeling about" first, but then thought that the difference might be an insignificant nuance in the context that I was talking in.

But now, with your mentioning of anamnesis ( haven't absorbed the content behind the link fully yet ), how about : All feeling is remembering. Does knowledge and learning come prior to feeling ? So : Can one feel anything about themselves from their own photographs ?

billangel · April 20, 2010

I would also agree with the observation made by Wouter Willemse. He stated

"It reveals in a sense that some aspects of your personality do come out, without consciously putting it in there."

</blockquote>

The most interesting aspects of some of my most recent work, especially as relates to my self-portrature, have been visual or conceptual themes that became apparent to me only after I had made the images and studied them for a while. These themes could only have appeared in my work via the activity of my sub-conscious, as my conscious mind was preoccupied with different issues when I actually made the images.

Art X Photography · April 21, 2010

Yes, absolutely, unequivocally, we can learn much about who and what we are through the images we take and the manner in which we present them. That manner is like an imprint or stamp of our psyche, all be it in a less obvious way. One can undertake a variety of photography genres and independent of knowing who they were created from, the viewer can often point to who the photographer is/was. In much the same way as the viewer learns about the photographer, the photographer can also learn about themselves. Whether it's in retrospect to comments made on one's work or a process of self awareness, our photos give us insight in much the same way as words spoken, actions performed and thoughts expressed do.

Sure, we start of with a specific goal and yes the image, through its progression, can take on a 'life' of its own. But that 'life' is ultimately governed by who we are as individuals, what we want to project and how we choose to be perceived.

dan_south · April 27, 2010

It's not always easy to spot (we're not always fully aware when we look at ourselves), but the clues are there, and we'll see them if we look in earnest.

michaellinder · May 3, 2010

If this turns out to be just paraphrasing of earlier posts on this thread, I do apologize. However, I don't have the time right now to read through them all.

Any "authentic" human activity involves self-reflection and self-evaluation. If I don't learn anything about myself from engaging in photography, then something is amiss.

Sign In

Can one learn anything about themselves from their own photographs?

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

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

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