"Face" -- A New Book by Bruce Gilden

Not Here · July 23, 2015

An interesting discussion, albeit divergent at some points. I'm not familiar with any work by Gilden that's not represented or referenced in this thread so I'll limit my opinion to my perception of the samples from this book. I don't care if he's a difficult personality, I'm sure we all are at various times. The view I take from these samples is that he's presenting and exaggerating his subjects to present a social message, the more striking the photograph, perhaps the more sympathy or empathy can be evoked. At my age (very near retirement) this approach is not effective and from the comments made, it's not with a lot of viewers. I can't differentiate between their plight and the lifestyle that put them in their condition; not that I'm without sympathy. Exaggerating their condition further polarizes preconceived beliefs (IMO). As a final "review" of the book, I think the title "Face" is somewhat grandiose and misleading. These are faces of a minority segment of society who have made inappropriate life decisions. A more appropriate title might be "Choices".

Brad_ · July 23, 2015

>>> The difference between the American West and Faces is that Alvedon't photos were amazing photographs and these are crap.

Other than the photos are of people, I find nothing in common between Avedon's ITAW series, and Gilden’s recent Face work.

Avedon's project occurred over a five year period, through 13 western states in a station wagon, and was commissioned by the Amon Carter Museum in Texas. Avedon sought to engage average folk in the West. His was a deliberate exploration of a large cross-section of people, far different than the glamorized West most of the country associated with Hollywood. When released his photos were controversial for that reason along with the fact that being from New York, many felt he had no business documenting what the West was about. Interestingly, the same complaint was laid at Frank for his Americans series - though it took an outsider from another country to tell that side of the American story. Through his photographs and narratives captured by Avedon and assistant Laura Wilson, many became aware of the other West.

With respect to Gilden’s project, what was revealed? He apparently sought to photograph the unseen on the street who reminded him of himself, using lighting and effects effects ramped up to 11 to call attention to and make them more visible. Ok.

Uhooru · July 23, 2015

With respect to Gilden’s project, what was revealed? He apparently sought to photograph the unseen on the street who reminded him of himself, using lighting and effects effects ramped up to 11 to call attention to and make them more visible. Ok.

</blockquote>

I do believe that is correct about his intentions. Its I just think the technique got in the way of it.

Norma Desmond · July 23, 2015

One may choose to focus on the respective processes of Gilden and Avedon. Just for clarity, I wasn't comparing their processes. I was

comparing their results which are the photos. Not that process isn't important. Of course, it

is. Just not at all what I was comparing.

Damon DAmato · July 23, 2015

I was thinking more along the lines of Avedon's close-up portraits. The kind of photos you'd see in the New Yorker illustrating an article about a celebrity a few years back-- not the style of American West. <a href="http://www.famousphotographers.net/wp-content/uploads/photo-gallery/richard-avedon/richard-avedon-7.jpg">This photo of Picasso. </a>

<a href="http://alafoto.com/listing/albums/userpics/10001/Richard_Avedon_portrait_99.jpg">Or this of John Ford, for example. </a>

Really though, just a first impression.

Norma Desmond · July 23, 2015

Phil, I haven't seen Gilden's prints in person and I'm fortunate to have seen Avedon's American West prints here in

Northern California a few years back. The prints were, indeed, impressive. I agree that there's likely a significant

difference in concern with print quality between the two photographers. As I said, I wasn't comparing all aspects of their

photos and mentioned the aspects I do see some sameness in. I think there is a real and distinct comparison to be made,

though it's probably necessary to repeat that I don't think their photos are similar in all aspects or on all levels.

AlanKlein · July 23, 2015

<a href="/photodb/user?user_id=8755118">Phil S.</a>, Jul 23, 2015; 05:26 p.m.

Fred, not sure if you are familiar with Antoine d'Agata's work... <a href="http://www.americansuburbx.com/2014/03/asx-interviews-antoine-dagata-simple-desire-exist-2014.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Here's a link</a> to an excellent interview in which he talks about morality and its transcendence through the act of photography as an experience.

</blockquote>

The ultimate "selfie".

Norma Desmond · July 23, 2015

Phil, thanks so much for that link. The use of the phrase "polite daylight" to describe much photography struck a chord

with me. I suspect Gilden would be more

acceptable if his work were a little more polite. Politeness is usually a matter of following conventions, both physical and

moral. Those who flout those conventions get in trouble with mainstream mobs.

spanky · July 24, 2015

Didn't Zoe Strauss take similar pictures about 10-15 years ago? I guess it's getting harder to find new subject matter.

Regarding Avedon, I recently picked up a text book titled "Criticizing Photographs. An Introduction to Understanding Images" by Terry Barrett. One of the first chapters uses Avedon's In the American West series as an example of how different critics arrive at their evaluations.

Norma Desmond · July 24, 2015

Marc, it's not getting harder to find subject matter. Think about art from early on. People have repeatedly painted flowers,

for example. Impressionists painted boats over and over again. Self portraits have been done by many. Street people are

a common theme. So are children. I don't understand the point you're trying to make. It's one thing to think the subject

matter shows some kind of immorality on the part of the artist, which many are claiming. It's another to say it's getting

harder to find new subject matter, which I think is not the point. Many are not looking for new subject matter. They are

simply envisioning these subjects in their own ways. Art and photography are filled with traditions and symbols that have

existed through the ages. Part of the beauty of art is each generation's take on those traditions and symbols. Think of how

many churches and crosses have been photographed, how many beaches and rocks, how many suburban houses and

rural gas stations. It seems strange to talk about repeating subject matter as if it's a surprising occurrence.

Norma Desmond · July 24, 2015

Phil, not sure what you're seeing as the difference between theme and subject matter. What's the subject matter of Gilden's photos that you think has been done too much? What about the subject of war as documentary material. Can't we keep doing documentaries about new wars? About new presidents? About congress over the years? New documentaries about schools? New documentaries about street people? Any subject and any theme ought to be able to be explored time and time again with renewed vision and, even if not with new vision, someone's personal vision? Everyone here, especially those who don't like Gilden and his photos, has said that he's made them too much about himself. That means he has, in fact, personalized them. That's a good way to treat any subject, even one that's been treated many times before. IMO.

Brad_ · July 24, 2015

>>> I do believe that is correct about his intentions. Its I just think the technique got in the way of it. I feel that way as well, Barry. Mentally stripping away the lighting and effects, I don’t really feel or see much. As I alluded above before getting distracted into purpose and intent, the similarities I see between his photos and Avedon’s are shallow at best. Moving on with respect to Gilden in general, it’s been interesting watching how the nexus of inexpensive cameras and social media have played a roll in his popularity, especially with people getting into “street photography.” I think it’s his bad-boy swagger and attitude that many people starting out in sp find fascinating and "gutsy." Indeed, over the years that Facebook has been around, I’ve seen many trying to emulate his shooting style; i.e. jumping in front of people with camera and off-camera flash and lighting them up (scaring the hell out of many). I suppose it’s a stage some go through in their development. Just an observation, the Gilden followers I see, as with Gilden, seem to engage a very narrow range of people on the street, in a narrow range of neighborhoods. Many appear to be safer older people who are not likely to put up a defense to his in-your-face surprise method, rather than younger able-bodied people who might quickly and actively take issue with his behavior. To me, that’s a cop out. Don’t get me wrong. There’s a lot about Gilden I like. He’s been a pioneer in photography developing his own style over decades, and periodically reinventing himself employing his stylistic roots over the years - some work I like a lot. As an aside, the people I see starting out trying “to be Gilden” on the street seem to quickly grow out of that phase looking for something deeper or easier. Or even better, developing an empathic understanding towards other people, putting themselves in the shoes of subjects who have been genuinely frightened by a total stranger jumping in front of them out of the blue shoving a camera in their face with a flash. As a model, maybe that makes Gilden a “gateway” photographer for some getting into sp? Barry, are you familiar with Shelby Lee Adams? He’s been making portraits of people and families in the hollers of Appalachia for around 40 years. Over that time he’s developed a trust and respect that has rewarded him with extraordinary access and stunning images. I’ve been admiring his work and how he carries himself while engaging people for quite a while.

Uhooru · July 24, 2015

Thanks Brad, I'm not familiar with that photographer, but I will check him out.

spanky · July 24, 2015

Phil summed it up nicely for me (thanks Phil.) Look, I know there are differences between this work by Gilden and by Arbus for example. An Arbus portrait will be black and white in a square format. Gildens are color and in a rectangle. That's were the differences stop and those differences are not significant enough for me to not stop and think "I've seen pictures like these before."

I hold photographers like Gilden to very high standards, so I expect more from them especially when they have proven themselves with prior work. That's why as I mentioned above, I think with this body of work he's traded his talent for shallow controversy. Not only is Gilden a good photographer, but he's also a good businessman as well. Look at us, here we are on page 8 discussing this book. Looks like his decision was spot on.

I hope that by reading the text book I mentioned above I will be able to evaluate and judge the merits of photographs in a more intelligent and precise manner then I can now. Maybe then I can re-visit this work of Gildens and see it in a new light (no pun intended.) Until then, nothing about these pictures of his strike me as anything new or original.

spanky · July 24, 2015

By the way, this reminds me of a true story. Many many years ago me and a group of guy friends were lounging around at a public pool. A beautiful young woman in a bikini walks by us and we all stop to watch her stride by. When she passers one of the guys speaks up. "You know, people like the extremes. A person can be extremely beautiful or extremely ugly and they will both stand out in a crowd and be stared at." I don't know why I remembered this but I did. So when photographers try to justify pictures they take of people who may not be at their most attractive by stating that these people go through life unnoticed, I'm not so sure I can agree with this.

Brad_ · July 24, 2015

>>> I see the shifting towards a more artistically and personal approach by new and existing Magnum photographers as proof that subject matter has become exhausted.

Phil, I'm not ready to give in and say subject matter has been exhausted, but I am definitely seeing the shift you spoke of looking at contemporary work in photography galleries. That shift seems to have picked up over the last 5-10 years. I wonder if that is an attempt to make photography more accessible to a wider audience, and more purchase-worthy in galleries.

Norma Desmond · July 24, 2015

Phil, it's hard for me to imagine that you're ever going to get street and documentary photographers not to do photo essays about marginalized people and I certainly am glad that it's a continuing subject for exploration by different photographers with different viewpoints and perspectives. I think the problem is probably not the subject matter per se but rather that many people aren't doing anything new or particularly relevant with this work. I see something of value in the vision Gilden has presented. Others think of it as shallow. Regardless of that, visibility can be a very powerful thing for populations that have been or are being marginalized and I doubt any editor would turn down a really good photo essay on that subject, if it were appropriate for use. The magnum photographer you speak of, who mentioned the nominees submitting the same old subject matter, may well have been speaking in a bit of shorthand, which we all do. It was probably not just the subject matter but the lack of inventiveness or unique or personal perspective that would have turned off those looking at the work. I mean, one can say they're tired of beach shots and then someone will come along and photographic beaches with a re-energized vision that will show us that even what we thought of as old subject matter can be reinvigorated. How many movies were made in the 30s and 40s with a detective and a femme fatale who undid that detective? Same old subject matter. The good ones, though, I still watch even 75 years later.

Norma Desmond · July 24, 2015

Marc, sorry, I had missed your past post. The interesting thing is very few complain about the proliferation of photographs of handsome men and beautiful women, the tendency to photograph "photogenic" people. And yet, when we're not attracted to people, the subject matter is suddenly overdone. It's kind of cool that in my own work, I've actually quite often photographed people I wasn't initially attracted to and my photographing them in creative ways has changed what I now find attractive and expanded my own notion of beauty.

AlanKlein · July 24, 2015

Brad Thanks for the name of Shelby Lee Adams. I think his pictures are more interesting possibly because there not only face shots But also because as a New Yorker, I'm not familiar with the people of Appalachia. I think street shots are always more interesting when they are people, foreign or domestic, that you not acquainted with. It's new and different, something maybe Gilden was shootin' for.

Brad_ · July 24, 2015

>>> To clarify, when I state that subject matter has been ( or is becoming ) exhausted from a documentary point of view I mean on a societal and cultural level, not necessarily on the individual level ( I don't think it can ever be exhausted on the individual level ).

Phil, up above I was assuming you were speaking from a documentary social/cultural level, but still do not feel that has been exhausted. That does not mean something has not been done before, but there are many nuanced ways of addressing, expressing, and revealing a different situation/condition or aspect of a society that is worthy of exploration. Of course a photographer will likely produce better results if (s)he is highly motivated with deep personal curiosity about what is being explored and revealed. Honestly, I think the possibilities are limitless. Just of the top off my head documentary photographers such as Mike Yamashita and Ed Kashi come to mind who have explored a diverse subject range.

I still wonder if produced work that would stir my mind and curiosity as a viewer and one who enjoys discovery and learning, might be at odds with what commercial endeavors such as Magnum and and especially photography galleries need to survive using more accessible work.

Norma Desmond · July 24, 2015

And I would say Gilden's theme is confrontation and, perhaps, getting people to confront their own baser demons, which would convince them to call him an asshole, a jerk, and refer to his work as crap, things you generally hear on the Junior High schoolyard, but things I'm not sure Gilden wasn't actually trying to provoke.

Brad_ · July 24, 2015

>>> Brad Thanks for the name of Shelby Lee Adams. I think his pictures are more interesting possibly because there not only face shots But also because as a New Yorker, I'm not familiar with the people of Appalachia. You're welcome - I have a ton of respect for Adams. Poke around on the internet, there is a lot more than just face shots. I'd say most are contextual with environment and families. My view into Appalachia was also very limited as well. His decades long photographic exploration and stories have allowed me and others inside a culture where outsiders have not been able to easily access.

spanky · July 25, 2015

Barry, one of the LA library branches has not only the book of Adams Appalachian work, but also a very informative DVD documentary as well. I cannot recall which one but most likely it was the main branch downtown.

Norma Desmond · July 25, 2015

In the good ones the subject matter was there to convey a theme while the bad ones were simply about the same old subject matter.

</blockquote>

Fine. But this means that we're not running out of subject matter. To say, sarcastically as Marc did, that we must be running out of subject matter, does miss the point. If adopting significant themes can re-invigorate subject matter and has throughout the ages, then repeating subjects are not the problem. The problem with bad photos is a lack of vision or imagination and not the chosen subject matter per se. In fact, I would say the opposite could also be true: if a photographer has to search for new subject matter (and that will be a tough search since most things have been done already) then it's that photographer's lack of imagination that isn't allowing him to see any subject that's been done before in a new light or from a personal enough perspective as to make it worth looking at.

the subject matter was there to convey a theme

</blockquote>

And let's break this idea down a bit. I'm not sure I'd want to go this far because this can be where the kind of exploitation that seems a concern in this thread can start to come in. The subject matter, IMO, is not simply there to convey a theme, in many cases of good photography and good documentary work. The subject matter is actually vital and determinative of what the photographer is trying to say. It's the subject matter that suggests the themes. Bad photography is filled with people exploring themes using this or that subject matter to do so that misses the point or comes across as disingenuous or forced. When there's an organic relationship of subject and theme, there's likely to be a more compelling photo and less exploitation of the subject.

In any case, I'll repeat that it would be unfortunate to say the subject of marginalized people is all used up. Marginalized people and the world who forgets to see them will benefit from the visibility which photography and documentaries can give to them. Also photos of war. And, frankly, whether they explore new themes or not will not be as important as keeping these subjects in the public's eye. We should be shown war so we don't get complacent about it because it's too easy to forget that wars are being fought in our name as we go about our daily business accepting them sometimes blindly. We should shame our government into allowing photos of returning coffins to be published in newspapers regularly as they once were so the grief and reality of death stays with us as a society. No new themes need to be explored in all these endeavors. The fact of the existence of marginalized folks, wars, and dead soldiers ought to be enough. These subjects are reality enough to warrant a photo to be taken. It's the individual subjects that can speak to us loudly and clearly, each marginalized person, each soldier, and sometimes they need to do so over and over again.

Norma Desmond · July 25, 2015

Remember, "marginalized people" is a label connoting a collection of individuals. Each individual who comes under that

label is a subject worthy of being seen and shown.

Sign In

"Face" -- A New Book by Bruce Gilden

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

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