'Genuflection Before Mother and Child'

A priest kneels (genuflects) before a mother and child in front of the

Lenten altar in his church. This is among rescans and reworks, and

among my very first photos taken with my very first camera; this

dating from early 1968 just after my first camera's (a Nikon)

purchase. Your ratings, critiques and observations are invited and

most welcome. If you rate harshly, very critically, or wish to make a

remark, please submit as helpful and constructive comment; please

share your photographic knowledge to help improve my

photography. Thanks! Enjoy! john

When I walked past the church, I saw the priest talking like this, or mostly like this with the woman and her child.  He was just talking and during the process as I approached, ready to take a photo, he kneeled like this, a gesture called 'genuflection' which has great meaning in terms of respect.

I recognized then that a priest genuflecting before a mother figure and male child had symbolic significance, and framed this as best I could to include elements that showed the church setting, including especially the cross and altar.

I did so instinctly, with so much concentration, it almost caused a headache, since I barely knew how to manipulate the settings on my camera, and though I knew what I wanted to do with the photo I could envision, the question was 'could I get my new camera to capture what I wanted' with its manual focus and its match needle exposure needle?'

This is the result.  This is a rescan and rework using more modern techniques of a poor scan posted eight or nine years ago; its quality represents the best that Tri-X then could elicit under the very poor lighting of a very dark church, when set at ASA (now ISO) 400.  I didn't know how to 'push' process at the time, and wouldn't have anyway as there were many outdoor scenes on the same roll that push processing would have ruined.

Push processing for those who do not know the term, involves developing the film so it has instead of ISO 400 the sensitivity of ISO 800 or beyond, which simply involved utilizing a somewhat higher developing temperature and/or longer developing time to enhance the latent image on the silver halide in the film -- what once was an 'art' and now is mostly lost to the majority of photographers in today's digital world.  Of course, push processing resulted in degradation of the image as the film was not intended for developing under such circumstances, but like digital 'raw', film had much latency that could be brought out and was not frozen until after development and even in some cases after printing.

john

John (Crosley)

I really like this photo. The priest seems to be listening very carefully to the mother and he is giving her his utmost attention. The child seems very content and comfortable as she stands by her mother listening to what is going on. A timely presentation now that we are in the season of Lent. A very comforting and pleasing work! Best wishes.

In reading your nice comment and critique, I couldn't help but think that you might not just be Christian but Catholic.

Am I right?

I was motivated to take this photo in part because of the Catholic adoration of the Madonna, the woman Christians believe in their hearts is the human mother of Jesus, and the resemblance (or the symbolism) here in this scene of the mother depicted for the Madonna, and the child for the Jesus child.

Am I right again in my symbolism, especially to Catholics if you happen to be one?

And if not, is my symbolism still on the mark?

For I think that this photo means different things to many people -- whether they are 'believers' or 'nonbelievers' and even if Christians, to which sect they belong.  

Catholics (even lapsed Catholics) to whom I have shown it have -- almost to a one -- found it a very profound photo, and again -- almost to a one -- they have been most admiring of the depiction.

This is an Episcopal Church -- noted only because there is NO Christ on the Cross, if one examines the Lenten Cross cover carefully.  However, under the New Ecumenism, an Episcopal (or Anglican) priest can give services in a Catholic church and vice versa if I understand the New Ecumenism correctly, though my study was a long time ago now, and things may have changed (or I may have misunderstood).

Private confession vs. public confession and the role of the Madonna in the church now that the services are in vernacular (English here in the USA instead of the former Latin worldwide) seem to be the two major things that separate the two Christian sects, adding maybe the ability of an Anglican priest to marry and in some Anglican dioceses or communions for women and even lesbians to become priests.  (I guess that is a major deal with the Roman Catholic Church, and when I  write about Catholicism I write about Roman Catholicism, but remember that there also is Greek Orthodox and Russian Orthodox catholics, and they each have their own rules and views).

Gary, I'm pleased this photo gladdens your heart this Lenten season.  Thanks for letting me know.  I am left with the belief that your critique reveals much about you as well as the photo.

The image was taken 45 years ago.  I thought it was powerful then.  It seems that maybe it has withstood the test of time. (I was a kid then exploring with my new camera and finding that 'wow', it works pretty well!)  I remember thinking to myself about that time 'I'll probably never in my lifetime ever see such a scene again.'

And I haven't.

john

John (Crosley)

Interesting and unusual scene!

Hi Svetlana, (Member with the Photo of the Week!!!)

Thanks for the nice comment.

I've elsewhere commented on your Photo of the Week this week, not only in your portfolio under the photo, but also under one of my photos.

I think I sent you a link.

It advised everyone to click on that photo and take a look.

Congratulations!

Your photo is entirely worthy -- as is much of your other work.

Keep it up and you'll be famous, not just on Photo.net

john

John (Crosley)

Very nice image. Reminds me of I Confess, by Alfred Hitchcock filmed in Quebec I believe. Umm 1953.

This scene is very strange to me.I can relate to this era when I was a more fervent  catholic and when the priesthood was way more influent than presently....and,I have NEVER seen a priest in such a posture.Genuflexion,to me,was always a brief gesture but an act reserved for the Supreme Being and nobody else.Here,this priest seems to be in some frozen pleading stance in front of this woman whom is not even looking at him but beyond him;moreover,with her hand in the pocket posture,this woman gives the clear impression that she is ready to be out of there with her young one whom seems to be the only one impressed by the bowing priest.The logical explanation I would venture for this is that the mother and child were there,maybe getting ready to leave and the priest came down in this position to talk to the young one ....and you caught this instant that he raised his head to address the mother.Still does not take anything away from this unique capture and most excellent image...another one.Bravo!

Meilleures salutations-Laurent

I'm now going to be sure to look up 'I Confess' by Hitchcock and see if somehow I have 'copied' him, though certainly I have not seen that movie ever.

Interesting comment; thank you for that.

john

John (Crosley)

Though it's been 45 years almost exactly, I recall this woman was engaged in conversation quite a long time with this priest.  She may merely have been reflecting on a thought during a pause while the priest spoke to her.

Recent revelations about clergy, which do not just reflect more recent events, but long past events would give this photo greater meaning if it were a Catholic church, but I believe it's an Episcopal (Anglican Communion) church (no Christ on the shrouded cross, and Christ on cross is a symbol only in the Catholic church).

I entered the door far behind me having spied them talking like this and the priest in conversation, maybe even kneeling, and was not rushing to the front, as I was adjusting my new camera and trying to be somewhat 'invisible' in the large, but neighborhood church on Manhattan's middle upper West side, somewhat southerly and west of the Cathedral of St. John the Unfinished (which is the nickname for 'St. John the Divine Cathedral; was given since social programs kept commanding (and rightly so) money that was once set aside for constructing that large edifice in the European tradition.  This is a smaller affair, but still 'high church' I think, as there are two Episcopal sorts if services -- 'high church' and 'low church' with different formalities involved and somewhat different services, at least at that time.  In Manhattan in that area is was more likely to be 'high church' and 'high church services' and NO guitar playing or Jesus Jazz or Jesus Rock'; strictly organ music and choir -- all traditional, and in English.

This was taken on a weekday or Saturday; not a traditional service day or time (services are held at Evensong at least certain days, but this was not during Evensong time but more in midafternoon.

I always thought the photo was striking for its symbolism; and if we could lift the shroud and find a tortured Jesus on that cross, that would make my day and if the child were a Portuguese, it likely would be a boy, not a girl, and that also would make my day. Portuguese, at least from the Canary Islands, traditionally who immigrated to the USA then and more recently, did not allow their boys' hair to be cut until the boy was quite old, as moms often were wishing for daughters, and tradition allowed them to treat young boys more as girls until forced to relent.

(trivia I learned from practicing law with Azorean Portuguese, and noticing the young boy children's hair was not cut until quite an older age.)

Laurent thanks for the kind words and the detailed analysis.

These rescans and reposts are what I'd show in a gallery first off if I were to do so, I think.

What say you, my friend?

john

John (Crosley)

A wonderful image!

I had my first camera only a few weeks to a month and a fraction when walking through New York City I ducked into a NYC church and spied this.

I was not smart enough to understand quite how rare this occurrence was, but had an inkling and of course, did understand the priest kneeling before mother and child.

The rest is why I found I was better suited to taking 'street' photos than nudes, for which I had bought my camera, I think.  Alas.

Thanks, Mikhail.

john

John (Crosley)

GREAT capture!!!! Regards.

Some young kid, age 21, with a just-bought Nikon camera wandering the streets of the middle to upper West side of Manhattan who wanted to shoot nudes because that was a good way to get women/girls to take their clothes off but had no likely models instead decided to continue walking the Manhattan streets looking for photo worthy occasions and situations.

He stuck his body inside a church and saw this priest converse with this woman and her child, and immediately the parallel to things New Testament/Biblical came to mind.

Although that didn't concern him much on a theological level, he did understand the deep theological underpinnings of the kneeling priest before mother and child (although this was a Protestant church -- Christ is not on the veiled Lenten cross). 

So, he moved forward a little and took two or three photos, of which this was the best.

That guy was me, and this is a photo with staying power; I had seen that it had 'significance' of some sort when I took it, but like others of that time it sat in a box with other exhibition quality prints for 30+ years for want of an audience.

See some of my other, early work such as three people in a hotel lobby, one sleeping with his cane, one by an elevator door aware of my presence and another woman, next to a wall, completely uncaring of whether I was there or not.

See also 'Balloon Man' taken (like the other) after this was taken.

See the photos of the man sleeping on the Staten Island Ferry, one of three passengers, on three benches with three poles, captured under extremely poor night light under the electric deck bulbs, but on my FIRST role of film ever.

I took some of my best work as a neophyte never having heard of the early greats of the 35 mm school, but undoubtedly having seen their work in 'Life,' 'Look,' and various other photo mags that graced my family door's mail slot, which I had poured over (and never gave much thought to).

My 'style' just popped out of my 'photographic oven' fully formed in a way, at least for the better stuff, even if I couldn't manipulate my equipment fast, and didn't know my bounds.

I knew what a great photo looked like, and that was what I emulated, but not to copy, just emulate the great stuff I'd grown up viewing in those magazines.

In fact, when I took this, I already probably had just missed a chance at a Pulitzer Prize for events over three days in Trenton, New Jersey in which I was shot, my shooter went back to try to kill the original intended target, the ambulance ride to the hospital, the Italian bigots who visited me in the hospital asking my permission and endorsement to kill my shooter (who was black) (I vehemently refused -- he was caught and absolutely headed to prison), and then, being in the center of a forming race riot (a) on my way from hospital to police station in a squad car, and then (b) at the cop station standing next to one of two cops who stood off rioters who broke in wielding axe handles, shouting epithets (at me among others with murder their intention) as he wielded a pump action shotgun at the top of the stairs they were starting to climb to get to me (and him too) threatening our lives, as that gun and him were all between the then crippled me and almost certain death.

In fact, two rioters were killed that night.

Without his heroism that night, I'd have been just a memory and a line in a home town newspaper obituary.

Later that night, I got a guided tour of the police station, talked to the cop who killed an axe handle wielding divinity student, then went on a further tour through the holding cell crammed with raucous, yelling, screaming, cursing youths threatening my life because I was white.

Where's my Pulitzer you say? 

I am certain if I'd taken the easy to take and obvious photos, I'd have had a Pulitzer for documenting any of those three days on film.

Publication of such photos would have been compelling even for LIFE magazine, I am sure.  They would have been stunning.  I can still see the visions in my mind they were so startling and lifelike.

It would have made a great spread in 'Life' and would have been worthy.

But I had no film.

Same camera, same photographer, same eye.

No film.

I was going to buy some film in Washington, D.C., where I reasoned it would be cheaper when the train arrived the following morning after departure than in NYC where the price per roll was sky high.

I learned a costly lesson from that.

Better to pay a high price for film (or media) than have no photos.

And all this is true, 100%.

You can be free to research it -- it's all recorded in newspaper and other archives as well as earlier PN posts.

When I took this photo, I think I had a camera for less than three months, and already had been published in top publications, NY TIMES, Time-Life syndicate, NY Daily News, etc., all for that 'kid with a camera' who really didn't know he was ready to compete with the big guys.

My next move was documenting the takeover of the Columbia Campus by rioters AND then to Viet Nam as a free lance combat correspondent, to San Francisco as a free lance, then hired by Associated Press.

Whew.

It all seems so clear and magical now.

I met Cartier-Bresson who in a sentence or two gave me the sad facts of life about photojournalism as being a sadly fated career, and I gave up my career as a photographer almost as quickly as it started (I converted to writing with the blessing of AP, climbing as a writer/editor nearly to the top in 1-1/2 years before I quit -- to their consternation -- to go to law school.

I was anxious to get my life going on the right path and have nothing to apologize for.

john

John (Crosley)

That was much more than you expected wasn't it Marta?

Thanks for enduring.

Oh, and I'm never without a camera, fresh batteries and a SD or CD card with plenty of space for captures already preset for my circumstance.

Unlike Eddie Adams (famous for photo of Saigon Police Chief executing a prisoner which was his most famous (and hated) photo, Adams was right near the World Trade Center 9-11, but he had 'NO FILM'.

I won't be found like that again.

jc