John Szarkowski, Curator of Photography, Dies at 81

I just found this on the NY Times website. The passing of many of the influential people in the world of photography makes me wonder who, of the contemporary photographers, educators, curators and critics, will carry on the work of the ones who forged how we think and what we know about photography. From The New York Times

Published: July 9, 2007

John Szarkowski, a curator who almost single-handedly elevated photography’s status in the last half-century to that of a fine art, making his case in seminal writings and landmark exhibitions at the Museum of Modern Art in New York, died in on Saturday in Pittsfield, Mass. He was 81.

Richard Avedon/Courtesy Richard Avedon Foundation

John Szarkowski in 1975.

The cause of death was complications of a stroke, said Peter MacGill of Pace/MacGill Gallery and a spokesman for the family.

In the early 1960’s, when Mr. Szarkowski (pronounced Shar-COW-ski) began his curatorial career, photography was commonly perceived as a utilitarian medium, a means to document the world. Perhaps more than anyone, Mr. Szarkowski changed that perception. For him, the photograph was a form of expression as potent and meaningful as any work of art, and as director of photography at the Modern for almost three decades, beginning in 1962, he was perhaps its most impassioned advocate. Two of his books, “The Photographer’s Eye,” (1964) and “Looking at Photographs: 100 Pictures From the Collection of the Museum of Modern Art” (1973), remain syllabus staples in art history programs.

Mr. Szarkowski was first to confer importance on the work of Diane Arbus, Lee Friedlander and Garry Winogrand in his influential exhibition “New Documents” at the Museum of Modern Art in 1967. That show, considered radical at the time, identified a new direction in photography: pictures that seemed to have a casual, snapshot-like look and subject matter so apparently ordinary that it was hard to categorize.

In the wall text for the show, Mr. Szarkowski suggested that until then the aim of documentary photography had been to show what was wrong with the world, as a way to generate interest in rectifying it. But this show signaled a change.

“In the past decade a new generation of photographers has directed the documentary approach toward more personal ends,” he wrote. “Their aim has been not to reform life, but to know it.”

Critics were skeptical. “The observations of the photographers are noted as oddities in personality, situation, incident, movement, and the vagaries of chance,” Jacob Deschin wrote in a review of the show in The New York Times. Today, the work of Ms. Arbus, Mr. Friedlander and Mr. Winogrand is considered among the most decisive for the generations of photographers that followed them.

As a curator, Mr. Szarkowski loomed large, with a stentorian voice and a raconteurial style. But he was self-effacing about his role in mounting the “New Documents” show.

“I think anybody who had been moderately competent, reasonably alert to the vitality of what was actually going on in the medium would have done the same thing I did,” he said several years ago. “I mean, the idea that Winogrand or Friedlander or Diane were somehow inventions of mine, I would regard, you know, as denigrating to them.”

Another exhibition Mr. Szarkowski organized at the Modern, in 1976, introduced the work of William Eggleston, whose saturated color photographs of cars, signs and individuals ran counter to the black-and-white orthodoxy of fine-art photography at the time. The show, “William Eggleston’s Guide,” was widely considered the worst of the year in photography.

“Mr. Szarkowski throws all caution to the winds and speaks of Mr. Eggleston’s pictures as ‘perfect,’ ” Hilton Kramer wrote in The Times. “Perfect? Perfectly banal, perhaps. Perfectly boring, certainly.” Mr. Eggleston would come to be considered a pioneer of color photography.

By championing the work of these artists early on, Mr. Szarkowski was helping to change the course of photography. Perhaps his most eloquent explanation of what photographers do appears in his introduction to the four-volume set “The Work of Atget,” published in conjunction with a series of exhibitions at MoMA from 1981 to 1985.

“One might compare the art of photography to the act of pointing,” Mr. Szarkowski wrote. “It must be true that some of us point to more interesting facts, events, circumstances, and configurations than others.”

He added, “The talented practitioner of the new discipline would perform with a special grace, sense of timing, narrative sweep, and wit, thus endowing the act not merely with intelligence, but with that quality of formal rigor that identifies a work of art, so that we would be uncertain, when remembering the adventure of the tour, how much our pleasure and sense of enlargement had come from the things pointed to and how much from a pattern created by the pointer.”

Thaddeus John Szarkowski was born on Dec. 18, 1925, in Ashland, Wis., where his father later became assistant postmaster. Picking up a camera at age 11, he made photography one of his principal pursuits, along with trout fishing and the clarinet, throughout high school.

He attended the University of Wisconsin, interrupted his studies to serve in the Army during World War II, then returned to earn a bachelor’s degree in 1947, with a major in art history. In college, he played second-chair clarinet for the Madison Symphony Orchestra, but maintained that he held the post only because of the wartime absence of better musicians.

As a young artist in the early 1950s, Mr. Szarkowski began to photograph the buildings of the renowned Chicago architect Louis Sullivan. In an interview in 2005 in The New York Times, he said that when he was starting out, “most young artists, most photographers surely, if they were serious, still believed it was better to work in the context of some kind of potentially social good.”

The consequence of this belief is evident in the earnestness of his early pictures, which come out of an American classical tradition. His early influences were Walker Evans and Edward Weston. “Walker for the intelligence and Weston for the pleasure,” he said. In 1948, Evans and Weston were not yet as widely known as Mr. Szarkowski would eventually make them through exhibitions at MoMA.

By the time Mr. Szarkowski arrived at the museum from Wisconsin in 1962 at the age of 37, he was already an accomplished photographer. He had published two books of his own photographs, “The Idea of Louis Sullivan” (1956) and “The Face of Minnesota” (1958). Remarkably for a volume of photography, the Minnesota book landed on The New York Times best-seller list for several weeks, perhaps because Dave Garroway had discussed its publication on the “Today” program.

When Mr. Szarkowski was offered the position of director of the photography department at the Modern, he had just received a Guggenheim Fellowship to work on a new project. In a letter to Edward Steichen, then curator of the department, he accepted the job, registering with his signature dry wit a reluctance to leave his lakeside home in Wisconsin: “Last week I finally got back home for a few days, where I could think about the future and look at Lake Superior at the same time. No matter how hard I looked, the Lake gave no indication of concern at the possibility of my departing from its shores, and I finally decided that if it can get along without me, I can get along without it.”

A year after arriving in New York, he married Jill Anson, an architect, who died on Dec. 31. Mr. Szarkowski is survived by two daughters, Natasha Szarkowski Brown and Nina Anson Szarkowski Jones, both of New York, and two grandchildren. A son, Alexander, died in 1972 at age 2.

Among the many other exhibitions he organized as a curator at the Modern was “Mirrors and Windows,” in 1978, in which he broke down photographic practice into two categories: documentary images and those that reflect a more interpretive experience of the world. And, in 1990, his final exhibition was an idiosyncratic overview called “Photography Until Now,” in which he traced the technological evolution of the medium and its impact on the look of photographs.

In 2005, Mr. Szarkowski was given a retrospective exhibition of his own photographs, which opened at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, touring museums around the country and ending at the Museum of Modern Art in 2006. His photographs of buildings, street scenes, backyards and nature possess the straightforward descriptive clarity he so often championed in the work of others, and, in their simplicity, a purity that borders on the poetic.

From his own early photographs, which might serve as a template for his later curatorial choices, it is easy to see why Mr. Szarkowski had such visual affinity for the work of Friedlander and Winogrand.

When asked by a reporter how it felt to exhibit his own photographs finally, knowing they would be measured against his curatorial legacy, he became circumspect. As an artist, “you look at other people’s work and figure out how it can be useful to you,” he said.

“I’m content that a lot of these pictures are going to be interesting for other photographers of talent and ambition,” he said. “And that’s all you want.”

Photography Trips vs. Wandering

I have always found that it is difficult to photograph with other people on long photography trips (be they with photographers or not). In the past, I have always felt guilty if someone is waiting for me or sitting in the car while I am photographing. And, too often the visual and ideological differences between photographers means that one person is photographing while the other person is not (though that can sometimes be an advantage if it pushes you to see things in new ways). Of course, the waiting is especially bad in the summer or winter (but not so bad if there is a nearby body of water and proper rocks for skipping). Now, my primary problem with photographing on long trips with other photographers is that I am interested in thoroughly exploring specific places or subjects, which are usually different than their interests. That is not to say that I am opposed to making seemingly-random pictures along the way to wherever we are wandering (I say seemingly-random because while the vision may be consistent, the subject is not), but I don't feel that is as personally worthwhile as a concentrated study of an area or subject. And furthermore, I do, in fact, thoroughly enjoy wandering. I believe it is through the experiences we have while exploring and wandering that we discover what it is that moves us to photograph.

Best of Photography and Film from the George Eastman House

George Eastman House Show at the Speed Museum. While I was in Louisville last weekend I saw a show at the Speed Art Museum of a selection of photographs from the George Eastman House. It was basically a history of photography show, but it excluded all things big or digital.

I don't know if I could make an objective review of a show such as this, but I do know that there were a few photographs that stood out, and some in which I found new joy or meaning.

There was a picture by Adolphe Braun, whom I recently discovered trough a book of his work, that was more beautiful that I would have imagined from looking at reproductions.

weston_excusado.jpg

Edward Weston had his own panel with the obligatory Pepper #30 hanging above the Excusado from 1925. As wonderful and moving as the pepper can be, I found the Excusado to be far more beautiful than Pepper #30. The reason for that is mostly due to the copy of the pepper was a cold-toned print, which to me, is not as beautiful as an object as a creamy, warm-toned print such as the Excusado. In addition, the forms in the later photograph are more subtle, but no less sensuous than the Pepper #30.

modotti.jpg

And while I am on the subject of Edward Weston, I must mention that I have a new-found respect for Tina Modotti. In my immature and arrogant past I never thought of her as being as important of an artist as Weston. Now that I have grown up, I can see that my thinking of her accomplishment was based more on her gender and on the length and scope of her "career" rather than on her sensitivity as an artist. Ultimately, I feel it is that sensitivity that makes an artist/photographer's work important on a human and emotional level.

barnard.jpg

It might not be correct in doing so, but I am comparing nearly all war photographs to those of Simon Norfolk. Maybe that is just to say that through photographs of the aftermath of war, one sees not victory of one side over the other, but the universal sense of pain and loss if the innocent. George Barnard's Ruin of Charleston from the civil war is no exception.

In conjunction with the Eastman House show and the View Camera Conference there was a small exhibition of photographs that were made exclusively with large-format view cameras. The photographs ranged from 19th-century geological survey photographs to a photograph by David Graham. The one that had the most impact for me was the 1978 Chippewa Square, Savannah, Georgia, by Nicholas Nixon. I searched the internet for hours trying to find a scan of it. It isn't anything that would knock your socks off, but it is sweet, and sometimes, that is all you need.

Who doesn't like the smell of a hot dry mount press at 4AM

It must be the night before a trip. Why else would I be mounting prints at 4AM? In a few hours, I am going to be driving with the photographer, Joe Freeman, to Louisville, Kentucky for the 5th Annual View Camera Conference. This is going to be our first long trip together since we drove out West and Baja California in 2003, and this one should be a blast. Personally, I think the first View Camera Conference  that was held in Albuquerque in 2002 was the only one that was really good, with each conference that followed being a little less special. This one is taking place during Louisville's two-month photography festival, and there should be great shows all over town.

But, the reason for going to Louisville isn't really for the conference. It just serves as a place and reason to meet up with other photographer friends to drink beer, make pictures and look at prints. Maybe even sell one if I'm lucky  (and that is the reason why the dry mount press was putting in some overtime).

Bernd Becher

hb_198010741-16.jpg

I just learned today that Bernd Becher died on Friday, June 22. He was most known for the collaboration with his wife, Hilla Becher, photographing industrial and architectural typologies in Europe and America. Maybe more important though, was his role as an influential teacher at the Düsseldorf Art Academy where Andreas Gursky, Thomas Struth, Thomas Ruff and Candida Höfer emerged.

Here is a wonderful piece I found that I think really gives a feeling for how they lived and worked.

Website Update

The Lower Owens River Project section of my website has just been updated. There are now ten additional pictures from my most recent trip in May. I still have ten-fifteen more negatives to print from the trip, and should have those up within the next few weeks. Here is a picture from the trip that didn't properly fit with the rest of the sequence, but I think should still be shown someplace.

Photogasm*

Photogasm* 1: Caused by seeing something that makes you shoot, or want to shoot, all your film. Is recognizable by dialated apertures, quick shutters, and passionate "OH MY GOD!!!"s and "DID YOU SEE THAT!??!"s. Note: Can be very dangerous while driving, especially while at high speeds. (Not to be confused, as it is in the Urban Dictionary, with chimping-- looking at the LCD of a digital camera while making an oo-oo-oo sound)

2: The result of photographing very intensely, where everything seen leads to making an amazing, life-altering photograph. Usually, after such a picture, little else can be done for the rest of the day. Note: In The United States, a photogasm usually occurs after coffee. In Iceland, a photogasm is always followed by a coffee.

*the term was first introduced to the world of New Richard by Kara LaFleur

More New Work

This new picture from my Lower Owens River Project is similar to other pictures of trees I have made in the last few years. These pictures, which are usually very dense, are the ones that I feel push my vision forward in new, unexpected directions.

The photographer, Justin James Reed, posted one of those pictures on his blog a few days ago. It is actually one of the few pictures I feel is a turning point in my work.

When I have consciously set out trying to make these dense tree pictures the results are nearly always failures. The few times where I have made the really successful ones-- the ones that I feel push my vision forward-- are usually the last pictures I make that day, and result from working very intensely in one area for a short period of time. It is as if these pictures are a culmination up everything I saw and felt until that point.

Eugène Cuvelier

Here is another 19th Century French find from Luminous Lint. I remember there being quite a few Cuveliers at AIPAD this year. Unfortuately, I was in a little rush this year, and I didn't get to spend as much time looking as I have in the past. Here is a particuarly beautiful one from Fontainebleau.

6324_std1.jpg

Eugène Cuvelier The Forest of Fontainebleau Salted paper print from glass negative 1860s (early) 19.8 x 25.8 cm (7 13/16 x 10 3/16 in.)

I photographed in Fontainebleau for one afternoon when I was in France last year for Paris Photo. I am considering taking my 8x10 if I go again this year.

Polaroids

Nearly all my photography has been black and white, but for the last six months or so I have had the urge to work in color. I have found that I had to retrain myself to "see" in color, and to do so I have been making Polaroid Spectras for the last four months. I really began in March on a road trip through the South for the SPE National Conference in Miami. I know, I should have used digital, but I still find that holding a print in my hand is far more exciting than trying to see what I did on the back of a camera or a laptop (and furthermore, the only digital camera I own is on my phone). Funny story: While I was photographing in the Keys a woman asked me if my Polaroid camera was a "Really old digital camera" and my reply was, "Yeah, it's old school digital."

I have my holders loaded with color film and I have summoned the courage to expose them over the next few days (now all I need is the money to get them developed . . .)

But until then, here is a diptych I recently made in South Philly (or is it Queen Village?).

Adolphe Braun

I just came across the work of Adolphe Braun¬ a 19th Century French Photographer. As there are an increasing number large contemporary color photographs made I am finding myself drawn more and more toward the beautiful work done at the beginning of the medium's history.

The work here, at Luminous Lint by Adophe Braun, while different, is just as sophisticated as some of the work done in Iraq and Afganistan by Simon Norfolk.

After The Flood

While I had 47 prints from a dozen or so new negatives in the wash last night I took an hour to look through Robert Polidori's After the Flood.

It is almost shameful that I have waited so long to look at Polidori's book, eventhough the shear size of the book is a partial deterrent from just picking up the book for a casual look.

During the hurricane and flood my only contact with the disaster was through NPR news and the subsequent follow-ups. I saw relatively few images (I don't have a TV) but curiously, I didn't seek out those images-- still or video. I thought at the time that I was getting what I needed to know from the radio and conversations with other people.

That is not to say that didn't see any images from the disaster. I saw a good number of pictures at the 2007 National SPE conference that John Woodin, David Graham and Thomas Ness showed. I remember those images as being more intimate than those I say last night in Polidori's book.

But it was in seeing Polidori's the images that the magnitude of the disaster hit home. The vast number of pictures in book is enough to shed light on the scope of the wreckage. But it was his direct manner of documenting the destruction that gave me the real sense of the magnitude of the loss.

Though I came to have a better understanding of what it is to be from New Orleans, I am still having a hard time concluding how I feel about his work. It seems that I am liking and disliking it for many of the same reasons.

New Negatives

Note: I hope this in the only quasi-technical writing I ever do in the blog. I mention that because in reality, I am one of the most relaxed people there are when it comes to technique—especially when it comes to users of view cameras. I find that all too often people will fixate on technique, and let important things like vision fall to the wayside. I now only mention how I am developing my film because it will affect the way I see and photograph (it also explains why I was up until 7AM with only two hours of sleep for two nights in a row). -----------------

In mid-April I had the pleasure of being the guest of Steve Sherman during a house-warming party for his new darkroom (its the kind of darkroom that we all dream about). When I was there, I saw several prints from negatives that were developed using a technique that he breathed new life into. The technique, called "semi-stand development" basically entails placing a single sheet of film vertically in a tube, and giving it extremely minimal agitation. The results are negatives that appear extremely sharp with better separation of tones throughout the whole scale of the negative. When I first saw these prints in 2004, I was initially turned off by the "unsharp-mask" effect. I later learned from a good friend, Joe Freeman, that more frequent agitation will lessen overly sharp appearance, but will not jeopardize the ability of retaining good local contrast. Joe convinced me when he showed me prints he made on Printing Out Paper with negatives developed this way. They are some of the most beautiful prints I have ever seen.

I learned what few basics I need to know, and set out on Saturday to begin developing my new films from my trip to California this past May.

Before I could do so, I needed to make several tubes for individual 8x10-inch negatives. That was the easy part— I simply cut a 4" PVC tube down to 11-inches and cemented a cap on one end. The hard part was making the plunger that would agitate the film. Taken mostly from Joe's design, I created a plexi-glass disc and put it on one end of a threaded 3/16 rod. I then drilled a whole in a separate PVC cap, that I would place on each tube when it is time to agitate the film. My mistake was in making the plexi-glass disc to large. It scratched several of my first negatives beyond repair. I solved the problem by sanding down the disc and cutting a kitchen sponge a little larger than the disk. I then made a second disc, and sandwiched the sponge between the two plexi-glass discs. Now, if the plunger robs along the film, the soft sponge will be the only thing in contact, and will not cause any scratching.

The whole film developing process takes about 2 hours start to finish, and I can really only do 6 negatives in that time. That is 75% slower than how long it used to take to develop that many sheets! If the results of this new method were not so outstanding then I would not even think about using this new process.

I developed and printed about a half dozen of the new negatives to see if there were any problems before I develop the other 60 sheets of film from my trip.

Here are two of the few that I have printed so far.

This diptych is from Key's View in Joshua Tree National Park, and I am looking toward the San Gorgonio Pass and Palm Springs. You can barely make out 10,000 foot Mt. San Jacinto, even though it is only 50 miles away. Air pollution is causing several problems in the park, and is of major concern. You can read more about that here. The foreground hills here have a more separation than I was able to achieve in the past, and the sky shows no sign of streaking or blotching that is often a drawback to developing film in this manner.

This picture, also from Joshua Tree National Park, shows how highlight separation (seen in the rocks in the lower right corner) can be achieved, even in harsh noonday desert sun. If for no other reason than that, I would not change from this film developing technique.