— The Hesitant Photographer

I find myself wanting to explain why I named this blog “The Hesitant Photographer.” Most of those who know me realize that I am neither very hesitant, nor do I consider myself a photographer. That is not to say that I do not value the photographic work I did, it is just to point out that it isn’t my focus – I do not want to expound upon ideas in my work but rather express ideas I have about others work – however, without the personal work I completed, I do not believe I would have questioned the nature of the photograph to the extent that I have.

But in naming this blog “The Hesitant Photographer,” I wanted to relay the nature of my musings; not exactly hesitant, and not exactly coming from a photographer, per se. Yet, the questions I ask do not have hard and fast answers, nor do I expect to find a solid ground for this line of research. Rather, I hope to expand on questions previously ask, and hopefully, create new questions along the way.

In this vein, I believe there are two ways of thinking about photography – to consider the photograph in terms of the “object” and to consider the photograph in terms of an “art.” Instead of trying to contemplate the nature of the universe, aka designate what art is and is not, I would like to take a step closer to examine the ways in which the photograph has been considered.

Arguments about the photograph as object vs. the photograph as art are not new. In fact, these arguments are as old as the medium itself. When the photograph came into being (1839), the nature of the mechanical vs the human hand was at the forefront of debate. This was the beginning of the industrial revolution; why then, are these arguments still so powerful? Why, so many years later, do these arguments still matter?

I believe the answer lies in the mechanical nature of the camera and the “creative” nature of the artist.

The main question being: how creative (or artistic) can the resulting image/photograph/object be when made in such a technical and structured manner?

Stay tuned for more thoughts on the matter.

    Read More

    This is a strange new world to me – this world of wonderful (scary?) technology. However, I am going to attempt to make use of it – because, as they say, if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em. Well that’s the plan.

    What exactly will I be joining? What exactly is the point of this? I suppose I find it only fitting to record my musings on the world of photography, art, and the intersection of both at this point in time. Both photography and the idea of “art” are extremely fascinating to me but perhaps most interesting is the push and pull relationship that the two have experienced over the past 100 years.

    Photography has functioned, as Diana Emery Hulick wrote in 1992, as “Modernism’s stepchild” – I aim to discuss why this is the case, and why in the world art historians have held such a grudge against photography as “Art” for so long.

    Although I believe there are those out there who agree with me – Photography deserves a prominent place in the history of art and has rarely been credited its rightful place – I think that too many casually shrug off its importance. Hopefully this blog functions as a forum for discussion and discourse about photography, art, and their fitful relationship.

      Read More