Serge.se is a new forum for fine art and documentary photographers. They have some fairly interesting work there at the moment. I am particularly fascinated by Larry Dunstan's work. I have my opinions about some of the others, but I like Serges idea and the quality they are holding.
Well done Serge.se
Well done Serge.se
posted by Stinkbugphoto at
4:52 PM
3 Comments:
Thanks for the tip. Larry Dunstan's pictures haunt me. I can't say I like them, but they don't let me have peace of mind. The way some of us are physically or mentally affected by chance, be it freaks of nature, birth defects or accidents has a profound effect on our lives. It is and has always been difficult to see the human beeing behind the deformity. These pictures highlight that fact beatifully, but I just can't like them. Through the photograph you only see the exterior having no idea of the person inside nor any chance of communicating to alleviate the visual impact of the defect. The pictures make me uneasy and that's a reflexion on me of course.
Personally I find Thorsten Kirchoffs pictures intriguing and more to my taste. Over the years I have come to like this type of grainy, dreamy photography more end more. The dreamy part reminds me of Ralph Gibson, the grainy, dark one of many Japanese photographers, particularly Yuichi Hibi. Very strong images in my opinion. What do you think?
Perhaps I should expand on my comment. In my work I meet people on a daily basis with all sorts of problems. The physical appearance is of no significance in these instances as it is the person who is of importance. The depiction of physical defects without any connection to the individual is what I find disturbing. We are only shown the surface which makes the pictures too one-dimensional in my view.
I'm not trying to stir up a storm and hope that I'm not offending anyone. I am sure there are others with more insight than I have, but this is my take on the subject. I'll be more than happy to read different views
I agree with the haunting affect of Dunstan's images. I think what I like is that they are so much about the deformity. Giving the viewer a legitimate opportunity to study the deformity without feeling self conscious or rude and through this alleviating perhaps the curiosity and the fear. When we familiarize ourselves with things they often become less fearful or unusual. With this it just may open a door into how the viewer might perceive the deformed people they meet in future. The deformity becomes less of a curiosity, thus the viewer may see past to the person.
I too have worked many years with the disabled of many varieties. Until then I felt unsure of how to react, behave, think. With the exposure I had through my work, the disability disappeared and the person revealed. Thus how I respond to the disabled now is healthier and normal due to my exposure. It is no longer strange to me. It is familiar.
However, I do think there are images in his work that I find a bit unnerving. I am curious about the chickens being thrown into the mix. What do they represent?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home