I went to see the exhibition at the Hayward Gallery: diane arbus: in the beginning (which for some reason doesn’t require capitals). It's photographs she took between 1956 and 1962, and printed by her: Diane Arbus did not conspicuously spend a lot of time perfecting her darkroom skills.
Taking pictures at the exhibition was forbidden so this is a publicity photo:
I am, like you, a connoisseur of art-speak and was thrilled to read these lines in the mini catalogue:
‘Even in her earliest studies of pedestrians, her subjects seem magically, if just momentarily, freed from the flux and turmoil of their surroundings. The result is a singular look of introspection. In reacting to Arbus individuals are revealed almost as if they were alone.’
There really aren’t many photographs in the exhibition of what you and I would call pedestrian, though there are one or two:
Do these people have a singular look of introspection? I dunno. I’m inclined to say not.
Do they look as if they’re almost alone? I have no idea because “almost alone” strikes me as a meaningless construction – you’re either alone of you aren’t, you know, like you can’t be almost pregnant.
But art-speak aside it’s a pretty good exhibition.
But art-speak aside it’s a pretty good exhibition.
I got home and found myself looking a blog post by Eric Kim about walking and photography. He says, ‘I’m not a zen monk. I’m a blood thirsty American capitalist who is re-appropriating Japanese culture for my own selfish needs."
I like that. He continues, ‘I see street photography and walking as a form of “walking meditation”– the more I walk, the less stress I feel. And the less stress I feel, the less shitty of a person I am to others. And the more I have a reason to live.”
I like that. He continues, ‘I see street photography and walking as a form of “walking meditation”– the more I walk, the less stress I feel. And the less stress I feel, the less shitty of a person I am to others. And the more I have a reason to live.”
