I am starting to figure out why my photographs have gained little traction in the rarified air of contemporary Fine Art Photography. A decided lack of personal and photographic marketing appears to be an insurmountable stumbling block that is delaying my ascendency to the pantheon of contemporary Fine Art Photographers. I am not a member of some easily categorized “school of photography.” I’m not a post-modernist, a crusading photojournalist, a celebrity portraitist or an adventure photographer. I think I really need to come up with some easily marketable school of photography that I can use to impress curators, gallery directors and MFA students.
I think some analysis is in order in an attempt to discern the characteristics of my photographs to allow me to classify and categorize my artwork. My photographs are:
small – this means you have to get close to the work and be involved with it on an intimate level. They don’t occupy huge areas of a gallery wall.
black and white – the world isn’t black and white any more. It’s color. Kind of a hazy, muted, pastel like world that’s wrapped in gauze. Unless, it’s a landscape photograph with saturation turned up to eleven. (The photo geeks, will completely misunderstand the “Spinal Tap” reference and maintain that a saturation of eleven is almost black and white. Sigh.)
organized – composed, one might say, as in a pleasing arrangement of objects within the frame. The center of attention will probably not be dead center in the photograph.
apolitical – they neither support nor criticize any known political agenda or social cause
polite – My photographs don’t shout “Hey, look at me!” from across the gallery. They would prefer a quiet personal conversation with you.
literal – looking at one of my photographs you know what you’re looking at. I am not a fan of ambiguity, vagueness or abstraction. There are no symbolic, inferential or secret messages (that I am aware of) in my photographs. If you discern a reference to an obscure artist, well, you are much smarter about those things than I am.
positive – There is enough ugliness, meanness, hardship and suffering in the world. We know it’s out there and we live with it every day. We don’t need to be reminded of it constantly.
beautiful - I see my photographs as constantly looking for the beauty in world around me.
wholesome – My photos do not tend to push propriety. Even when I was photographing nudes, the compositions were more about form and grace than a gratuitous display of pulchritude.
non therapeutic – My photos are not a form of therapy. I do not attempt to “work out” my deepest psychological problems and inner angst through my art. I am not a victim seeking sympathy through my art.
completely my own – Evidently, it’s acceptable to steal another photographer’s images and re-interpret the image to meet your photographic thesis. I don’t do that. If you see one of my photographs, you know I made the photograph, processed, and printed it. I also cut the mat and framed it. I guess I’m old fashioned that way.
After reviewing these characteristics, my own photographs and thinking a very long time about where my photographs fit in the contemporary photographic landscape, I have come to the conclusion that I am at least fifty to seventy years out of step with the contemporary zeitgeist. This thrills me. I feel I am on the cusp of having my big artistic breakthrough! I am so far out of synch with contemporary art I am primed for the revival of my aesthetic. Here is my chance to get in front of the curve and define this school of photography. My images are from the classic time of black and white photography, but I am bringing that style forward. Finally, I was able to create the term retro-classicist as my photographic type. I now am the premier retro-classicist photographer in the world and can now begin my self-promotion. Fame and fortune are imminent!
Well said, Joe! I love seeing your work…
Posted by: Walt Duddington | July 12, 2022 at 06:55 PM