Thursday, 14 February 2013

Susan Meiselas and the genre of documentary photography (Part One)



 As a young woman, Susan Meiselas originally studied anthropology (science of humans). This is relevant, as her photographic work explores human concerns. From 1972 – 1975, Meiselas photographed strippers in a touring carnival in America (Meiselas,S. 1976). As well as photographs, she accompanies the work with interviews. These show how she developed relationships (of trust, and perhaps friendship) with some of the subjects. This is Very in depth, as work goes beyond the photographs. The photographs themselves show women working in a less than reputable manner and location; ironically it is quite unattractive to look at. The interviews bring a more human element into it, that these women aren’t just show pieces, they’re humans. This is their lives and it is unfortunate. The depth of the work takes it from being a simple photo essay to almost a social study of a particular trend/culture. The fact that she builds a relationship with the subjects shows that she isn’t just observing, she’s getting involved and perhaps creating more accurate accounts of the culture.

Figure one REFERENCE USA. Presque Isle, Maine. 1973. First dance

 In 1976 she joins the prestigious Magnum photo agency, who are documenters of human concerns and stories.

Figure 2 NICARAGUA. Esteli. 1979. Sandinistas at the walls of the Esteli National Guard headquarters

 In 1978 she goes to Nicaragua in South America to photograph the Sandinistas uprising/revolution. This will perhaps be her most significant piece of work. She is a prominent photographer there, and her work makes appearances internationally in publications. However, once the “story” is finished and most other members of the media have left, she stays a bit longer. The work also evolves over time. She revisits subjects of her photographs and tracks down the people to see how their lives have changed. She also later makes large murals of significant images and hangs them in the locations they were originally photographed. (Reframing history, 2004).As a device, this is powerful, as it displays how both the location has changed and how the context of the location has perhaps changed. Instead of being an outpost, it is now a shop. Instead of a man fighting in a street, there are families walking freely. The evolution of the work, in many ways, redefines the nation and the message of the body of work.
Figure 3 NICARAGUA. July, 2004

 Over a large amount of time, the Nicaragua piece has evolved and become something much larger than a simple photo essay of an uprising. It is now a body of work which spans 25 years (1979 – 2004). As with the carnival strippers, there is some relationship between photographer and subject. The photographer obviously cares about the subjects as she revisits them and interviews them about how life has changed. Videos of this can be found on her vimeo and youtube.
 The original photo essay can have a different resonance with different people. I myself was not aware of the Nicaragua revolution before seeing this work, but members of generations before me may have been very aware, and perhaps even active over the issue. The images broadcast around the world that belong to Susan Meiselas appeared in many different publications, and that can have an effect on how they are read. This is the basis of the exhibition ‘Mediations’ of 1982.
 Meiselas displayed images in a particular way, to emphasise how the reading of images could differ depending on their presentation. She “installed the original images alongside the various publications that reproduced them, so that viewers could consider the different contexts of their reception.” (roth,p 2008) Although I cannot find any footage of the exhibition itself, I have got a few images of publications where meiselas’ images were used in varying ways.

Figure 4 meiselas, s (2008) pg 140 - 141

 The two images have a matching subject but are photographed in very different ways. The image on the left is a lot more sympathetic towards the subject. I personally find it reminiscent of images of people in death camps after world war two, leaning over to liberating troops and wanting to be freed. There is a focus on the “face” as it is taken at eye level, forcing the viewer to stare the subject directly. The image on the right gives a contrasting impression. It shows three figures grabbing rocks, and one figure holds one quite aggressively, as if they are about to throw it towards the viewer. The image is taken from a low angle, indicating that the men are on top of the viewer and perhaps about to attack them.
 The Mainichi Graphic Weekly and The New York Times, the publications in question, are actually quite similar. The Mainichi Graphic Weekly is a Tokyo based magazine (part of the Mainichi newspaper company, a broadsheet) which is similar to LIFE magazine in the us (Camerapedia, 2007). The New York Times is a quite sophisticated magazine aimed at concerned Americans, like a broadsheet. Although these papers give contrasting views, they are quite similar publications. Perhaps the conflict was viewed differently, or the editors had their own perspectives on the conflict which comes through here. A better example is probably this following image of the cover and article from GEO magazine.
figure 5 Meiselas, pg

 Using the same image from the Mainichi graphic cover, the main controversy (at least from Meiselas’ point of view) with this publication is the caption for the image inside, of rebels stood against a wall. Meiselas states;
 “Geo actually captioned it. ‘Here behind a barricade in Massaya six rebels who started by spitting contempt at photographers change their mines and strike this dramatic pose, for geo.’ I was not on assignment for geo when I took this picture. It’s a complete construction.”
Interview from draft text for mediations exhibition (Meiselas,S 2008)
 Not only has the image been taken slightly out of context of her personal work and presentation, which is the Nicaragura book, but a caption has been writing which does not represent the people photographed. But it does change the meaning, and alter the viewers’ perception on the people. Geo is an international geography magazine similar to national geographic, both concentrating on geography around the world. It is perhaps a bit more sensationalized than a newspaper, and is perhaps the reason the writer of the article elaborated a story around an image.
I did stumble upon this critique of Meiselas’ Nicaragua work, which made me consider not only her work but the documentary genre as a whole. “The best known of these critiques, by writer/artist Martha Rosler, placed Nicaragua (with disdain) in the tradition of concerned photography: "The liberal documentary, in which members of the ascendant classes are implored to have pity on and to rescue members of the oppressed, now belongs to the past.” (Roth,P 2008)
After reading this and a few parts of an essay (Rosler,M 1981), Rosler is very critical of “documentary photographers” in this time period, critiquing their work as not actually being activist or beneficial, more like exploitation of a foreign subject/culture which praises the photographer rather than raises awareness for an issue.
I’m not sure I agree with Rosler. I shall have to read some more, but I feel that her views may be based on the large amount of praise given to photographers (often not intentional on part of the photographer) by publications after/whilst a piece of work is made. (Rosler, M, 1981) I shall have to investigate Martha Rosler and her views further.
 The Nicaragua work is quite significant. As I said earlier, Meiselas has created a very large and dynamic piece of documentary work which spans 25 years. Perhaps she envisioned it lasting this long, or perhaps she felt a desire to go back and revisit the area and the people as her work started to take a place in history and become part of the Nicaraguan national identity. The result also critiques the documentary genre, whilst staying relevant to the people of Nicaragua.

References
  • Meiselas,S 1976 Carnival Strippers. Farrar, strauss and Giroux new York (Reissue in 2003, steidl, Gottingen)
Photographs
  • Figure one Meiselas, s USA. Presque Isle, Maine. 1973. First dance (Photograph)
  • Figure two Meiselas,s 1979NICARAGUA. Esteli. 1979. Sandinistas at the walls of the Esteli National Guard headquarters (Photography)
  • Figure Three Meiselas, s (2004) NICARAGUA. July, 2004 (photograph) available at http://www.magnumphotos.com/C.aspx?VP3=CMS3&VF=SearchDetailPopupPage&VBID=2K1HZOVW1IUO2&PN=1&IID=2TYRYD9JK8T6 (first accessed January 2013)
  • Figure four Meiselas,s (2008) In history (pg 140 – 141) international center of photography, new York
  • Figure Five Meiselas,s (2008) In history (pg) international center of photography, new york

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)