all photos (embiggenable)
THERE WAS A TIME MANY YEARS AGO, DECADES in fact, that, on my several iterations ago blog, I was a stanch defender of truth-def: that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality-in photos. What was tiring about discussing that idea was the never-ending, dancing on the head of pin contrarian advocates who wanted wanted to take a deep dive into the philosophical meaning of “truth”. And, as an adjunct position, they also threw in the questioning of the idea of “real”. All of which I found rather unproductive inasmuch as I was interested in discussing the characteristics / conventions / apparatus of the medium, not the meaning of life.
Inasmuch as we photographers are going thru the motions of making simulacrum-def: something that replaces reality with its representation-I believe that the idea of so-called “truth” in a photograph might better be described as representational / visual veracity. That is to write that, if a casual viewer-aka: a non-“serious” amateur picture maker, were to view a straight photograph of some thing-people, place, thing, event, et al-made from the real world and see the same thing in situ, he/she would have no problem recognizing it as being related, reasonably accurately, to that thing as it was depicted in the previously viewed photograph.
That written, if one accepts the idea that photography is unique amongst the visual arts in its unique / intrinsic ability to accurately / convincingly / truthfully (there’s that word again) visually depict a segment of the real, why not employ that characteristic of the medium to create art?
Easy answer; iMo, the most difficult challenge in making art, Photography Division, is doing so without relying on art sauce / cheap tricks to garnish the real with a false pretense. Ya know, like making a “fake” photograph. Say, consider a picture of fall foliage so screamingly over-saturated, color wise, as to be a complete distortion of the real.
Some might ask if it is possible for a photograph to be able to convey a moral / cultural / emotional truth. The answer to that question is simply, “Maybe.” or, most probably, “No.” That is, at least not a clearly unambiguous, universal truth. That’s cuz the question legitimately opens the door to the idea of relativism-the doctrine that truth and morality exist in relation to culture, society, or historical context, and are not absolute. For instance, there are those who saw horror and tragedy in the photo of people plunging to their death from the two towers while there were others who, viewing the same photo, saw a scene that incited great joy /celebration and a sense of the fulfillment of their dreams.
In any event, in my picture making I try to stick to the facts of life on this planet. Call it what you will but I currently think of it as the real dinkum oil.