100 Years of Photographs of Gay Men in Love

[removedacct1]

@TheFlyingCamera @Don Heiszf you want to discuss semantics and the history of sexuality and pyschology, then please do so... but not here. It's a photo forum

While I am often displeased when a discussion of a sensitive topic becomes confrontational and "angsty", I also believe that if we cannot discuss the subject matter in photographs and the story they are telling, then this forum would be limited to dull, repetitive technical information, and I don't think that is optimal. If anything, I wish there was MORE thoughtful discussion about content and the meaning of photographs and less technical info sharing.

I can only speak for myself, but I find that one unfortunate consequence of many discussions on the subject of human sexuality and gender identity is that for people whose identities fall within the "alternative/non-binary spectrum" (I am in that set), there are things that get said in discussion that act as triggers that spark panic, defensiveness, or similar negative response. In other words, many LGBTQ+ people have "hot buttons" that are easily triggered and the response isn't easily suppressed. It is the nature of the LGBTQ+ psyche: society has damaged us. (No, I don't speak for everybody. Though I suspect that plenty of people 40 years my junior fare better, having grown up in a much more liberal, rational society)

TFC has illustrated a very important point, as it pertains to the photographs collated in the book this topic is supposedly about: before we had labels to describe/define what homosexuality is, there was only behavior, not identity. With the creation of labels that define identity, we've created opportunity to make community, make a place in society, craft a meaningful life that encourages a sense of belonging, etc., but we've also given a name to something that people can aim their discomfort and disapproval at. We've given people a (relatively) clearly defined target to which they can aim their hate, and in the past 70 years we've been navigating the consequences of that. On the upside, we can just be people, without having to explain ourselves. In 2015, I was finally able to marry the man I've been partnered to for the past 22 years. Prejudice and judgement are less conspicuous and (hopefully) less likely to find harbor in the minds of our species. Good things have come from investigating the spectrum of sexuality, and presenting the facts without judgement, without perceiving differences as pathological.

I, for one, am glad someone collated such a unique collection of photographs, and I'm pleased that - for me - those photographs create a sense of legacy. I am comforted in the knowledge that although their lives were probably not easy, there were people who found a way to express love with one another all those years ago, and I can look into their faces and feel kinship and belonging.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

While I am often displeased when a discussion of a sensitive topic becomes confrontational and "angsty", I also believe that if we cannot discuss the subject matter in photographs and the story they are telling, then this forum would be limited to dull, repetitive technical information, and I don't think that is optimal. If anything, I wish there was MORE thoughtful discussion about content and the meaning of photographs and less technical info sharing.

I can only speak for myself, but I find that one unfortunate consequence of many discussions on the subject of human sexuality and gender identity is that for people whose identities fall within the "alternative/non-binary spectrum" (I am in that set), there are things that get said in discussion that act as triggers that spark panic, defensiveness, or similar negative response. In other words, many LGBTQ+ people have "hot buttons" that are easily triggered and the response isn't easily suppressed. It is the nature of the LGBTQ+ psyche: society has damaged us. (No, I don't speak for everybody. Though I suspect that plenty of people 40 years my junior fare better, having grown up in a much more liberal, rational society)

TFC has illustrated a very important point, as it pertains to the photographs collated in the book this topic is supposedly about: before we had labels to describe/define what homosexuality is, there was only behavior, not identity. With the creation of labels that define identity, we've created opportunity to make community, make a place in society, craft a meaningful life that encourages a sense of belonging, etc., but we've also given a name to something that people can aim their discomfort and disapproval at. We've given people a (relatively) clearly defined target to which they can aim their hate, and in the past 70 years we've been navigating the consequences of that. On the upside, we can just be people, without having to explain ourselves. In 2015, I was finally able to marry the man I've been partnered to for the past 22 years. Prejudice and judgement are less conspicuous and (hopefully) less likely to find harbor in the minds of our species. Good things have come from investigating the spectrum of sexuality, and presenting the facts without judgement, without perceiving differences as pathological.

I, for one, am glad someone collated such a unique collection of photographs, and I'm pleased that - for me - those photographs create a sense of legacy. I am comforted in the knowledge that although their lives were probably not easy, there were people who found a way to express love with one another all those years ago, and I can look into their faces and feel kinship and belonging.

Without doubt, it's a beautiful book, and the range of images in it are inspiring. I bought a copy right away.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

The moral unease experienced by one's inability to consider homosexual love as normal is not the same as the shaming, bullying, imprisonment, physical violence, even murder that actual homosexual people had to face and still have to face.

Discounting the far-fetched case of either dry humour or cryptic understatement, if I understand RL correctly, then I don't see why it is SO important to tell us that he's kinda somewhat bothered, and why this discussion has to be about his feelings instead of the actual impressive achievement of the collection, and what it helps us understand about the history of life during the recent 100 years.

It's like barging in on a quantum physics convention, and shouting in the middle of the panel "PLEASE NOTE THAT I DO NOT UNDERSTAND ANY OF THIS." Who gives a...?

I'm not sure why Ralph posted, but I think it may have been more an admission than anything, because I can understand people whose discomfort with a subject that was once considered taboo is hard to shake, even after their beliefs on that subject evolved and changed.
My parents grew up with one set of beliefs about gay men and women. Then, as the world changed, their beliefs and their actions changed, and they welcomed more and more people into their world (including into their home) without consideration of what their sexuality was.
But they never became comfortable with discussing that sexuality or with anyone exploring it photographically.

 

[MattKing]

It's like barging in on a quantum physics convention, and shouting in the middle of the panel "PLEASE NOTE THAT I DO NOT UNDERSTAND ANY OF THIS." Who gives a...?

Interesting observation Michel, but I don't agree with the example, at least in the context of Ralph's post.
The reason I think this matters, is because of the work that Ralph does. There are some relatively distant parallels between his work and the subject of this book.
I think it unfortunate that he is not comfortable with the subject, because otherwise his photographic knowledge could support a useful critique of the book.
A better parallel might be an astrophysicist sitting in on a quantum physics convention, and then asking a question to the panel, prefaced by "Please note that I do not understand any of this."

 

[Craig75]

Let's not dogpile on Mr lambrecht.

I would rather someone tell me to my face they are not comfortable with me than behind my back. He has spoken honestly and truthfully and that should be respected.

Mr lambrecht has helped many many members on this board and given pdfs of relevent chapters from his books to board members freely regardless of their sexuality.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Ralph has his options and feelings.
You have yours.
All are entitled to their opinions and feelings.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Interesting observation Michel, but I don't agree with the example, at least in the context of Ralph's post.
The reason I think this matters, is because of the work that Ralph does. There are some relatively distant parallels between his work and the subject of this book.
I think it unfortunate that he is not comfortable with the subject, because otherwise his photographic knowledge could support a useful critique of the book.
A better parallel might be an astrophysicist sitting in on a quantum physics convention, and then asking a question to the panel, prefaced by "Please note that I do not understand any of this."

I think both analogies miss the mark - the response was more along the lines of "I neither understand, nor want to understand, this, but I still want to express an opinion about it".

 

[MattKing]

I think both analogies miss the mark - the response was more along the lines of "I neither understand, nor want to understand, this, but I still want to express an opinion about it".

I took Ralph's post as being an admission of his inability to express an opinion.
You have clearly understood it differently.
It is certainly possible that both of us are wrong - Ralph's difficulties with the keyboard since his health problems sometimes make it difficult to understand his posts.
So I'll stop here, and leave it be.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I took Ralph's post as being an admission of his inability to express an opinion.
You have clearly understood it differently.
It is certainly possible that both of us are wrong - Ralph's difficulties with the keyboard since his health problems sometimes make it difficult to understand his posts.
So I'll stop here, and leave it be.

I took his comment to mean that he had an opinion but knew it would be an unpopular/politically incorrect one, so he chose to not fully articulate it. I cut him some slack because of his age and medical condition, and it does take some degree of courage to admit you aren't as open-minded about something as you perceive your peers would wish you to be. There's been plenty of opportunity, though, for a clarification of that statement, should he have wished to do so.

 

[cowanw]

When I read Ralph's post I remembered how shocked I was at number of examples of naked woman depicted in his (instructional) book. In
100 Years of Photographs of Gay Men in Love I was struck by the beautiful tonality of the photographs. Weird me,eh! to distinguish between an instuctional text and an photographic book.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I took Ralph's post as being an admission of his inability to express an opinion.
You have clearly understood it differently.
It is certainly possible that both of us are wrong - Ralph's difficulties with the keyboard since his health problems sometimes make it difficult to understand his posts.
So I'll stop here, and leave it be.

I took his comment to mean that he had an opinion but knew it would be an unpopular/politically incorrect one, so he chose to not fully articulate it. I cut him some slack because of his age and medical condition, and it does take some degree of courage to admit you aren't as open-minded about something as you perceive your peers would wish you to be. There's been plenty of opportunity, though, for a clarification of that statement, should he have wished to do so.

When I read Ralph's post I remembered how shocked I was at number of examples of naked woman depicted in his (instructional) book. In
100 Years of Photographs of Gay Men in Love I was struck by the beautiful tonality of the photographs. Weird me,eh! to distinguish between an instuctional text and an photographic book.

Give Ralph some slack please.

 

[awty]

Give Ralph some slack please.

Yes, Ralph is German, the German people have a way with words.
Better to try and accept people than marginalize them.

 

[mshchem]

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yes, Ralph is German, the German people have a way with words.
Better to try and accept people than marginalize them.

For not native speakers there are nuances that are not easily learned. There are nuance difference between UK English, Irish English, American, Canadian, South African, Australian and New Zealanders. We are all separated by a common language.

 

[bdial]

So, on a lighter note, did anyone notice the Kodak Retina next to the guys with the boat?

 

[nadav]

I just got a copy of Sunil Gupta’s Lovers: Ten Years On. It’s a sweet book.

https://www.sunilgupta.net/lovers-ten-years-on.html

 

[SchwinnParamount]

...

TFC has illustrated a very important point, as it pertains to the photographs collated in the book this topic is supposedly about: before we had labels to describe/define what homosexuality is, there was only behavior, not identity. With the creation of labels that define identity, we've created opportunity to make community, make a place in society, craft a meaningful life that encourages a sense of belonging, etc., but we've also given a name to something that people can aim their discomfort and disapproval at. We've given people a (relatively) clearly defined target to which they can aim their hate, and in the past 70 years we've been navigating the consequences of that.

This!!! Eloquently stated. Honestly, I've always thought labels were nothing but harmful. I never realized that the "labelled ones" would see value in the label. Now I know better.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

Ralph has his options and feelings.
You have yours.
All are entitled to their opinions and feelings.

I'm not.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Yes, Ralph is German, the German people have a way with words.
Better to try and accept people than marginalize them.

Germans are also well known for precision of language. I'd argue with your use of the term "accept" here but I'd just get accused of derailing the forum for personal political points.

I do understand that Ralph is of a different generation, from a different place, and that he is, to put it kindly, "struggling" with this topic. But just as it was said to others who came to this thread, declared it a car wreck, then stayed to repeat the accusation, if you don't like it, you don't have to read it, and you certainly don't have to comment on it.

 

[Craig]

I did a search for this book and one of the hits was Simons, a Canadian department store/clothing retailer, founded in Quebec. I did have to laugh at the description on the website under "care instructions" there was
-Do not machine dry
-Do not bleach
-Do not iron.

But what if I want my pages nice and crisp?

 

[bdial]

For those interested in how this book came to be, the Photographic Historical Society of New England (PHSNE) will host a Zoom meeting with the authors for their monthly meeting Sept 12.
The meeting is open to the public, but you need to be on the club’s mailing list for the meeting link, it will also get posted on their youtube channel afterwards.
info at www.phsne.org

 

[Craig]

I didn't see the notice of the zoom meeting until after the event, so if you could post the youtube link when it's available I'd appreciate it.

 

[sionnac]

I can post when it's up (I'm the PHSNE Program Coordinator) and you can also see previous presentations, and this one when it's posted, on our YouTube channel https://bit.ly/3k7fTFd and sign up to receive emails for future presentations here.

 

[sionnac]

Here is the link to Hugh Nini and Neal Treadwell's PHSNE presentation Loving: a Photographic History of Men in Love, 1850s to 1950s. Thank you Hugh and Neal!

 

[milescl]

Here is the link to Hugh Nini and Neal Treadwell's PHSNE presentation Loving: a Photographic History of Men in Love, 1850s to 1950s. Thank you Hugh and Neal!

Thanks for sharing this.