Lewis Carroll's Photographs

[BrianShaw]

AMEN.

... and now I wish I were a Harper's subscriber. I haven't seen those articles. They look interesting.

 

[artonpaper]

I wish you lot would get a dictionary between you - Most of the time I can work out what you mean, (reported/purported) - But in this instance I take it that Jock Sturges is being referred to - Yes, I have his book "The Last Day of Summer" here on the desk to check the spelling of his name

So, having mentioned him, what is the point?



Here in Australia in my opinion we have the King of the Creeps defended and lauded by a bunch of purblind arts experts - I refer, of course, to Bill Henson - I was going to scan an image from his 46th Venice Biennale 1995 catalogue, but there is no way a scan from these dark catalogue images would survive the process of scanning and loading and still be readable

I refer to BH as here is a photographer who works with very young models, covering them in stuff and mutilating the images to form a large montage - More recently his work at the Roslyn Oxley gallery 9 was held by the police for a while, although to me these portraits verged on the innocent - BH has actually canvassed for models through a school, but I will have to re-read David Marr's "The Henson Case" 2008 for the exact reference - David Marr was a journalist who I used to respect, but no longer

Yes, nasty pix are alive and well in Australia - This is in my personal and owned opinion

Now to cop the flak, but I am used to it

John

Well, I thank jbaphoto, John, for spell checking me. Reminds me of my fuddy duddy middle school English teacher. But, ''what is the point?'' Really, you can't make that connection? The point, or points are, here's another photographer, one of many, who have photographed children in a way that some people seem to think sexualizes them. Now I don't like Henson, not because he's creepy, but because his pictures, to me, seem overly slick and self-conscious. When I look at Carroll's work, I enjoy them on many levels, including a glimpse into a rather eccentric part of his personality. I'm glad his pictures exist. Likewise Sturgis, and Sally Mann. And sometimes people get upset. So what. Worst pictures I've seen I think, were pictures of Nazi officers hanging children. This stuff, it is what it is.

Hey John, did I spell ''fuddy duddy'' right?

 

[Wayne]

To him it may have been an exercise in eroticism.

Do you find his photographs of children erotic?

 

[Wayne]

Start a separate thread, please. I will share opinions on him too!

Summary: never arrested, never convicted, never happened... no matter what the other available information may suggest.

And now we see you aren't just a historian, you are equally interested in smearing the living as well.
Who needs proof when you have suspicion and "other information"?

 

[John Austin]

Good Morning Artonpaper,

I am sure fuddy duddy is right, but spell check is underlining it in red, I digress - My question regarding Jock Sturgis was as way of asking for an expansion

I thing I have always found odd is that Sally Mann and Jock Sturgis were castigated for producing what I find to be in general engaging portraits, although SM's pictures of nose bleeds etc I am not fond of, but that is part of the mix - The person who was never castigated to my knowledge was David Hamilton, who made deliberately sexual images of young Scandinavian girls

My prime criticism of Henson is his lack of engagement, to me the most crucial aspect of portraiture - I feel the lack of engagement goes hand in hand with his creepiness (a word use I accept in this thread) and the slickness of his presentation

Regarding the media noise over Henson's 2008 Oxley show I forgot to mention the radio campaign from Chris Smith of Radio 2GB in Sydney which started the furore, I was reminded of this by Ross Chambers - Living the the Southern Karri Forest Belt I am too far away to see the Henson show in Sydney, but if I was in NSW I would certainly visit it

 

[tomalophicon]

Good Morning Artonpaper,

I am sure fuddy duddy is right, but spell check is underlining it in red, I digress - My question regarding Jock Sturgis was as way of asking for an expansion

I thing I have always found odd is that Sally Mann and Jock Sturgis were castigated for producing what I find to be in general engaging portraits, although SM's pictures of nose bleeds etc I am not fond of, but that is part of the mix - The person who was never castigated to my knowledge was David Hamilton, who made deliberately sexual images of young Scandinavian girls

My prime criticism of Henson is his lack of engagement, to me the most crucial aspect of portraiture - I feel the lack of engagement goes hand in hand with his creepiness (a word use I accept in this thread) and the slickness of his presentation

Regarding the media noise over Henson's 2008 Oxley show I forgot to mention the radio campaign from Chris Smith of Radio 2GB in Sydney which started the furore, I was reminded of this by Ross Chambers - Living the the Southern Karri Forest Belt I am too far away to see the Henson show in Sydney, but if I was in NSW I would certainly visit it

Do any of you Aussies remember this?

http://www.theage.com.au/entertainm...-child-prostitution-claim-20110821-1j4td.html

 

[Leigh Youdale]

Do any of you Aussies remember this?

Yes, I do. Seems every country has a Mary Whitehouse or two.

A couple of years ago I was at the beach with my wife. She was paddling at the water's edge, I had hung back to take a beach scene as I was then testing the Bessa III MF camera.
Someone near my wife noticed me and asked if she knew me and what did I think I was doing, and if I didn't stop "perving" on the children nearby they would ring the police.

Of course they were way out of line from legal standpoint, but sometimes it's not worth the aggravation of staring down a zealot who is foaming at the mouth and eager for a "win" of righteousness (self) over common sense.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Do any of you Aussies remember this?

http://www.theage.com.au/entertainm...-child-prostitution-claim-20110821-1j4td.html

Very, very tame — read, non-event, compared to Henson's seminal works. There is a lot more about Bill Henson than what poster's here postulate. I suggest you know him personally and understand his methodology, direction, drive and dedication. As for the "models" in his exhibition, the first, they were photographed many years ago and are adults. Contrary to populist myth, the poses were consented by family. His darkly malevolent film noir interpretation of the beauty of youth might have caused a silly beat up with a prudish Premier of Victoria (thank God he's gone back to the farm at Ravenswood to mingle with sheep), a trigger happy Police commissioner and a blood-lusting media, but the spin-off is that the controversy was quite good for business. He continues to do well with a wide retinué of projects reflecting his personal oeuvre and especially, his life dedication to the arts. His CV, readily available on the web, speaks reams for his wide acceptance in galleries around the world: very few of us have that sort of take-up. Clearly, even in these supposedly enlightened modern times, the non-artistically grounded NIMBYs are more interested in kicking up a righteous spray than learning something intellectual. Society's shame, art's gain.

 

[BrianShaw]

And now we see you aren't just a historian, you are equally interested in smearing the living as well.
Who needs proof when you have suspicion and "other information"?

Either contribute to the discussion or please shut your pie-hole. Thank you. You, sir, are both wrong and insulting. Your personal attacks are not welcomed.

If you can provide proof of your position then please do so. To date, all you have done is voiced your generic distrust of historical analysis and expressed a very unrealistic belief that absolute proof is required before any conclusions can be made. Please present your absolute proof and stop casting accusations upon me that are clearly not true.

 

[tomalophicon]

Lol.

 

[BrianShaw]

Me too. I'm LFAO, in fact. Laughing my way right to the ignore feature!

 

[Wayne]

Either contribute to the discussion or please shut your pie-hole. Thank you. You, sir, are both wrong and insulting. Your personal attacks are not welcomed.

If you can provide proof of your position then please do so. To date, all you have done is voiced your generic distrust of historical analysis and expressed a very unrealistic belief that absolute proof is required before any conclusions can be made. Please present your absolute proof and stop casting accusations upon me that are clearly not true.

That is freaking hilarious, but I'll bet you don't even know why.

 

[BrianShaw]

Troll.

But, yes, I do see what you would find humorous.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I wish you lot would get a dictionary between you ...

Those who obsess about proper spelling are quite often of such small minds that they cannot deal with anything else of substance.

Nothing personal, I'm jest sayin'

 

[Ross Chambers]

Well, that seems to be an issue that is not unique to him. Some others of the same era were equally inattentive to surrounds. I speculate (my personally owned opinion) that the "sloppiness" was a function of two things: the complexity of photography in those days, and the complexity of orchestrating the allegorical scenes. There was a lot to think about and it is not clear that these images were produced in a manner to be "picture perfect"... meaning publication or award-winning quality. Ohter Victorian photographers were definitely interested in sales. I'm not sure that Carrol/Dodgson was so motivated.

Not to forget Julia Margaret Cameron's concept of focus, which Dodgson criticised.

 

[Leigh Youdale]

Those who obsess about proper spelling are quite often of such small minds that they cannot deal with anything else of substance.
[/I]

And in the spirit of debate that has characterised this thread, please name your documented sources for this statement including medical reports, clinical trials and the qualifications and CV's of all of the authoritative medical and psychological experts you no doubt relied upon when making the above statement.

 

[BrianShaw]

Not to forget Julia Margaret Cameron's concept of focus, which Dodgson criticised.

Yet despite that criticism she actually sold photographs for money, indicating some degree of success.

 

[BrianShaw]

Yet despite that criticism she actually sold photographs for money, indicating some degree of success.

"alleged" criticism, I should have said.

 

[BrianShaw]

Yet despite that criticism she actually sold photographs for money, indicating some degree of success.

"presumably" sold for money Io should have said.

 

[BrianShaw]

Yet despite that criticism she actually sold photographs for money, indicating some degree of success.

"perceived" success I should have said.

 

[Steve Smith]

Yet despite that criticism she actually sold photographs for money, indicating some degree of success.

Perhaps she did but the family didn't really need the money and I doubt that she was really interested in making any income from photography other than the novelty of it.

Her photographic career only lasted about eleven years whilst she lived here on the Isle of Wight. I think it reduced significantly when the family moved back to India (Ceylon) around 1875.

EDIT: All of this reminds me that Dimbola Lodge has free entry for the whole of February - so I will be going this weekend!


Steve.

 

[BrianShaw]

Perhaps she did but the family didn't really need the money and I doubt that she was really interested in making any income from photography other than the novelty of it.

Not needing money has never kept anyone from wanting to make a little more.

Whether she was interested or not is surely open to speculation. I'd speculate that for whatever reason she may have gotten into the selling aspect... the fact remains that for some period of her life she actively sought out and worked with a gallery to sell prints, and they sold.

I've often envied her because I suspect, like you do, that she engaged in photography purely for fun and had all of her other worldly needs sufficiently taken care of.

 

[BrianShaw]

p.s. enjoy Dimbola Lodge. i'd join you if that were possible, but alas... I cannot.

 

[John Austin]

Those who obsess about proper spelling are quite often of such small minds that they cannot deal with anything else of substance.

Nothing personal, I'm jest sayin'

OK, I obsess, but in this case the spelling obsession was to confirm the spelling of a proper name - That being done the "fuddy duddy" bit I took as a joke

Also, and crucial to my posts is that I always claim, and where I have not I apologise, that my views on the work of Henson are my personal opinion based on seeing his works, I have said very little on the 2008ish portraits apart from saying, I think, that I found them verging on the innocent, I can say no more on these pix as I have never seen real prints

If I state that opinions on photographer's images are my own and not claimed as absolute I feel that is OK, but will take other views into consideration

Perhaps I should have taken my page one advice on this thread, but I am glad to see this thread running as it is a damned sight more interesting than Leitz vs Nikon arguments - I pick on that one as I started it

John

 

[mr rusty]

Fascinating and educating thread. Somehow it had passed me by, but I had never really taken much notice of Lewis Carroll or the Alice stories, other than I am aware of them of course. I did not know he was a photographer. The other angles are interesting, but I believe we cannot moralise on victorian values from a 21st century perspective.

I had a very interesting conversation recently with a foreign agent for the equipment I sell. I won't name the place - it is irrelevant - but he told me it is (little known outside the country) but customary for the ruler to have the services of different young girls from different "tribes" on a monthly basis. If the young girl becomes pregnant it is looked on with great delight, as it brings royal blood to the tribe (and helps the gene-pool which is otherwise constrained within the tribe). If she fails to become pregnant she leaves with presents. Either way, being the "chosen one" is looked on with pride.

The point is morals are different from place to place and from time to time. Who are we to judge.