Senator Barry Goldwater, Photographer

JBrunner said:

I'd have to disagree, I like the most of the ones I've seen, and 15,000 self processed negs over 50 some years is hardly the work of a dilletante.

I think its quite allright to not find anothers work to your taste, however, calling an obviously serious photographer a dilletante is a bit much.

Click to expand...

Well, you might say that his lack of recognition as a photographer is a VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY to deny him his due because of his contrary political beliefs to that of those generally attributed to the "ARTISTIC ESTABLISHMENT".

Or you might say that they just generally are not all that impressive. Quantity of output is not a substitute for quality.

His pictures are no worse than mine. But that ain't saying much!

Anyway, fair enough to disagree - I've given my accolades here to Mr. Goldwater where I think he deserved them. I'll leave the thread now for others to discuss.

copake_ham said:

BTW, I think his photographic work tailed off after the 1950's. One might say he was a bit of a "renaissance man"; another might use the term "dilletante".

Click to expand...

Some people have jobs George, and succumb to corrupting their artistry for that sake. Barry certainly did have a hiatus from photography in the early 1940s, frivolously flying cargo airplanes through (not over) the Himalayan mountain passes. I wasn't there (hadn't been born yet) but I have heard that was one of the most dangerous things a person could do. What a chump! Bet he missed the best shots of his life doing that.

BTW, please don't bother reviewing my photos. I'm quite sure I qualify for your bucolic dilletante award. Thank you. I'm proud.

Now then, Jason, you were saying-----

Alex Hawley said:

Some people have jobs George, and succumb to corrupting their artistry for that sake. Barry certainly did have a hiatus from photography in the early 1940s, frivolously flying cargo airplanes through (not over) the Himalayan mountain passes. I wasn't there (hadn't been born yet) but I have heard that was one of the most dangerous things a person could do. What a chump! Bet he missed the best shots of his life doing that.

.....

Click to expand...

Alex,

Could you please explain to me how the above comments relate to the QUALITIES of Goldwater's photography?

He's been lauded on this site for many attributes - as you just have done with a recitation of his WWII missions. And, in fact, I mentioned his 1950's surveys of the Grand Canyon - did you read the whole thread here?

But, more to the point, how do your comments add to the erstwhile forgotten appreciation of his photography?

Isn't this what I think JB wanted the discussion narrowed down to?

Don't single me out by name as the one who doesn't appreciate the man's photography. Last I checked, other than what has been dredged up here today, no one even knew there were family using his name to extract a few bucks selling his pedestrian photos!

He may be your "god" - he's not mine!

After browsing through the website with his photography and words, it seems to me that Barry Goldwater might very well have been a contributing and enthusiatic participant on APUG, if APUG had been available to him, and he had had the time.

Just think of the discussions he and George and Roger could have engaged in!

Matt

On one extended photography trip, Edward and Charis Weston spent some time with the Goldwaters. Read all about it in her book "Through Another Lens."

Bill Mitchell said:

On one extended photography trip, Edward and Charis Weston spent some time with the Goldwaters. Read all about it in her book "Through Another Lens."

Click to expand...

That's interersting Bill. It appears to me that he was friends with Adams and Weston before he became a "name" political figure.

As far as his photography is concerned, and from his own words, he wanted to capture the essence of the land he loved, Arizona. I think he succeeded in that. No, he was not quite on the level of Adams or Weston, but I don't understand why being on that level should be a necessary criteria for success. On the contrary, I think its highly to his credit that Adams and Weston became friends. The connection of those friendships would have surely been photography. And again, his photography preceeds his political career by a good amount.

Bill Mitchell said:

On one extended photography trip, Edward and Charis Weston spent some time with the Goldwaters. Read all about it in her book "Through Another Lens."

Click to expand...

The Goldwaters (i.e. Barry and before him, his parents) were a prominent family in AZ arising from the wealth they'd made as merchants.

They were also sophisiticated and educated people in a land that at the time, was still characterized as a "rough and tumble" society. At the time of the Weston's; AZ was defined by the 4"C's": Copper, Cotton, Cattle and Climate.

It was a mining state; with a nascent agriculture based on the Hoover and Roosevelt Dams that began to harness water resources; as well as a dry ranching location (requiring large spreads - see the story of Sandra Day O'Connor's family for this aspect); and ,finally, a location where well-off people who'd contracted tuberculosis went "for the cure".

It is unsurprising that the Westons would have called on the Goldwater's - who were prospering by merchanting these industries.

Thus, I'm not sure what the point is here - except, perhaps, to underscore the point I noted about dilletantism.

Maybe I should have said that Barry Goldwater was an amateur photographer, as he was also an amateur radio operator, who leveraged his position as a prominent scion of a wealthy merchant family to rise to political prominence.

But as I look at the photos on the website, I see ordinary compositions that are more "reportorial" than inspired. They provide an interesting historical chronicle of a time and place (AZ from the 1930's to 1960 or so). But so what? If they didn't have his name on them - would anyone today consider them noteworthy?

I doubt it.

If they didn't borrow theri pedigree from a completely separate field, they'd be entirely forgotten. My point exactly.

bjorke said:

Thanks Roger, good thoughts. I'm in the middle of writing a short essay on war photography and some of the paradoxes outlined in Sontag's Regarding the Pain of Others (caution: ugly images) and evaluating it in the light of the sorts of cognitive-evolutionary analysis done by researchers such as Marc Hauser at Harvard.

Basically, I think that Sontag over-interprets the failures and frustrations of war photography in its apparent inability to halt war altogether. Researchers like Hauser et al, while not studying photography directly, reveal the crucial connection for human morality (which functions at a low level with strong universality, regardless of culture) and the importance of seeing people. Sight, and by extension photography, is (to my delight) a strong moralizing, humanizing force - far stronger than words.

Conservative/liberal left/right politics aside, I personally cannot think of many (any?) visual artists of any merit who are pro-war, even in the presence of great direct threat (Goya and Picasso come to mind as artists who were clearly threatened but whose images did not advocate violence against their self-declared enemies).

Click to expand...

Just a thought - I don't know any photographers who are or were actively pro-war, but there are vast differences in attitudes to soldiers and soldiering. Consider if you will David Douglas Duncan (a former Marine combat photographer), who I find is much more sympathetic to military personnel in contrast to, say, the virtually neutral approach of Larry Burrows, or Don McCullin with his very hard-edged approach, or Philip Jones-Griffiths with his out-and-out anti-American polemic. One thing is for sure - I very much doubt if you will obtain much enlightment from Susan Sontag!

The reaction of Charis and Edward to the Goldwater brand of "not our brother's keeper" Western Republicansm was a VERY negative response. Apparently they had to bite their tongues a lot. (Charis, of course, was eventually married to a California Union Organizer.)
My favorite story about Goldwater was when asked about what he and his wife did in retirement, he said, "We just sit on the front porch a lot, looking at the sunset, and hum Hail to the Chiel."
As a photographer, Goldwater was at least as good as most of those professional landscapers who contributed to "Arizona Highways."

Bill Mitchell said:

As a photographer, Goldwater was at least as good as most of those professional landscapers who contributed to "Arizona Highways."

Click to expand...

I certainly agree with that Bill.

Perhaps his association with Weston/Adams et al started by his patronage of them. Nothing is said about this that I have found, but Goldwater did have the financial means to by their art in those early days, which would coincide with the Great Depression to a degree.