The Artist Upending Photography’s Brutal Racial Legacy

[Karl K]

I'm not sure I agree with the the choice of words in this headline from the New York Times article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/05/...te=1&user_id=1536c4d5b6b4f7d33565f7a2cc040a23

 

[warden]

I caught that article, and I agree the title doesn't match the content. I imagine the writer didn't choose the headline.

 

[guangong]

It's the kind of headline that one expects from the NYT. What I read of the article article is better.

 

[Peter Schrager]

Develop how 300 answers
Intelligent conversation 0
She's an artist..I don't care what color she or her photography is...

 

[BrianShaw]

It seems to me that the pencil and the tongue have been much more instrumental in creating a brutal racial legacy than cameras and photography. I’m happy for her, though, in artistically expressing her feelings.

 

[gone]

This headline has become par for the course w/ the NYTs, which used to be a good paper if you could read through it's editorial agenda. I occasionally get a free Sunday edition at one of the Little Free Libraries here (America puts it's toe into socialism's water, LOL) and it's still sorta OK. However the online edition has become just like everyone else's now. Front page articles on celebrities, cooking videos, etc. Any way to get the reader to click on something. The only news I trust nowadays is the AP.

 

[Dali]

NYT... Who reads such rag?

 

[warden]

NYT... Who reads such rag?

I do.

 

[MattKing]

If you read far enough down on that opinion piece, the article's title does start to make more sense. The majority of the piece is about the photographer and her work, and doesn't seem to relate to the headline. The analysis of historical context, and how that context relates to the photographer comes nearer the end of the piece, and the title makes more sense in relation to that part.
The piece really needs to be in two parts, and the parts deserve their own titles.
It is strange to see a title that has more relevance to the end of an article than the beginning.
The early parts of the article, and the photography referred to in it, are valuable.
The thesis in the later part is interesting and complex, and I'm not at all convinced it is correct, but it is definitely poorly served by the article's title.

 

[Peter Schrager]

For all the razzmatazz her work..works

 

[jvo]

I do.

+1 - and happily pay for a subscription!
would we have had this conversation if there was no nyt to print it?

 

[guangong]

When I became more active in photography, beginning in the early 1960s, many of my friends were black photographers. As with every endeavor, some became quite successful, and some less so. Of course, during Democrat era of Jim Crow the reputation of many fine black photographers were limited to the black community. Still, my good friend Bernie Boston became the dean of White House photographers, and photographed every president from Truman through Clinton. Bernie credited Truman with giving him a break.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The NY Times writes for their liberal readers but I do appreciate that they spend time on photos and photo essays.

 

[tballphoto]

Unfortunately im confused as to why the article is making this woman some sort of hero, or calling her imaginative and creative, when i have seen thousands of non black photographers doing the same thing. Hell i have a photo lecture dvd that is taught by a white guy, that tells you to do the same thing this woman is doing....
take a photo of the subject in their normal environment to create a sense of relaxation in the subject. And thus create a better photograph of them.

Duh..... i think we was teaching that in the 1870s...