Nice post.. I also think that VM came of age when box cameras and film were new and exciting and capturing scenes with walkabouts was what a lot of people then found interesting and fun, leading to a long term passion.
Nice post.. I also think that VM came of age when box cameras and film were new and exciting and capturing scenes with walkabouts was what a lot of people then found interesting and fun, leading to a long term passion.It's my impression that Vivian Maier took photos mostly for her own 'self-reflective' reasons and she had little interest in public exhibition or recognition. Like many of us here on Photrio she was inherently an observer of events rather than a participant, and she must have enjoyed using her collection of interesting cameras just much as we might. Add to this her peculiar French/Austrian family history with the influence of photographer Jeanne Bertrand on Vivian's childhood sensibilities and it's no surprise that her personal photographic vision was distinctive. Now that the 21st century smartphone camera has encouraged our new social media culture of self-absorption and preening exhibitionism, the naturalistic countenances of Vivian's mid-20th century subjects seem so very fearless and genuine. That kind of open-faced and unprotected authenticity is rare in street shooting today, particularly since so many people now walk around with their gaze obliviously fixed upon the screens of their personal devices. It's no wonder that Maier's photographs are now so highly valued, because in most contemporary Western cultures those old streets are gone forever.
I would put myself down as a casual observer of VM's work. I haven't seen the movie about her, nor do I know much about her life. And what little I do know, I have probably gotten wrong. So with blinding ignorance I will continue!
It always strikes me as a bit unfair of how her work was posthumously published. Unless, I'm mistaken she never curated her own work for public viewing, which means we are seeing her photographs without knowing whether of not she even liked them. We might be seeing photographs that she would have scoffed at. (We all have those.) I think this comes out when I see her photographs. Some are really compelling, while many I don't really see the appeal. All in all, this agrees with the idea that someone else decided on her artistic vision. It would be interesting to see her top 25, as chosen by her.
Unfair to whom? She's dead, her estate has granted permission or sold the rights. If she were alive, it would be a real issue. From what I have read, she was not very competent during the last few years of her life. She lost the storage locker with all her negatives, etc. for non-payment, yet uncashed government checks were among her belongings.I would put myself down as a casual observer of VM's work. I haven't seen the movie about her, nor do I know much about her life. And what little I do know, I have probably gotten wrong. So with blinding ignorance I will continue!
It always strikes me as a bit unfair of how her work was posthumously published. Unless, I'm mistaken she never curated her own work for public viewing, which means we are seeing her photographs without knowing whether of not she even liked them. We might be seeing photographs that she would have scoffed at. (We all have those.) I think this comes out when I see her photographs. Some are really compelling, while many I don't really see the appeal. All in all, this agrees with the idea that someone else decided on her artistic vision. It would be interesting to see her top 25, as chosen by her.
Yeah, i GUESS i understand the point people are trying to make, but............so what. She will NEVER have a say. Either her Negs get printed and viewed in the manner that the new "owners" choose, or they get tossed into a land-fill.Unfair to whom? She's dead, her estate has granted permission or sold the rights. If she were alive, it would be a real issue. From what I have read, she was not very competent during the last few years of her life. She lost the storage locker with all her negatives, etc. for non-payment, yet uncashed government checks were among her belongings.
I would put myself down as a casual observer of VM's work. I haven't seen the movie about her, nor do I know much about her life. And what little I do know, I have probably gotten wrong. So with blinding ignorance I will continue!
It always strikes me as a bit unfair of how her work was posthumously published. Unless, I'm mistaken she never curated her own work for public viewing, which means we are seeing her photographs without knowing whether of not she even liked them. We might be seeing photographs that she would have scoffed at. (We all have those.) I think this comes out when I see her photographs. Some are really compelling, while many I don't really see the appeal. All in all, this agrees with the idea that someone else decided on her artistic vision. It would be interesting to see her top 25, as chosen by her.
Yeah, i GUESS i understand the point people are trying to make, but............so what. She will NEVER have a say. Either her Negs get printed and viewed in the manner that the new "owners" choose, or they get tossed into a land-fill.
Which would you prefer.?
To fret over what she might or might not have approved of seems pointless.....worry for worries sake.
If a person is dubious about her exhibitions, i suppose they could just not look at any of her prints.
By unfair, I don't mean a slight against her. I mean that her worked is judged not only on its merits, but also against the works of other photographers. In the latter case, they selected those works which they wanted the world to see and kept lesser works in boxes. An unfair match-up.Unfair to whom?
I am sure the parties that currently hold the rights to her work have edited out the weak shots. After all, it is not in their interest to present a mediocre body of work. Whether those are the same as she would have is unknown. She pretty much did not show any of her work as far as I can tell. I hold that we're better off with the selection we have now than what we might have if she still controlled the work.By unfair, I don't mean a slight against her. I mean that her worked is judged not only on its merits, but also against the works of other photographers. In the latter case, they selected those works which they wanted the world to see and kept lesser works in boxes. An unfair match-up.
I don't doubt this.I hold that we're better off with the selection we have now than what we might have if she still controlled the work.
It is up to you as photographer. You can try to get published during your lifetime. You can destroy your work. You can make a last will with specified rules to your heirs (the implication of this depends on the very legal system).So you dont get the right of anonymity if your a good photographer?
and what if what the curators of her work actually chose the images that VM herself didn't think were her best ?I am sure the parties that currently hold the rights to her work have edited out the weak shots. After all, it is not in their interest to present a mediocre body of work.
Well first off .. Vivian did print her own work, Vivian's collection has a few thousand prints (colour, and Black and White) ... made by her or under her direction.I would put myself down as a casual observer of VM's work. I haven't seen the movie about her, nor do I know much about her life. And what little I do know, I have probably gotten wrong. So with blinding ignorance I will continue!
It always strikes me as a bit unfair of how her work was posthumously published. Unless, I'm mistaken she never curated her own work for public viewing, which means we are seeing her photographs without knowing whether of not she even liked them. We might be seeing photographs that she would have scoffed at. (We all have those.) I think this comes out when I see her photographs. Some are really compelling, while many I don't really see the appeal. All in all, this agrees with the idea that someone else decided on her artistic vision. It would be interesting to see her top 25, as chosen by her.
So much confusion.... Prints made under Vivians Direction by the french printer have been shown at Stephen Bulger Gallery , I have seen them and she picked these images to print.. I am about to travel again to see a collection of vintage prints, so it kind of imply's to me that
Vivian was involved with her work, like any one of a thousand photographers we know... The social system was not in place to protect Nannies with no Pension, no health care, the story still holds true today... I have health care here
in Canada but I am self employed with no indexed pension... If I keep my health and can print my wife and I are ok, if I lose my health then I could lose everything slowly like Vivian did. This is not so uncommon and it surprises me that
people really putting so much spotlight on her deficiencies as a human.
As I said above it is to the creator to prevent this. May it be by destroying his work.i mean what if they DIDN'T want it found and that is why it was never shown, displayed or played... people have reasons for not putting stuff out there
and what if what the curators of her work actually chose the images that VM herself didn't think were her best ?
. This is not so uncommon and it surprises me that people really putting so much spotlight on her deficiencies as a human.
Vivian did print her own work, Vivian's collection has a few thousand prints (colour, and Black and White) ... made by her or under her direction.
Thank you for posting that, I have seen pictures of Vivan and friends... Yes friends.. working in a makeshift darkroomTrue! Two links with a few of Vivian's vintage prints :
http://gapersblock.com/ac/2012/06/29/opening-vivian-maier-vintage-prints/
https://news.uchicago.edu/story/uchicago-library-receives-gift-vintage-vivian-maier-prints
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?