![Manufactured Landscapes [2006]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51ySjq%2B65pL._SL75_.jpg)
Seeing ourselves... It's me! (no, really...)
Tuesday, July 21, 2009 at 6:56PM Last week Jez Coulson blogged on Laura Cumming's book, 'A Face to the World: On Self-Portraits.' Laura, an art critic for The Observer, looks at how famous artists have portrayed themselves and the story that their images tell. It looks like a fascinating book, but back to Jez... who accompanied his post with this excellent self-portrait:
I joked with Jez about his 'half in the picture' shot - he said it was a classic 'shades and camera' look favoured by photographers!
Well, yeah - and he has a point - but if you are a consultant who uses photography - what then?
Back to the self portrait that I took when I was struggling through a particularly tough consulting assignment...
This is the 'classic look' of a consultant in the midst of turmoil and change trying to look after people and slide good work in 'under the wire...'
A reasonable excuse but then I looked at my other self-portraits and realised I wasn't especially present in any of those images either.
And, so... to Flickr. Where searching on 'Self-Portrait' produces 1.3 million hits. I didn't check them all but I would guess that the photographer barely appears in about 50% of the shots.
Perhaps there is a strange power in staying in the shadows; photographing, interpreting, witnessing...?
But in my Flickr search I found some incredible work by Malin Svensson, a young Swedish photographer who seems a little different. In her self-portraits, she appears both in and out of the image.
Disarmingly present yet also mysterious; a beautiful, intriguing mixture.
Reader Comments (8)
It's Jez! I see Jez on your blog! :-)
There's a guy in a photography group to which I belong that posts photos of himself (self-portraits), in them he is always half-naked and bare-chested with an intense look of some kind on his face, and frankly, I think he's sprayed himself with some sort of oil!
In the end, whatever we choose as our self-portraits, they do reveal something about us ... and/or perhaps about our choices --- but then again, our choices are born out of the narrative/narratives that guide us ... whether they be true or false, accurate or inaccurate ... they do make us who we are ... they do shape and form how we see ourselves and the world.
Interesting when you compare Jez's photo and the choices he made with Malin's photo and the choices she's made ... and then when you compare both of them with that guy in my photo group!
Anyway, here's the quote I put up in response to Jez's self-portrait over on his blog:
"For in picturing themselves, artists reveal something far deeper than their own physical looks: the truth about how they hope to be viewed by the world, and how they wish to see themselves ... "
I checked out some of the artists in Laura Cumming's book and it seems that the predominant style is to address the viewer straight on - perhaps a little bit of shade here and there - but quite unlike many of the photographs we see.
So yes, as you say, our self-portraits say something about us... I wonder if the choice of medium also says something? Photography is a particular way of participating in the world which has a quality and power all of it's own, sometimes anonymous, peripheral... unless, of course, you're standing half-naked and sprayed in oil!
I do think you're right that the medium makes the difference ... and that photography is very different than painting or sculpting. In thinking this through using the archtypes in literature/stories/film, it seems on the extremes that there are four basic types of "portraits" or "characters":
1) Enlightened self-interest (a person who is, if you will, arrogant but right). In terms of movies/film the protagonist in RIPLEY'S GAME is this archtype or the character Miles from the US television show Thirtysomething.
2) Arrogant stupidity (someone who thinks they are right but are in fact wrong). Lots examples of this from film and literature :-)
3) Humble but simple (so someone who is not entirely right or wrong, and knows they are not entirely right or wrong, but lacks any overall hubris). Forrest Gump?
and 4) Humble but wise (so a person who knows, accurately, when they are right and when they are wrong, and when they do not know the answer, but their "rightness" or "wrongess" isn't attached to ego.) Gandhi, for example?
Just for fun, you could look at self-portraits through this lens. Obviously, "oily bare-chested, look-at-me and how hot I am" guy would fall into category #2 :-)
The girl, Malin, above seems to fall, at least to some degree, into #4 or #3 or somewhere between the two ... which isn't surprising given that she looks very young.
Many of the self-portraits, when viewed through this lens, tend to either fit into #2 or #1 ... don't they? Or maybe not. I have seen some in some of the other categories as well (particularly self-portraits, or at least approved portraits, of folks like musicans or even writers).
Okay, so where to categorize your pic ... or, more to the point .... Jez's self portrait? Yeah, not even going to go there :-) :-)
Cheers,
Lynda
Maybe I can get Jez to join the conversation and then we could hear it from him? Btw - I imagine I am in box 3 - Forest Gump. I have too many questions to get close to any sense of wisdom!
And...there are some self-portraits on your blog which you seem to have overlooked....which category do you fall into ;-)
LOL :-) No self-portaits on my blog, mate ... those would all be ones taken of me by someone else. I HATE pictures of myself, believe it or not ('cause there are quite a few of 'em posted!) ... but apparently I'm a very challenging and sometimes intimidating professor (so I'm told), and so I started a Facebook page and put up some pics of myself on my blog and Web site to try to make myself more user friendly. (I suppose my self-portrait would either be me with a bag over my head, or a picture of some beautiful supermodel-type photoshopped over me. So what does that say about me??).
So I was surprised that students found me intense and intimidating (me?? really? I'm just a goof-ball!), and I set out to show a lighter side of me on my blog/Web site so students wouldn't be so scared of me or my classes. And so far, it seems to have worked. Walking around campus now, I often hear, "Yo! Lynda! What's up?" And students have friended me on Facebook and can see that I'm just a gal obsessed with Johnny Depp films.
Hmm, which # am I really? I don't know, but perhaps it is revealing that one of my favorite films is RIPLEY'S GAME, and I loved the character Miles on Thirtysomething. In fact, often the people I admire most fall into category #1.
And I have a theory about Jez ... but I ain't posting it :-)
hehehe...... aw come on Lynda....... Im intrigued...... hehehe........ Im not sure most photographers can be judged in quite the same way painters can in their self portraits........ sometimes u just knock them off as aphotographer....... I have a pictire in a book I did with the salvation Army...... about the Katrina aftermath...... I saw myself in a broken mirror did a pic of myself....... weirdly its now half a page in the book....... I like it..... its not really controlled but it is me as photojournalist...... which I dont really have....... its too late for me to get really involved...... and sadly this week I am really having trouble getting on the net but maybe I can think more about self portraits......
cheers Jez XXX
ps ....... check out Lauras book!
Okay, so I asked my favorite niece, who has known me her entire 21 years of life (she's studying to be an analytical psychologist), how she sees me, or how she'd "picture" me ... and she said "intense and intimidating" ... but then she added "but in a really fun way once people get to know you." (now I'm wondering how one can be intense and intimidating in a fun way!?!?) Alas. So perhaps my efforts to be less intense and intimidating aren't paying off ... hmm ... wonder what would an intense and intimidating ... yet fun ... self-portrait might look like? Don't know :-( Hopefully not like oily man :-)
So next I show her the photo of Jez. She studies it and says, "Artsy guy. A study in contrasts. Shadows and light but still darkness. Someone who is exposed and yet not exposed ... hiding ... but maybe hopes to be found ... "
I wonder if this is similar to Rorschach test :-)
Btw, Jez's picture in book for Salvation Army can be seen here. It's kinda like the one above though ...
http://www.uss.salvationarmy.org/uss/www_uss.nsf/vw-sublinks/05ED41371E8F9223802571C5005695A6?openDocument
And what category would Jez fit into? Well, from what I can see he's not arrogant (yes, he can be arrogant ... can't we all? ... but overall he's not arrogant). So that eliminates two of the categories ... :-)
Hey, class starts tomorrow ... let me know what's up :-)
Definitely a Rorschach test... you can 'project anything you like on to an image! But... I wouldn't have you in the 'intense/intimidating' box - though we've also exchanged emails so I know more about you than just the images... How about 'hidden depths....?'...;-)
The Salvation Army book has some amazing Jezpix- the one of the boat/ship(?) - basically on top of what used to be a house took my breath away. So I guess I need to put Jez in the humble but wise category - as he just keeps on and on producing amazing pictures...