Voyeurism in Photography

I was reading this post over at 40 watt about sex in photography and was struck by this question "photography that deals with sex without being voyeuristic? Is that even possible?" When i read it my first reaction was not to answer the question but to ask if it is possible to have photography without voyeurism or rather "Is voyeurism inherent in photography and if so, in what way does it function?"

They word Voyeur comes from the French work voir, "to see," and from the Latin word Videre, also "to see." Here it becomes interesting because apparently there is a semantic debate about whether to see means to wait and see something or to actually take part in the action of sight. Semantics is Semantics however in this situation i believe it becomes important to grasp because if one is lying in wait to see something that is very different from the simple act of sight. Both instances are relevant in photography - one could say that the photographer often lies in wait to see and then capture, we are all familiar with the philosophical musings of the photographer as hunter - and then we have the photographer who "sees" the image and makes it permanent on film (or cv cards).

But what i am really interested in here is not what the photographers relation is as voyeur - without going into detail I will just say its my personal belief that photographers or the act of photographing is not inherently voyeuristic - I am interested in Photography in general but more specifically how the image functions in society. I am therefore led to the question "Is the viewer of a photograph inherently a voyeur?" The answer to this question has interesting implications about photography in general.

I don't have a solid answer, nor do i wish to come up with one... however i feel instinctively that the viewer is a voyeur and for now i will just share some thoughts...

You never know who is looking at photographs... so the viewer of photography is engaging in an act of viewing in which the subject portrayed does not/will not know who is viewing the image of them. yes, it is an inanimate object that the viewer views in reality, but it is of a person whom they have most likely never met and even if they have, most likely were not at the scene in which the photograph was taken and therefore they are a voyeur of the scene portrayed - due to their absence in the consciousness of the person portrayed and their meditation and pleasure (in whatever sense) of the scene/person portrayed.

Desire V. sexuality. so much is wound up with sex in voyeurism but doesn't it just have to do with some sort of desire... from the roots of the word, there is no relation to sex, but maybe we have an inherent desire to see?

Identify or objectify. to objectify is to be a voyeur as to be an object is necessarily a perception of one or nore of the senses and to identify is to view in a way that one understand what is happening in the imagery due to personal experience which is objectification plus.... and that plus makes it non voyeuristic (unless the identification is identifying with a certain voyeurism)

OK and lastly, i will leave with a quote from Thomas Pynchon's book V.

“V. needed her fetish, Melanie a mirror, temporary peace, another to watch her have pleasure… An adolescent girl whose existence is so visual observes in a mirror her double; the double becomes a voyeur…. But such was her rapture at Melanie’s having sought and found her own identity in her and in the mirrors soulless gleam…”

any thoughts? lemme know what you think about the matter...

Images, feelings, and thoughts on war...

Right now i am sitting in a loud, populated porch area of a local hot spot... people are drinking, they have been since morning, the music is loud, there are dogs playing with one another, people laughing, and the weather is beautiful. This is the place I jokingly call my office but currently i am struck with the decadence of it all. I have been reading about and watching videos related to the Iraq invasion by the United States. I can't even begin to relay the feelings i have had, the emotions that cut through me like the sharpest of knives... Yesterday, i found this article via Conscientious but didnt have time to read it until today... however last night i stayed up late, captivated and disturbed by this article found at Exposure Compensation. You have to watch all the video's, not just the intro, which is powerful enough!
I am just reflecting on the current election and cant help to think that it is just such a backlash from all of the shit we have been through as a result of the fuckhead who needs not be mentioned... but a well needed and healthy backlash it is!
if you are not highly disturbed by the links that i just posted i really feel a deep sorrow for you... how can humans do such horrible things to one another? This war has led to the highest casualty rate for journalists in any war ever... not to mention the lies and how many civilian casualties or the soldiers who are fighting for what again? our freedom? is that really what it is about? WTF? How is any of this ok...

NYC here i come...

So I just received word from Pratt Institute that I have been accepted into their MFA Photography program. While this is not my first choice school, they certainly are reputable and i am extremely relieved that I will at least be attending this coming Fall. I've applied to four other schools and ICP is my first choice, so we shall see. I am more relieved that I will be moving out of Charlotte and to New York. When i first graduated undergrad from the School of the Art Institute of Chicago i was kinda of bewildered at what my life might be like without the intellectual environment/constant stimulation of school so i just started reading photography books and blogs all the time, kept up with my fellow students and so on. All and all it worked out really well however I am so ready to get back into a consistent dialog with fellow intellectuals and photographers. There is something to be said about the rigor of higher level institutions, especially in art programs I think. I know there is a huge trend for going to grad school and so on right now in the art world and its getting a lot of criticism, however I really believe in it and feel that even if there is an overload currently but i think if anything, that will just make the environment that much more competitive and hopefully the work will be that much better.

So, this is the most disturbing thing I have seen since a relative of mine sent me an extremely racist e-mail about Mexican immigration into the U.S.
These films brought tears to my eyes immediately but I dont yet know how to conceptualize them or even really understand them - further complicated by the fact that I really cannot bring myself to watch either twice.

What do you think?

watch here


and here

So the other day, at the end of class, one of my students asked me "so what do you do?" I didnt really know how to respond so i said "well, what do you mean? like for work?" and she said yes. So i said, "well, i teach photography classes here, i have my own gallery-based practice, i photograph for local publications, and i work at a local art store sometimes - so basically i look at, talk about, think about, read about, and make art 7 days a week."

I hadnt even really thought about that too much myself and was kind of hit with the fact that is what i do all the time. Then, last friday i had the pleasure to meet up with Brian Ulrich while he was in town for a show that opened at the Light Factory and he mentioned the profound luck that we have the opportunity to just make and talk about art all the time instead of fight in a war or hide out in a bomb shelter or for that matter, sit in a cubical all day. Its really amazing. Its not like its easy to make art or teach, its probably a lot harder than most other jobs, but we are still just thinking about and dealing with aesthetic and historical concepts of image making and that actually puts food on the table.

So, today i was directed to an audio clip of the art critic Dave Hickey by exposure compensation and while listening to his very interesting (though i dont agree with all of it) and entertaining lecture i was struck with the same thought again as he mentioned what he does for a living. At one point he basically said that there is no place for art critics, there is no heirarchy or art critic specific jobs (i mean of course there are things that art critics do, like write for instance - but there is no art critic job proper) - anyhow, go check out the audio clip, he explains it a lot better than i can out of context and by memory. But the point is - he brings up the fact that all he does is think about, talk about, buy, and write about art. And i know this is about to get redundant but i started reading an interview with Hickey by Believer Magazine where he says “HONESTLY, I NEVER SIT DOWN TO WRITE ANYTHING WITHOUT THINKING, THIS IS A WEIRD THING TO BE DOING! WHY AM I SITTING HERE WRITING?”

ok enough with it all... just wanted to share - go read and listen to those links!

the beginning of the end

So a while back (i think a year ago when i graduated from undergrad and confidently yet blindly embarked on my no-job but making pictures career) i decided it might be a good idea to start a multi-user blog for artists. So, i did but none of the other users ever posted and i refused to be the only person... so alas it died. Recently i've been toying with the idea again and have heard from several friends in the art community that i should and so here we are! the inaugural ramble...

so hello, my name is ryan and you can see my work here www.ryaneaster.com