The theme of the current issue, Boundaries of Documentary, was suggested by the growing diversity of approach among photo-documen- tarists and photojournalists, as well as theoreticians of photography. Can we take seriously photographs showing so-called objective fact? And can such a thing as authenticity of testimony hold up in photography theory? Is there nothing left but obsolete formulas, or can we maintain a reasonable degree of trust in the testimony of the reportage presented by photographers?
The term documentary photography is inspired by film theory. It began to emerge in the 1930s. Needless to say, both photographic and filmic shots have been used for documentary purposes since the dawn of both media. If suddenly there occured the definition of documenta- rism as a separate discipline, with rules of its own, there had to be a reason. The reason can probably be found mainly in the fact that the straightforward record brings fewer responses when the practical use of the information it brings ceases to be topical, whether this is written or visual information.
The creative ethos of film documentarism was pioneered by John Grierson, who understood it as an artistic genre working outside of fabulation. He believed that images collected within the framework of this definition could be more interesting than those in fiction films. 1/ If in 1924, Grierson urged a creative interpretation of reality, in the winter of 1932 he suggested that the term ”documentary film“ be used for higher forms of realist cinema. He ranked in lower categories forms such as the film newsreel, which he saw as a conventional compilation of news records.
Many photographers share this perspective. Photo-documentarists differ from earnest journalists, who avoid any staging or artificial arrangement in their work, by a more personal motivation of the testimony they bring. It is from their personal ”why“ that they derive the essential ”how“.
The cornerstone among those titans who in the decade preceeding the Second World War contributed to a new style in impromptu photography is Henri Cartier-Bresson. He was inspired by the expeditious 35mm camera, which allowed him to form the shot differently than had been the custom. But was his aim really to eternalize the customs of the urban or rural life of his day? Not much, at least primarily; the period detail and atmosphere become significant only secondarily. The aesthetic structure became dominant, since the main concern was that of artistic expression.
If the post-war Henri Cartier-Bresson, as a co-founder of Magnum Photos, wanted to publish his work in the daily or weekly press, he tried to capture the attention of his viewers also through topical photographs - i.e., photographs with a narrative device. The overall quality of his work became very uneven, since the choice of photographs was not dictated by artistic intention, but by a pragmatic orientation to subject matter - even more so in that sometimes they were published without acknowledgement of the careful, time-consuming process achieved in particular by the exposure of a great amount of material. Cartier- Bresson was not immune to a kind of superficial humor, or simple contrasts between objects, and he employed them repeatedly.
A trend asynchronous with descriptive journalism developed the specificity of a photographic way of seeing. Its definition as visualism derived from film theory, and is ascribed to Louis Delluc, who tried to grasp the ways in which a cameraman could render the description of a theme more lively and interesting in order to appeal to audiences.2/
In Cinéa, the magazine he published, Louis Delluc coined new terms, among the most frequently used in other languages perhaps cine-club and photogenic. In Czech, photogeny is used - in the broadest sense of the word - to refer to rendering some phenomena more attractive through the creation of its image. The question is whether one should consider the effect hinted at here to be a schism between photographic(full article is available after purchasing a subscription - not available now)
The term documentary photography is inspired by film theory. It began to emerge in the 1930s. Needless to say, both photographic and filmic shots have been used for documentary purposes since the dawn of both media. If suddenly there occured the definition of documenta- rism as a separate discipline, with rules of its own, there had to be a reason. The reason can probably be found mainly in the fact that the straightforward record brings fewer responses when the practical use of the information it brings ceases to be topical, whether this is written or visual information.
The creative ethos of film documentarism was pioneered by John Grierson, who understood it as an artistic genre working outside of fabulation. He believed that images collected within the framework of this definition could be more interesting than those in fiction films. 1/ If in 1924, Grierson urged a creative interpretation of reality, in the winter of 1932 he suggested that the term ”documentary film“ be used for higher forms of realist cinema. He ranked in lower categories forms such as the film newsreel, which he saw as a conventional compilation of news records.
Many photographers share this perspective. Photo-documentarists differ from earnest journalists, who avoid any staging or artificial arrangement in their work, by a more personal motivation of the testimony they bring. It is from their personal ”why“ that they derive the essential ”how“.
The cornerstone among those titans who in the decade preceeding the Second World War contributed to a new style in impromptu photography is Henri Cartier-Bresson. He was inspired by the expeditious 35mm camera, which allowed him to form the shot differently than had been the custom. But was his aim really to eternalize the customs of the urban or rural life of his day? Not much, at least primarily; the period detail and atmosphere become significant only secondarily. The aesthetic structure became dominant, since the main concern was that of artistic expression.
If the post-war Henri Cartier-Bresson, as a co-founder of Magnum Photos, wanted to publish his work in the daily or weekly press, he tried to capture the attention of his viewers also through topical photographs - i.e., photographs with a narrative device. The overall quality of his work became very uneven, since the choice of photographs was not dictated by artistic intention, but by a pragmatic orientation to subject matter - even more so in that sometimes they were published without acknowledgement of the careful, time-consuming process achieved in particular by the exposure of a great amount of material. Cartier- Bresson was not immune to a kind of superficial humor, or simple contrasts between objects, and he employed them repeatedly.
A trend asynchronous with descriptive journalism developed the specificity of a photographic way of seeing. Its definition as visualism derived from film theory, and is ascribed to Louis Delluc, who tried to grasp the ways in which a cameraman could render the description of a theme more lively and interesting in order to appeal to audiences.2/
In Cinéa, the magazine he published, Louis Delluc coined new terms, among the most frequently used in other languages perhaps cine-club and photogenic. In Czech, photogeny is used - in the broadest sense of the word - to refer to rendering some phenomena more attractive through the creation of its image. The question is whether one should consider the effect hinted at here to be a schism between photographic(full article is available after purchasing a subscription - not available now)