When I put a "Book of Interest" or "Book o' the Week" at the end of posts, they're often books I haven't seen—just something that looks like it might be good, or that other people have recommended to me. I used to go up to the bookstore at the George Eastman Museum in Rochester to at least look at books firsthand, but a store remodeling and, shortly afterward, the advent of the pandemic put a stop to that. I need to look into whether that's now possible again.
Secondarily, the book links are meant to be a portal for you to Amazon from TOP. As you know, we content providers get a little kickback from Amazon for products sold when buyers come to them from our sites. It doesn't come out of your pocket—the price to you is the same either way. Same when you buy something from B&H Photo by first going there from here. These spiffs aren't much, but they add up, and they've been an important reason TOP has kept on cranking for so long now. I've always tried to be a good Amazon citizen, and have never tried to game the system in any way. Some time back, however, Amazon insisted that I stop providing a general link to them, telling me that I'm only allowed to link specific products. So that's what I do now.
Mini-reviews
Anyway, several of the books that I've pointed to at the ends of posts have recently come into my hot little hands, either because I bought them or they were sent to me. So I thought I'd review them. The first one is Steve McCurry's In Search of Elsewhere. I recommended it mainly because it was on sale at the time for a very low price. I lived below the poverty line for a while, during which time I bought mainly remainders, and the "bargain hunter gene" still pokes its way through from time to time. It's still inexpensive (Amazon also told me not to advertise prices), although not as inexpensive as it was when I recommended it, and it currently has 97% four- and five-star ratings on the site.
Steve McCurry is both a National Geographic and a Magnum photographer, and is either the most popular or among the most popular photographers at either organization. Which is really saying something. I'm told that he's been very generous with Magnum in particular, helping to keep the famous agency prosperous. He has released a great many books. I haven't seen them all.
Mr. McCurry's reputation has however taken some hits in recent years, first in 2016 when it was revealed that he heavily Photoshops some of his pictures to make them more picturesque, removing not just visual distractions but—well, whole people among other things. When confronted with this, he initially passed off the blame to his staff and implied that he didn't know what they were doing, which, if true, is almost worse than if it isn't true. Then, in 2019, Tony Northrup reported on some details of McCurry's most famous photograph, "Afghan Girl" (Sharbat Gula, when she was a schoolgirl) and McCurry's studio disputed some of them. You can do a deeper dive on that if you want to, by going to YouTube and searching "Tony Northrup Steve McCurry." I'd prefer not to get into it. Tony Northrup seems to have been conscientious in his reporting and in correcting his mistakes, and I have no criticism of him; on the other hand, photographers do mildly exploit their subjects sometimes to get photographs, and that's not inherently wrong. I hope to comment (on this general issue, not this specific controversy) in a future article.
Verdict
Despite its ratings on Amazon, I doubt In Search of Elsewhere is among the best of Steve McCurry's books. Objectively, the reproductions aren't bad, but they're not wonderful either. The surfaces are quite matte and the blacks don't seem well supported. (Disambiguation: Matt, capital M, is a name, short for Matthew or Mathew; matte, also correctly spelled matt, means having a non-glossy surface; and a mat is a pad for the floor or a table or a cardboard sandwich with an opening for displaying artwork.) This makes the colors seem a little hyped and just a touch too pure or pastel. Brightening colors is the fashion these days, but to me it emphasizes one of color's weaknesses* rather than one of its strengths. Honestly, the color here isn't bad. It just doesn't quite look integrated to me, and that's a liability considering that some of his other books are good to great in this respect. The other problem with the pictures is that many of them cross the gutter, an all too familiar strategy beloved of designers who work on flat computer screens but much despised by photographers who are interested in seeing the visual impression of the whole frame unobstructed. Designers are always going to ignore the integrity of the page, and most of us are always going to prefer they wouldn't.
So this book isn't going to earn a spot at TOP World Headquarters, where the shortage of shelf space is well past the critical stage. To be clear, crystal: thumbs down, although not emphatically. It was said of J.J. Cale that whichever of his albums you came across first would always be your favorite, and that might be true of Steve McCurry books as well. So if you come to this one first, well, good. The book of Steve's that I continue to recommend (having been impecunious at times, I'm big on the strategy of finding "the book you should have if you can have only one") is Looking East, a compilation of portraits of many kinds of people from many different near- and far-Eastern countries. I love that book, and have paged through it slowly many times for pleasure. The hardcover is now very inexpensive—more inexpensive than In Search of Elsewhere was when I mentioned it. Looking East is a rich mix; none of the pictures cross the gutter; the large reproductions are close to ideal and most have the coveted palette of Kodachrome; and the book contains the best representation of "Afghan Girl" I've seen, assuming you can bear to sully your tender sensibilities with a picture of a person who's not 100% happy having her picture taken (in which case, don't look at "Migrant Mother," either, or Karsh's portrait of Churchill or...well, you're just going to take the average and stop looking at photography). I don't think I've ever seen a print in a museum, but I have the original National Geographic cover...somewhere, unshelved.
Thinking out loud here, but you know what? A book of pictures of people who aren't happy having their picture taken could be great. Someone with exquisite taste like Jeffrey Fraenkel would have to do it, though. A dozen great examples have come to my mind just since writing the last paragraph. Robert Frank's picture of the Black man in the park glaring at him; Jim Marshall's picture of an angry Johnny Cash giving him the finger (although it's unclear if Johnny was really angry or just posing); Ron Galella's picture of Jackie Onassis crossing a Manhattan street (no ambiguity there); Jill Greenberg's "End Times" pictures, of small children in distress. The list is potentially very long.
Anyway Looking East is the McCurry book to have, in my humble and only partially-educated opinion, unless you either want a lot more of them than just one, or don't want any.
Mike
*Namely, that color is distracting, one of the two major traditional dismissals of color photographs. I'm not sure whether that was supposed to mean it's distracting to viewers, or to photographers themselves when they know they're recording color.
Book o' the Week
Larry Clark, Tulsa. A classic of 20th century photography. Teenage Lust (NSFW) was always the hard title to get—$500+ for the paperback right now—but it wears its voyeurism too much on its sleeve. I have them both, and Tulsa, IMHO, is the better book. Available at a good price right now, but not always.
This book link is a portal to Amazon.
Today at B&H Photo
Original contents copyright 2020 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Geoff Wittig: "Many successful artists (in any field or format) follow a kind of arc to their career; initial experimental striving, trying out a range of styles or subjects, some hits and a lot of misses. Then a gradual distillation or focus, finding their voice, producing progressively better work that finally starts to sing. Some get even better with time, hitting a stride and creating real masterpieces. A few can maintain that peak creative output for years. Even the best artists tend to find a groove, mine it, and eventually settle down to crank out gradually less adventurous, more derivative and repetitive stuff. Some end up as parodies of themselves. To my eye Steve McCurry has followed this arc. His journeys through Afghanistan at the time of the Soviet occupation are the stuff of legend, his Kodachrome work pitch-perfect. His body of work from Central Asia is astonishing. But how do you top that? Having thumbed through some of his (multiple) recent books, it's hard to avoid the impression that he's strip-mining his own legacy and becoming a consumer brand."
Mark Rouleau: "I was at the library about a year ago and saw a book of Steve McCurry's portraits. That might even have been the title of the book. At any rate, I flipped through it, page after page of people from around the world glaring and scowling at the camera like the Afghan girl. 'A book of pictures of people who aren't happy having their picture taken' indeed."
Stan B.: "If it’s anything that spoils a portrait for me, it’s a smiling face. Automatically reduces it to a snapshot. Doesn’t mean you have to look like a badass—just anything other than...a smiley face! Sometimes, I’ll swallow the happy shot of a stranger just to get them relaxed and get it outta the way—before I ask them, 'How 'bout a serious one now?' Or, I’ll just futz around with the camera controls until the subject starts losing patience (and their smile) with the incompetent before them...."
Mike replies: I used to get through it by taking two rolls and then slowing way down and taking an almost-break. Then they seemed to be ready to be themselves. I should do an article about missing portraiture. I can't even give portraits away for free now.
Albert Smith: "I was fortunate to have met McCurry when he came to the College in town to donate a print of the Afghan Girl to the photography department for display. While there they had an exhibit of many of his other works (many in this book), and for all the hype about being able to pull up anything in seconds on the web, nothing beats a real print with gallery lighting. I just kept looking at the photos impressed by the quality. He was personable and answered any questions.
"I took the opportunity to verify and settle debate that raged on the various Nikon-centric sites that I was on in the early 2000s...what lens was used to photograph the Afghan Girl? It was the classic 105mm ƒ/2.5 which settled many an argument on those sites."
Tom Burke: "Interesting how information changes perception...I've got a McCurry book, Untold, which (I think) explains how he came to take some of his best-known pictures, and I liked it. Then I read some of the online articles about the edits to pictures he'd taken, and Tony Northrup's articles about Afghan Girl, and my view changed. I don't think I've looked at that book since.
"I think you're wrong to put Afghan Girl, Migrant Mother, and Karsh's Churchill in the same category. Sharbat Gula was a child, and had no agency in the events of that day. The migrant mother had some, even if only to say 'No' to Lange (but she didn't); and I think we can assume that even if he was annoyed, Churchill remained entirely in control of the proceedings. No comparison there at all, IMHO, even without Tony Northrup's points."
Mike replies: Yes, of course, but, Tom, he's not hurting her. Taking a picture of someone neither hurts them nor "steals their soul" or anything else in the way of damage. If a photographer forces a child to become naked, or do something repellent, then of course it's wrong. But to pose a schoolgirl for a while, unless you have some sort of proof of bullying or berating or of the photographer overriding her protestations, it's just not harm. No harm no foul, as they say.
I've photographed lots of kids I simply encountered. Strangers to me. Usually I asked their parents, if they were nearby and it seemed polite. Many times the kids didn't even know they were in a picture. Sometimes I asked them to cooperate, and they did. One of my favorites is of a kid at a playground doing a flip off a swing. I'd been talking to him and complimenting him on his athleticism. He was old enough to be at the park without his parents. I asked him if he'd do it a few more times so I could take a picture. He did it a few more times. How is that harm? He was about 12 and he was perfectly friendly, as was I. I was there with Xander who was about four at the time. I thought of this because page 97 in the book I'll review tomorrow, Ernst Hass: New York in Color 1952–1962, shows a picture of a girl on a swing. Seems highly unlikely Haas got her consent before taking that picture.
In the U.S., people don't own legally-taken images of themselves, nor do they have to consent to it being taken. (See Nussenzweig v. DiCorcia.) From a socio-political standpoint, if we stand by while the idea gets going that just being photographed constitutes harm done, and the idea becomes widespread and bigotry gets calcified (as I think it has already started to do), then the whole project of deliberately documenting life on the fly with a camera is pretty much done....
Alex G.: "I had occasion to think about Steve McCurry recently and I realized that I don't have much use for him any more. I appreciate his visual language: the use of color and the grace of his compositions (though he slipped a lot in my estimation when we learned that many of these shots were less than truthful). But the whole project of being Steve McCurry feels completely out of date in a world where people living in India, S.E. Asia, and elsewhere are perfectly capable of capturing their own lives. I'd rather see people as they see themselves. Perhaps I've been reading too much Ibram X. Kendi, but I've come to think that McCurry's work and similar reflects a colonialist and racist mindset. I don't mean that McCurry is a white nationalist or consciously racist. But the status quo—the way we, in the 'West' frame our relationship with these cultures and nations—needs to evolve. At this point, I'd much rather support the work of Asian photographers. Maybe you can highlight a few of these."
Ben Marks: "Re 'Mike replies: I used to get through it by taking two rolls and then slowing way down and taking an almost-break. Then they seemed to be ready to be themselves. I should do an article about missing portraiture. I can't even give portraits away for free now.' When I was in college in the 1980s, a friend of mine and I asked mutual friends to come sit/stand/cavort for portraits. We were trying to learn how to make portraits with the equipment we had...it was amateurs posing amateurs, if you know what I mean. We were each using our own cameras, and each of us quickly discovered that the first three rolls of film rarely contained the 'keeper' from the session. It was almost as if it took roughly 100 pictures for even our friends to stop being as self-conscious as they appeared in those initial shots (and they say boredom is a bad thing). Being impecunious college students, we stopped loading film in our cameras for the first 100 clicks or so under the theory that the images were wasted anyway and film was our biggest expense. And the experiment turned out well. I still treasure those portraits, the best of which I printed on Ilford Galerie matte paper. The goal was to present each sitter with a portrait that they thought of as an authentic representation...not easy, given the disconnect between how we see, or hope to see, ourselves and what a camera actually records."
Mike replies: My father, who was an amateur but had publication credits, used to call them "B-clicks." He would set the camera on B and shoot away for a while. Then when the subjects loosened up he'd put film in.
Jayanand Govindaraj: "This consent business is a rich-nation fad. What I would say is that it is probably not prudent to apply one's own cultural bias onto other cultures that we do not readily understand. In Chennai, India, where I do my street photography, hardly any parent or child is unhappy at having their photographs taken, knowingly or unknowingly, or will react with anything other than delight when they see their images on the rear LCD panel—and you will see this across religions, be it Hindu, Muslim or Christian.
"Of course, when I am photographing in Europe or USA, I am careful to have local friends with me, or join a street photography group on a photo walk!"
