Andrew Heller's Annotated Bibliography #3

Observation

In this photograph an African American boy has torn the lid off of a fire hydrant and has sent a blast of water gushing into the street. The boy appears to be young and is perhaps in his teenage years. With the water gushing into the street, several children have decided to play in and around the water. The children are all black and the street is located in an urban, but not dirty part of the city. Several of the children playing in the water have their bathing suits on and/or their clothes taken off. There are adults and/or older teenagers watching from various stoops, and there are two cars parked on the street that are similar models. There are several more older looking people standing behind the cars looking on at the children playing in the street. The boy opening the fire hydrant is wearing jeans and sneakers, while the other boys seem to be wearing t-shirts and jeans. A girl is wearing a dress with formal shoes along the left side of the picture, and the street appears to be wider than usual for a city. Finally, the houses along the street are similar in style to what would typically be seen in a city, and besides the can in the bottom right corner, there is very little litter in the streets and on the sidewalk.

Inferences

I was inspired by Lyndsay's annotated bibliography to choose the same picture because she noted that the picture came from The Sweet Flypaper of Life, which Decarava completed with Langston Hughes. Over the course of my studies, I have grown to admire Hughes for his work during the Harlem Renaissance. I, too and Dreams are two of Hughes' works that I remember fondly for their short, but empowering themes calling for equality, and I wanted to see how his themes compared to Decarava's. Functioning as a commentary on issues of pride, racism, and the struggle of life as experienced by the negro community in Harlem, the book is comprised of 140 of Decarava's photographs and illustrate the monologue of a fictional character named Sister Mary Bradley that is written by Hughes (Hughes & Decarava). At first glance, this photo perfectly speaks to the subjects that the book is trying to comment on. It is presumably a warm day in the setting of the picture; hence why the child felt the need to take the lid off of the hydrant. Also, no one in the picture seems to be responding negatively to the technical act of vandalism being committed by taking off the fire hydrant. This could support the fact that its a hot day outside, but could also be interpreted in a broader sense as an approval to destroy the municipalities of the white man. The fact that two cars of the same model are parked on the street makes me think that the people living in the community earn a similar income, and the similar state of the children's clothing could also support this. In reference to the book's theme however, the scene appears to be one that is quite common in American mythology, but adds racial diversification with the exclusion of any white people. Scenes of kids or adults breaking fire hydrants in the city on a hot day are quite common, and it could be seen that Decarava took this image to show how this scene is similar to one many have seen before. Furthermore, due to the commonplace of the picture, I believe that Decarava included the image  to show the similarities that exist between white urban culture and black urban culture and thus create the theme that, regardless of race, we are all the same in the context of how we go about our daily lives. It is clear to me that Hughes and Decararva created this book, as well as this picture, to highlight the pride existing within African American communities and to also exemplify the sameness that exists between all people.


 Decaraca, Roy and Langston Hughes. The Sweet Flypaper of Life. New York City: Simon and Schuster, 1955. Print.

Amber McNeila/Annotated Bibliography #3

Observation:

The photograph features a child sitting at the bottom of a staircase, with his/her body facing towards the left of the image. The stairs draw the viewers eye to the right of the image despite a lack of anything there, due to the way the photo was cropped. The child is wearing a light and dark colored striped shirt and well as pants rolled up to his/her knees. He/She is also wearing sneakers. To the left of the image are at least two trashcans and an iron fence running vertically, that would seem to tower over the child. The brick wall directly to the right of the fence has much stronger horizontal than vertical line. The poles to the railings are very detailed, as if they are from an early decade. The area appears quite clean and a window of set of doors are hidden behind the staircase. There is a light beyond the iron fence and the child appears to be looking in that direction. The railing is angled from the top right corner to just above the child's head. The child has his/her hands placed in his/her knees, almost peacefully. The lighting in the photo is also emphasized on the top of the railing as well as the stairs. What lies at the top of the stairs as well what is to the left of the trashcans is left unknown to the viewer. 

Inference:

The following image seems to depict what child does on a typical day in Harlem. It can be inferred that the location is Harlem because Roy DeCarava is known to photograph there. The child is the focal point of the image because DeCarava searched to often find himself in his photography, he states, “I forced everything out of that print so the observer could feel what I felt as a kid” (Duganne 135). The child remains alone in the image to signify the loneliness he felt throughout his childhood. DeCarava and his widowed mother (with whom he spent the majority of his life) moved around a lot. Often times the neighborhoods were filled with Hispanic, Irish and Italian families and only a few African American families (133). The way in which the railing guides the viewers eye to the child may almost represent the solemnity DeCarava felt and what the viewer to understand. 

The light just beyond the fence seems to represent a type of hope or a place where DeCarava felt that he fit in, such as the one he finds in photography. As we have studied photography we have learned that the different types serve different purposes. Documentary photography seems to capture a point in time and studio photography seems to remain more contrived and for the need to capture perfection in a single frame. DeCarava proves that it does not need to represent a social issue or stance on matters of race or inequalities for the group as a whole. Sometimes photography is used for the purpose of self-identification and self-fulfillment. It is not always easy to express emotions in words and pictures are a good way yo express those feelings. This point is supported by the claim, “While DeCarava also sought to use notions of family to understand his sense of self or in Frazer’s terms, what makes him a “human being”, for him the African American family provided not a means of socialization, but a way to gain access, a he had done through his photograph Hallway, to the childhood memories, fears and desires that made up his inner, psychic life” (151). In a time of racial injustices it seems that photographers could capture what events were occurring at the time, but not always how people felt about them.

His use of the photographic concept of framing is very evident in this particular image. The way he does not allow the viewer to see beyond the fence, to the right of the stairs, to the top of the stairs, and to the left of the trashcans. The lack of information may also represent DeCarava's  inability to call a single place home with the constant traveling from place to place. The lack of location also forces viewers to look at the image beyond the context. Far too often the audience of a photograph forces a perspective on an image when all of the information in question is provided for the viewer. In discussing DeCarava's pieces John Kouwenhoven, author of The Columbia Historical Portrait of New York  asserts, “—that a picture of something is not the thing itself, but somebody’s way of looking at it. Even in the most representational pictures, what is shown may tell us less than we can learn from the manner in which it was presented or the point of view from which it is seen” (137). Photography can be a form of self-reflection, almost like a mirror and by cropping the image and manipulating it, the viewer is forced to identify with more than one image to completely gain a more well-rounded and conceptual understanding of the self. This concept of the self can again relate back to the idea of beauty and what it truly means. In regards to studio photography, the viewer may find a less authentic version of his or herself in comparison to a documentary style photograph.

Annotative Bibliography

Father and Child, Harlem, New York, by Roy DeCarava

Observation

In this photo I see a black man and a black child. The child is clutching the face of the man and kissing him on the cheek. Both subjects appear to be wearing simple t-shirts. There is a glass in the frame, suggesting the subjects are in the kitchen. The room is dimly lit, and the photograph itself has an orange tint. The photo also appears to be flipped 90 degrees to make it on its side.

Inference

In reading the excerpt from, Roy DeCarava, Harlem, and the Psychic Self, by Erina Duganne it became apparent that DeCarava was intent on making his photography much more than just a simple image. He wanted to start a revolution in the art of photography and take a simple image and create an abstract meaning that was up for interpretation to his audience. The chapter also discussed some of the intimate details of DeCarava's childhood and life. DeCarava was raised by a single, widowed mother. They moved around Harlem frequently and lived in neighborhoods heavily populated by Hispanic, Irish, and Italian Americans rather than African Americans. He felt very out of place as a child and often used that solitude as a subject for interpretation in his photographs. Judging by the title of the photograph, I believe that this is a a picture of a father and his child. I believe that DeCarava's inspiration for this photograph stems from the feelings that he probably typically had growing up without a father of his own. 

"'That picture, with its lack of space and light, expressed what I felt as a six-year-old but was not able to express then' In this passage, DeCarava suggests that rather than literally represent the exact hallway in which he grew up, he sought to use his representation of this corridor to assimilate his past, again not to fix it, but to allow it to generate new meanings both in his present and future." (Duganne 134)

It is because of this specific passage that I believe that DeCarava would have taken this picture not only for his audience to interpret, but also for his own benefit. I believe that for him to take this photo he would have had to confront his past and be able to move forward in his own personal struggle. I think that the darkness in the picture illustrates the sadness in this struggle; however, the obvious love between the father and child in the photograph displays his positive journey towards moving on from the negative experiences of his past.


Works Cited

Duganne, Erina. "Chapter 4." The Self in Black and White: Race and Subjectivity in Postwar American Photography. Hanover, NH: Dartmouth College, 2010. 132-67. Print.

Annotated Bib #3

Observation

- This photo features two young boys sitting on a sidewalk in front of two large doors, which possibly opens to a factory. The one child is black, and the other boy is white. They are both between the ages of 6-8 years old. They are dressed in a similar fashion both wearing overalls with striped shirts underneath. The black boy has his right hand clinched as if he is holding something, or observing and biting his nails. The white boy is watching something or someone because of his still face something has his attention. On the ground behind the boys is a broken pipe or something the boys could have been playing with before this image was captured. There are two large steel doors behind the boys that leads to a factory or some industrial type place because of the tools in front of the door (upper right corner of the picture). The boys are also sitting near a manhole, which could have something to do with the place behind them.

Inference

- In Duganne's essay on Roy DeCarava, she includes insightful comments on DeCarava's personal life which shows why he captured images the way he did. Duganne states, "DeCarava shares an unmediated relationship with this content, his efforts to use these photographs of Harlem to explore concepts of race and self- including those childhood memories, fears, and desires that made up his inner, psyche life-have frequently been overlooked" (132). This quote shows why DeCarava captured Harlem the way he did. Many of his photos were of places that reflected his childhood memory. According to Duganne's essay, "DeCarava repeatedly moved around Harlem as a child, living in neighborhoods that were often more Hispanic, Irish, and Italian than African Americans" (133). This quote reflects on DeCarava's childhood and how he moved around Harlem a lot, and was around many other races of people instead of his own. This could be why he captured this image of a "African American" boy and a child that could be Hispanic, Irish, Italian, or something else. He inspired to reconnect with his roots and ethnicity by using photography. This photo shows a diverse area with two young boys of two different races sitting together without confrontation. DeCarava is quoted, "So I was always the new kid on the block. I never had a chance to take roots where there does exist, in poor areas, a history- a tradition (133). This photos reflects on his childhood and who he grew up around. In the community he grew up in similar to the photo, race was not the issue in a poor northern city, and so this photo symbolizes something greater than just skin color. With the youth hate is never natural it is taught, and so young children of all color usually get along together. DeCarava could be showing us that with his images that his community was not concerned with race since it was a universal struggle in the neighborhoods but people were close to each other because they lived on the same street.

Lyndsay Tipton - Studio vs. Documentary Photography

Studio and documentary photography seem like two very different branches stemming from the same tree. Studio photography seems much more stiff to me, which in my mind, would make it the more "controlled" of the two. As we discussed back during week one about Keita, often times a person would have a large say in the way that they were photographed. Sometimes they would ask to have their most prized possessions in the photos with them. They may choose to dress a certain way that makes them appear "better looking" or more wealthy. On one hand, these photos are important because they are exact portrayals of what the photographer's customers wanted. On the other hand, often times those portrayals were not necessarily true, so they cannot be looked at as an honest representation of that person or of the black community as a whole.

Documentary photography is entirely different from studio photography in the sense that it is not something that is being paid for. Studio photographers would have customers come to their studio and pay to have their picture taken. Documentary photographers would go out and into the community and take photographs of people that were doing every day things and were not necessarily prepared to be having their picture taken, This type of photography is much less controlled in that way. I think that what this means for the photographer and the person being photographed is that they are producing a much more honest image to the viewer. They are creating something that can be seen as historically accurate and could be used to show any number of people exactly what it was like to be a black person during the particular time period in which the photograph was taken (the Harlem Renaissance, for example). 

Annotated Bib #3 Lyndsay Tipton

Observation: The setting of this photograph seems to be a city street. Cars are lined up, parked along the curb and the houses are row homes, with children sitting and standing on their stoops. There are children out in the street as well. One of them is riding a bike. Another boy, who appears to be somewhat older has opened the fire hydrant and is spraying the street with water, which is now flooded. Some other young children are playing and standing in the water. There are no adults in the street. It looks as though a few of the figures on the stoops could be adults, but they are off in the background, not directly involved in what is happening in the photograph. 

Inference: The reason that I chose this photograph is because it is taken from DeCarava's book (which he did with Langston Hughes) entitled, The Sweet Flypaper of Life. One of DeCarava's aims as a photographer was to capture black life in a way that hadn't been done before: from within the community. He did not aim to have any political or sociological points in his art. What he wanted to do was showcase the domestic, every day life of the black American. This photograph as a single piece of art can definitely show a part of what it was to be an African American child in Harlem during the Harlem Renaissance. There wasn't any extra money for toys or outings or anything like that. Kids had to have fun where and when they could, just like these children in the photograph who have found a moment of fun in the water covered streets. It also shows what the areas that blacks might be living in looked like. Although they are not necessarily the focus of this photo, the row homes are included as well as a few cars. We, as viewers, could potentially use these as a reference point for the types of homes or cars that African Americans during the Harlem Renaissance may have had. The Sweet Flypaper of Life is what really interested me, however. DeCarava teamed his photographs with Langston Hughes' words to tell the story of a black woman living in Harlem. Through her story, they were able to tell the every day life stories of so many black individuals from the time period. Rather than Hughes simply writing a book or DeCarava simply snapping a few photos, they were able to combine their talents to truly show a side of black life that had not previously been captured before. 

Citations:

"Black-And-White Black America." NPR. NPR, n.d. Web. 28 Sept. 2015.

Kennedy, Randy. "Roy DeCarava, Harlem Insider Who Photographed Ordinary Life, Dies at 89." The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 Oct. 2009. Web. 28 Sept. 2015.

Annotated Bib #3 Kaitlyn Bavuso

Two men, subway. New York. 1954

Observation: 

     There are stairs leading down to the subway. There is two railings on either side. There is a one black man and one white man standing at the base of each of the steps. They are facing in the opposite direction. The white man face is looking ahead, while the African American head is facing down towards the floor. Both are dressed in equal fashion. They are standing on a platform. They are waiting for the subway train.

Inference: 

    After analyzing this photograph the message is simple, as it subtly demonstrates the racial divide between the white and African American community metaphorically. DeCarava was known to use metaphors to rely messages within his simplistic photographs. “DeCarava’s masterful control of tonal ranges of deep blacks in photographic palette has had metaphoric implications” (Epilogue Dawoud Bey & Act of Reciprocity).  Their positions of on their side of the railing subtly demonstrates possible equality, yet realistically they are not equal because of racial background. The white man on the left, is staring straight out into the empty railway, which could give the impression that he has no remorse or effect on racial inequality. The African American on the right hand side, appears to be looking downward,  as if he is ashamed or should be ashamed of his racial background. What is interesting is the attire in which both men are wearing. They both seem to be very well dressed, both wearing suit-jackets, and one with hat and one with a scarf.  They both are dressed very well,  but they are not equal because of their racial background. What really was interesting was the staircase itself. Typically staircases are associated with the idea of ascension, metaphorically meaning there is something better is on top. In this instance, the photograph depicts the angle of it facing downwards, which could indicate the tension and dismal aspect of the racial divide between the two communities. The staircase reminds me of when DeCarava talks about photograph “Hallway”. He described that the Hallway, dark , long and gloomy, left a negative effect towards his childhood growing up in New York. “ Not just one hallway, but all the hallways I grew up in were poor, badly lit, and confining… It was frightening, it was scary, and it was depressing”(Duganne 134-135).  It has the same effect of racial divide among the city of Harlem, which is where he grew up. The staircase has similar taste of dark and gloomy as it leads down to the subway where the two men are standing opposite of each other. It appears to open because of the empty subway, but the stance of two men make a create a restrictive tension between the two cultures. 

DeCarava, Roy. Two Men Subway Stairs. 1954. New York. Alan Thomas on Roy DeCarava. Web. 23 Sept. 2015.

Annotated Bibliography #3 De Carava

In the picture, I see a girl in a desolate place. The place looks messy. I see a lot of trash on the ground. I wonder if the place used to be in the process of development and stopped, and now it is not cared. She is wearing a white dress, perhaps, a wedding dress? She is wearing a crown as well. She looks like a princess. It is interesting that there is a word written on the wall in the background of the picture, PRINCE. Is she looking for her prince in this isolated place? Maybe De Carava is trying to depict desolate life of black, and their effort to find a hope, prince. 
The style of the picture, black and white, embraces the artistic mood in the way make the photo more serious. 
I see the back side of the girl bright, and where opposite side, where she is looking or headed, is dark. Does it give the interpretation of her dark, hopeless future?

The title of this photograph is Graduation. According to Kennedy, the girl is in a pristine graduation dress. Roy DeCarava, Harlem, and the Psychic Self analyzes this photo as a girl who ignores all the hopeless surroundings but pays attention on the billboard of Chevrolet  new model. The author interprets her formal attire as a "triumph over the desolation around her" (141). 

As the author discusses about "point of view" and "style" by Kouwenhoven in Roy DeCarava, Harlem, and the Psychic Self chapter four, we can use this photograph by DeCarava as an example. DeCarava uses a style of black and white. Then there is a dark shadow on the right side of the photo from the audience position, and a bright side on the left. The girl in the photo seems to be walking towards the dark shadow. It is possible for a person to take this scene as "'tragedy,' or that she will not overcome the wretchedness of her environment" (141). It all depends on the point of view. According to the article, "the ambiguity created between the girl and the shadows encourages a metaphoric as opposed to literal reading of DeCarava's photograph" (141).

Reading the article Roy DeCarava, Harlem, and the Psychic Self,  I wanted to chose a picture that fits DeCarava's concern, "'literalness,' or... 'real,'" and a content that is not only the subject matter of "a documentary value" but that explores "concepts of race and self-including childhood memories, fears, and desires..." (132). 

This photo cause various interpretation such as a brave, strong girl walking alone the hardship of life focusing on the challenge and hope or a girl considering giving up the life and falling into the darkness. I cannot tell whether the girl is hopeful or hopeless regardless the surroundings. I agree with Kennedy's statement, "Mr. DeCarava...came to be regarded as the founder of a school of African-American photography that broke with the social documentary traditions of his time". In deed, DeCarava has succeeded in taking the realness that would reveal the race and self in his photo. This photo does not just record the moment as a documentary photograph, but it tells something about the city, black life, and the society. 



Kennedy, Randy. "Roy DeCarava, Harlem Insider Who Photographed Ordinary Life, Dies at 89." The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 Oct. 2009. Web. 28 Sept. 2015.

Alex Deliso -- Annotated Bib no.3

Observation:

There are four boys, three of which are standing on raised areas above the fourth. The three boys are dressed in long pants, dress shoes, long-sleeve dress shirts, while the boy below them is wearing a collared T-shirt and jeans. At least two of the boys above are wearing ties, and none of the boys standing above are standing conventional spots (they are all on ledges and windowsills as opposed to the stairs). The boy below is standing under a fire escape holding up what appears to be a rod of some sort. The others are looking down at him. To the right of the boy on the ground is a barred window. At the top of the rightmost set of stairs is a sign that reads “La Blanche Lingerie”. The leftmost boy is holding his arms out and bracing them against the balcony next to him, while the rightmost boy is sitting on the railing.

Inference:

As quoted by the excerpt from Roy DeCarava, Harlem, and the Psychic Self, DeCarava said that he “was always the new kid on the block. [He] never had a chance to take roots where there does exist, in poor areas, a history—a tradition” (134). With this in mind, this photograph can be interpreted as a social commentary—where the “new kid” is on a literal lower-level from those from a higher class, which can be represented through the “higher-leveled” kids’ clothing. However, DeCarava outright denounces this idea of social commentary in his photographs (149), so it may not be accurate to bounce it off of those ideals. Even with DeCarava’s word about his authorial intent, the photographs by themselves can still hold these ideals if the context is not given. If DeCarava is removed from the equation and only the photo stands alone, this photo can easily represent the story of an outsider who is seen as lesser than the others because he has not conformed. The emphasis is placed on the white shirts and the “blanche lingerie” sign that contrast greatly with the darker backdrop, which may represent conforming to “white” standards, but they still retain their original presence despite this supposed change in ideals.

Alex Deliso -- Studio vs. Documentary Photos

                Both studio and documentary are taken with specific intent, although the purposes for both vary drastically. Studio is more controlled because it only takes the confines of the small area and manipulates it until it matches the photographer’s (and sometimes the subject’s) desires. Documentary is harder to control because it takes place in the context of the real world, and even though the picture may be taken to skew a particular vantage, there will always been an opposing vantage that can potentially contradict the message that the image conveys.

                Documentary photos also contain a larger amount of historical context that coincides with it, while studio photos can be taken for fun and entertainment. Even the documentary photos that are taken for fun will still contain historical influence simply because of the fact that they are always tied to the real world, while studio photos are mostly self-contained. Both of them rely on the audience heavily; while the pictures can stand on their own, without the necessary background knowledge, some of the meaning behind the pictures may be lost. Gordon’s work during the 1940’s in particular relies on the knowledge of the movements in Harlem—the picture I posted for my annotation on his work holds a lot of political connotations to those who are knowledgeable about that topic, but it may look innocuous to the uninformed viewer. Studio photos, such as Keita’s work, also are better able to draw emphasis on the individuals within the picture, while documentary photos can emphasize the environment around them.

Amber McNeila/Studio vs. Documentary Photography

Photography is an art form that serves a purpose beyond taking a picture of something, it captures a moment in time. This semester we have been studying different forms of photography, such as studio and documentary photography. The primary similarity between the two forms is that they both evoke some sort of emotion or analysis. No matter what the subject matter, the photographs force the viewer to think. In Keita and Sidebe's case the viewers may be analyzing the image to see  how wealthy the person in the photographs are or their social status. In Gordon Park's case, the viewer would have more of an intimate connection to the photograph because most of his images captured racial injustices and poverty. Both images serve to connect with a specific audience as well as photograph groups of people that were neglected in mainstream photography. Both types used men, women, and children as the subject material and black and white film was the medium. 

Despite the similarities in these types of photography, there are a few differences. The first as mentioned is the purpose of the photographs. documentary photography is supposed to photograph the raw truth as well as the minor details that go on in life. It captures the essence of everything. Studio photography seems to have a more narrow focus. The images Keita and Sidebe captured were often taken for the subjects to send to family members, friends or other loved ones. The subjects often dressed in nice clothing and posed with props or other individuals. The images appeared staged. It tries to portray some sort of perfection despite the apparent masquerade. The images almost seem as though they lack authenticity and the poses do not always appear natural.

In documentary photography, the images do not always have the same aesthetic quality as the studio photography nor is the subject almost always people, but they do have an organic appearance to them. The photo does not seem contrived or manipulated, although some photographs were definitely taken at specific angles to enhance certain aspects of the image and focus the audiences attention to a specific area. An example is the image i posted last week. The lines in the image draw the viewer towards the child with a missing limb, not to any other point in the image. The point of documentary photography is not to capture a pretty face. A pretty face does not always tell an accurate story. Besides there are no books that states that beauty needs to lie solely in the clothes worn or mood captured in the image. Beauty does not equate to happiness. Sometimes the most beautiful moments are the most vulnerable ones because they portray the essence of humanity and existence. Documentary photography often displays the truth whether the viewer wants to see it or not.  Whoever coined the expression "picture perfect" never bothered to zoom out of a studio photography lens.  

Discussion #3

European and American photographers traveled along the trade route in 1845. African photographers, studios or traveling photographers, started in 1860s. 

Although photography is an American thing, African photography is structured by African cultural values. The photography contains the traditional clothing, accessories, African textiles and so on. Later on, we can see how much influence of the colonization was given to the African in the photographs like people in the western background setting or wearing western accessories while dressing up in the traditional clothing, traditional fitting pose or looks on the faces. However, identity was important for Africans that not only for portraits and postcards, but also for identity cards people got pictures taken. 

The photographs from early time, American and African photographies are very similar that it is hard to tell American photography to African or vice versa. Postcards give clues to us to learn the process of development of West African studio photography. Between 1890s and 1930s, postcards played a big roll as records of local events, local characteristics, colonial propaganda and cultures.

European photographers typically included colonial and native life and points of interest in West Africa. For example, Fortier, one of the most popular European photographer, photographed post office, train station, the mosque, market, a butcher’s shop, the arrival of a caravan transporting salt in Timbuktu, and African people. On the other hand, African photographers like Lisk-Carew photographed portraits of local and British clienteles and official pictures for the colonial administration. 

The studio photography sounds to me more like art. As Okwui Enwezor says on page 28, the studio is a like a stage and the sitters are the actors or actress who show themselves as who they are or who create their images as who they desire to be by acting. For example, Keita's photography includes fancy looking clothing, accessories, settings, background, and so on. His photographs are like pieces of art. His photographs are artistic. He makes the sitters look fabulous in the picture, and he organizes things so that everything fits in the picture perfectly looking good. 
Studio photography focuses more on the sitters and their identities, whereas documentary photography focuses on the daily base. What people do in their daily life and routine, what happens in society, and what the city looks like during that particular time. For example, Gordon focuses on the daily lives like fisher, random people on the street, stores in New York City, a flyer on the street wall, and so on. His photograph has a purpose like letting the outsiders know what goes on in the cities.

Annotated Bibliography #4 Assignment

Erina Duganne, in her article, “Roy DeCarava, Harlem, and the Psychic Self,” is interested in how anthologies and exhibits are curated and what decisions get made, so as to portray a particular curator’s vision. She shows what happens to individual artists’ visions when their photographs are taken out of the context of their entire body of work and placed beside other photographers’ work. In particular she writes about DeCarava and Edward Steichen’s use and rejection of DeCarava’s photographs for the The Family of Man exhibit. Duganne also reads DeCarava’s way of looking at Harlem (especially when published alongside Langston Hughes’ writing in the book Flypaper) against Aaron Siskind’s portraits of the same place, arguing that DeCarava photographs in search of belonging whereas Siskind—a white photographer—was photographing to remain “objective.” DeCarava was immersing himself in Harlem (even though he remained somewhat detached, creating a tension in his photographs), she furthers, whereas Siskind was purposely distancing himself… However, Duganne also implies that both photographers were trying to stretch the definition of documentary photography. DeCarava was struggling, she writes, to “transcend photography’s literalism,” and Siskind was interested in how to get his own psychic experience into the photograph’s documentary frame. Ultimately, Duganne proposes that DeCarava was working through issues concerning his own racial identity while photographing in Harlem. Like contemporary photographer Dawoud Bey (who says that he wants to photograph persons without offering the viewer the context of their environment), Duganne cautions the viewer against reading DeCarava’s pictures reductively. His photographs, she concludes, “exist and participate in a complex network of social and psychic relations whose meanings are shaped by the broader societal forces and historical context in which they are embedded” (Duganne 165). Her subsequent reading in “Epilogue: Dawoud Bey and the Act of Reciprocity” of Bey’s rejection of the documentary genre and championing of the studio photograph is really interesting, as it points to how the boundaries of the documentary couldn’t stretch far enough, at least for Bey, when it came to representing race through the photographic lens…

Like Bey, this next week’s featured contemporary African photographer, Samuel Fosso, also champions the studio portrait—but for different reasons. Please read about Fosso’s photographic process (Samuel Fosso’s “Here’s Looking at Me” in The Guardian 27 June 2002:

http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2002/jun/27/artsfeatures2

& study Fosso’s photographs and write Annotated Bibliography #4 on one of Fosso’s studio self-portraits. (Due October 5 at midnight.)

At some point during the week read Frantz Fanon’s “Algeria Unveiled” in your photocopied packet and watch Isaac Julien’s Black Skin, White Mask (1996) on Youtube (there are five parts and here is the link to the first part which links automatically sequentially to the next four parts): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDpLmQEwjLM

I look forward to receiving this week’s Annotated Bibliography #3 this coming Monday.