I had been looking for the shooting scripts mentioned in Todd Hido’s book that were created by Roy Stryker for the FSA photographers.

The FSA series was about highlighting the socio-economic conditions of the US which makes an interesting contrast that they rejected some of the images in such an abrupt way. It really resonated with me over the idea that Roland Barthes discussed in ‘How to Live Together’ about those that we exclude from our communities but seek to ‘guard’ them, seemingly to create the comparison to ‘the other’ something that seems at odds with what the FSA photographs were aiming to achieve.

Roy Stryker would ‘Kill’ and image by punching a hole through the negative if it was deemed not good enough to be printed, though interestingly enough, some of these images have survived to be catalogued by the Library of Congress along with the much more famous images, such as ‘Migrant Mother’ (Lange, 1936). The photographers were unhappy with this, however he continued to punch holes in the images up until 1939 (Taylor, 2017). It is worth noting that Stryker was an economist and may not have seen the value of such images, he would also approach the task of the FSA by looking at process over the human story, this is noted in one of the shooting scripts that contains a note regarding Dorothea Lange’s concern that there was far too much emphasis on ‘economic setup’ and not enough consideration to the people that were impacted by it (Stryker, 1939). 

The hole in the image is striking and creates a clear subtext of its rejection by focusing the reader directly at this floating black disk, before considering the rest of the image (Marks, 2018). The hole creates an additional meaning to the image, some of which have been punched in areas that create an uneasy feel to the image itself. The image of the farmer (fig. 1) has been punched straight through the face, rendering the subject unrecognizable, although the caption states that it could be ‘Mr Tronson,’ we cannot be sure. When I read this image I am immediately drawn to the black circle in the center of it and know that the subject is living in potential poverty, his story was not deemed important enough to include and be seen.

This seems to contradict what Susan Sontag writes of the FSA project as a whole, stating that the very purpose of the images was to show the value of the persons depicted in order to convince the middle-classes that “The poor were really poor.” This form of rejection removes the re-usability of the images for any kind of reappraisal later on, they have now become valueless in the context of the initial work (Sontag, 1977, p.62).

Bibliography

Killed Negatives: Unseen Images of 1930s America (2018) [Exhibition]. Whitechapel Gallery, London. 16 May 2018-26 August 2018.

Marks, A., 2018. Hole Punched Voids Transform Rejected Photographs From the Great Depression. [Online] Available at: https://www.thisiscolossal.com/2018/07/hole-punched-voids-from-the-great-depression/ [Accessed 13 12 2019].

Mydans, C., 1936. Untitled negative showing South River, old high school at traffic junction, New Jersey. [Art] (Library of Congress).

Rothstein, A., 1935. Untitled photo, possibly related to: Old stage coach tavern near Huntsville, Arkansas, now inhabited by rehabilitation client. [Art] (Library of Congress).

Russell, L., 1937. Untitled photo, possibly related to: Mr. Tronson, farmer near Wheelock, North Dakota. [Art] (Library of Congress).

Sontag, S. (1977). On photography. London: Penguin, p. 62.

Now that I am looking at taking my project on community into a broader look at the places that allow it to function, I have been reading Todd Hido’s book ‘On Landscape, Interiors, and the Nude’ (Hido, 2014), as I have come to his look at his night images of homes and how these become an image of the people and the relationships they represent. Hido provides multiple examples of this in his book, one of these is of a bed (Fig. 1) which is not necessarily just an image of a bed (considering the denotation vs the connotations of an image), it might be an image representing a relationship, it could also be about loneliness (Hido, 2014, p.66).

It is important to consider the meaning that a seemly simple image such as a building might have. My aim is to start looking at the architecture of community, through the civic buildings that people congregate. From my initial research into some of the local buildings near me, I am now keen to shoot a range of interiors as well as exterior, and eventual images, before I move on to images of people again.

I do not feel the need to shoot these as Hido has done with his buildings, at night (Fig. 2). However, his emphasis on ambiguity is something that I intend to take from reading his book. It is also a continuation of the work I have started on developing my sense of narrative and allowing the reader to ask the question “What’s going on here?” (Hido, 2014, p.28), and also posing more questions than answers. The danger of applying Hido’s approach wholy onto my own photography is to then create a contrived image, removed from the faithful representation of the subjects. It is something worth exploring and considering the impact on my work.

Setting a Stage

Hido discusses the need to set the stage, which is an area I may consider exploring. Hido works on his locations to create a sparse environment so that you can focus on the subject, creating the conditions that provides context, and so that his subjects (Or characters) are able to be natural withing. Hido says:

“You can have an amazing story to tell, but you have to get the setting right”

(Hido, 2014, p.97).

My approach to this kind of work has always been to photograph what is in front of me and be as faithful to the scene as I possibly can. As I developed over Positions and Practice however, I have come to consider the direction in terms of how much I impose onto the subject to move them away from a ‘performance’ presented to me. My role, as I have come to terms with, is to create the kind of image I want to tell, and the dialogue between the subject and myself is an ongoing process.

Roy Stryker’s ‘Shooting Scripts’

Hido mentions Roy Stryker’s use of ‘Shooting Scripts’ to guide the FSA photographers

“In order to create the feeling of a common experience”

(Hido, 2014, p.123)

which I feel might be an interesting place to start looking at for my own work, moving forward. Hido considers that these are the elements for telling a story, and creating a full body of work and useful inspiration. I intend to look at these and create some explorations based on them.

I have found through some research, this example Shooting script produced by Roy Stryker and the FSA on ‘The Small Town.’ My intention is to analyse this in greater detail and see if it will apply ton what I am aiming to accomplish with this part of my project.

Bibliography

Hido, T., 2001. #2133. [Photo].

Hido, T., 2006. #3557. [Photo].

Hido, T., 2014. Todd Hido on Landscapes, Interiors, and the Nude. New York: Aperture.

Library of Congress, 2011. Farm Security Administration/Office of War Information Written Records: Selected Documents. [Online]  Available at: Farm Security Administration/Office of War Information Written Records: Selected Documents [Accessed 11 12 2019].

Abstract

What started as an image taken to say thank you became a question about the continuing proliferation of images. Sharing images online transforms the image into a type of currency that seeks to provide validation for both authors and readers, this perpetuates the visual language of established societal norms through placation, morals and covert colonisation as a subtle blackmail. This is a subtle ebb which we are all complicit and must intentionally reconsider and reengage with the way we use images. Where futurity is concerned, it should begin in the unlearning and relearning of visual culture.

---

The Online Image as Currency

My 2-year-old daughter would receive many gifts over the festive period from my wife’s extended family as we made our annual pilgrimage to visit. “Make sure you take a picture of her wearing it and send it to your aunt.” In fact, all of the gifts that we received would need to be meticulously documented and cataloged so that these photographs could be shared with the donor of the present. Even though, as a photographer myself, I find that to photograph is almost a reflex action, and the ease and enjoyment with which I photograph even the most banal of subjects is a constant draw, I started to consider the value of these images we were being asked to record and what happens to this value once it has been received, once they are within the realm of the pervasiveness and democratization of photography.

The photograph can be thought of as a form of currency – a term that could be used to describe how images are used, and ultimately appropriated and how they inappropriately propose evidence and provide what Roland Barthes termed a certification of presence (Barthes, 1993, p. 87) in that we must provide others with an ongoing, online record of achievement, no matter how menial that might be This is the new accepted normal acknowledging the representative futurity of our present age. Currency as an acceptance of the ubiquity of images and need to show oneself to others. In this description of the image, photography becomes a form of transaction, promising to pay the bearer on demand, though not to be confused with the commercial sense of the term (photographic skills are of course exchanged for their monetary worth). The value I refer to is the emotional and moral exchange that also takes place through the prolific sharing of images. Images that are designed to reduce your own value, images that are designed to reduce the value of others through the intersection of gaze and the intersectionality this creates (Lutz & Collins, 1991, p. 135); Images that provide an emotive moment, one way or the other (Barthes, 1993, p. 27) resonating and lingering with us.

In the digital sphere, the inherent value of photographic images is becoming more and more quantified, albeit in a dilution of quality and recognized through the unattainable view of perfection that exists; the idealistic and fundamentally edited world of our lives, nothing more than a greatest hits compilation, which is part of the performative power of photography and one that is continuing the illusion and the pretence that extends all the way to a covert colonisation of these accepted norms by driving a homogenised globalized commodity sold as the ideal ‘Caucasian beauty’ which was documented by photographer Zed Nelson in his project ‘Love Me’ and published in 2009 (Nelson, 2009). This has been a growing digital entity as newer generations of technology savvy users enter into their online only worlds, but also an ever existing modus operandi unchallenged by the economics that drive and have driven it. 

The recipient of the image who views, is the most important when an image is used as currency, as a transaction. Our lives online are drawn from a tight editing process to seek visual gratification for something that may not even exist, yet we share them and expect acknowledgement for this idealistic life. This is a more readily understandable transaction occurring between the author and the reader of the image (Barthes, 1977, pp. 142-149). This author seeks validation that one has lived; the reader will provide that validation and appropriate the image to suit their own gratification. This is an emotional attribution to the image, one that forms a kind of tangible link to a virtual and devoid online world.

This virtual tangibility can be compared to sporting events – when we root for our team to win, we react in what is known as the ‘spectating brain,’ where we can put ourselves into the role of the athlete on the field and get a real sense of feeling, connection to the sport, and community spirit, without any verbal communication or actual and literal physical link to the act of taking part in the activity (Borreli, 2016). It is something that can be palpably felt through a TV screen, or through the plethora of mobile devices that we interact with daily. This neurological impact has also been attributed to a number of actions wherever emotion is also attached, we start to mirror those feelings after witnessing others perform, which then creates links and other implications in the way we read each other’s emotions and also how we empathize with them (Winerman, 2005, p. 48). 

Through the prolific sharing of images that takes place every single second, we aim to generate a validation and empathy from others. However, it could also be a ‘status quo’ that might need to be maintained through these visual transactions. If an emotional resonance is created from the image, then potentially it can be used as a method of placating others. A subtle politics is at play when used as a method of thanks, a kind of irrational behaviour for sending this kind of image, especially if the gift was not gratefully received, as was the case for items we received for our daughter. Not to be viewed as being ungrateful however, some of the items were not the most appropriate, in terms of the size of clothing or the age range of the toy given. In a reverse of the function of the initial image transaction that I discussed related to the internet, in the thank you scenario, the photograph appeases and validates the donor, and maintains the balance within the family unit. Although in most cases this is far from tenuous, it is a form of obscure blackmail, transmitting deeply held moral values and motives: the photograph becomes both a product and bait (Barthes, 1993, p. 92). The currency of the image is within the context and the a thank you is a punctuation that notes the end of the exchange.

After the transaction has happened, the image becomes essentially meaningless and removed from its intended use: its context now has been completed. The context falls away, however the image does not assume new meaning other than its denoted content, it is redundant and the thing that we photograph has been appropriated (Sontag, 1979, p. 4), in the sense that the image starts to fulfil us, and add value to our lives through the attribution of emotion. In this way the donor is now fulfilled in a way that may not happen through the simple thanks of a text message, letter, or simple email. They are visually stimulated in the knowing that the received gift has been put to good use, they can see this irrefutable ‘evidence’ that forms the tangible link, the emotional connection to object, person and place. These images may regain some of their value over time, re-appropriated by nostalgia and in the context of historical intrigue, however this is of course may only be if these images survive the digital process of capture and storage. Printed images have the power to be cherished in a way that digital images will not, or instead they become the property of data harvesting juggernauts and disappear into the cloud (Prix Pictet, 2019) only to be referenced and used to fine tune algorithms and serve you unattainable perfection once again.

The present image, the image captured in the moment, this image that has been used as thanks, is a perfunctory exchange but there are many images however, that are used to capture and create an intimate family record. These are shared online via ‘big tech’ of course, in an album that we created in the cloud where personal poignancy, and other more candid moments blend together with the thank you transaction becoming part of the nostalgia and ongoing narrative following the beautiful development of our child, familiar to many.

In essence, the thank you image transaction is part of the wider discussion on the complacent proliferation of images. If we view photography as a type of currency, it would be in the form of a traded commodity exchanged for emotional validation, whether positive, or more often than not, a negative one. It is a quiet rage that is provided in the exchange of images for validation, consuming images as we do; it is easy to skip over their value due to the deluge and instant replacement of them, and in the quest for even more images. Our culture encourages it, and capitalism demands it, defining our very freedom on the ability to continue consuming (Sontag, 1979, p. 178). The thank you image is just another part of this plurality that exists in photography. We placate, take more, and validate more, yet the need for more images continues. Perhaps the true resolution of validation comes from not photographing at all, or it is that the value lies within the exchange and the validation and not the image itself which is the medium and not the message (McLuhan, 1967).

Online Image currency is a paradigm of our digital cultural exchanges, which we are currently and knowingly passive. It may be important to unlearn in order to relearn this visual culture and gain true visual literacy, here is where the real validation should sit.

Bibliography

Barthes, R., 1977. Image, Music, Text. Translation edition ed. London: Fontana.

Barthes, R., 1993. Camera Lucida. London: Vintage.

Barthes, R., 1993. Mythologies. 1st Vintage Edition ed. London: Vintage.

Borreli, L., 2016. Sports Fan Science: How Watching Sports Games Affects The Mind And Body. [Online]  Available at: https://www.medicaldaily.com/mind-and-body-sports-fan-sports-games-388444 [Accessed 12 January 2019].

Lutz, C. & Collins, J., 1991. The Photograph as an intersection of Gazes: The Example of National Geographic. Visual Anthropology Review, 7(1), pp. 134-148.

McLuhan, M., 1967. The Medium is the Massage. Paperback ed. London: Penguin.

Nelson, Z., 2009. Love Me: Introduction. [Online] Available at: https://www.zednelson.com/?LoveMe:text [Accessed 27 January 2020].

Prix Pictet, 2019. A Lens on Sustainability: Consumption. Paris: Prix Pictet.

Sontag, S., 1979. On Photography. London: Penguin.

Winerman, L., 2005. The Mind’s Mirror. American Psychological Association , 36(9), p. 48.