June 2013
It's almost certain that when a photographer exhibits their work, they will hear from the mouth of some well-intentioned and innocent viewer the devastating question: "where was this taken," or even worse: "what does it mean." This is because few people (even photographers) enjoy and judge a photographic work beyond its thematic or (even worse in our days) its conceptual label.
The responsibility, of course, is ours, the photographers, who do not find the courage to guide the viewer's gaze to more abstract areas, which would consequently be more photographic. The way we exhibit our photographs is capable of trapping them in the obvious or, on the contrary, can help guide them to what, even if not achieved, constitutes their artistic goal.
With the most classic arrangement of photographs, that is, one based on thematic unity and/or conceptual message, we gain a larger audience, but we lose the more discerning viewers and turn our backs on the artistically educational character of an exhibition. The audience is educated and won over gradually.
The primary way to achieve this is to first see for ourselves the cohesive and deeper thread that connects our photographs (something few photographers decide and manage to do) and then try to bring this thread to the forefront both in terms of processing and in how we present our photographs.
Also essential is not to provide obvious interpretative crutches to the viewer, because then they will not bother to delve deeper into the essence of our photographic approach. It might even be necessary to remove a good photo of ours if it creates confusion about our intentions, or another photo whose potentially easy and superficial readability could mislead the others in the same approach.
This is also the reason why, although each photograph must have its own presence and value, we cannot talk about photographic quality and proposal unless we see more photographs by the same photographer. This also leads to the thought that, even if we accept the questionable value notion that competitions fit in art, in the case of photography, it should be photographers (with smaller or larger portfolios) who compete, and not individual photographs.
The case of Craigie Horsfield, to whom the photos accompanying the article as examples belong, is absolutely clear. Portraits, animals, metallic objects, stairs, naked bodies, or trees are undoubtedly homogeneous parts and multifaceted versions of a personal world. The photographer expresses his world more with the "how" than with the "what."
Plato Rivellis