first let me say that I agree 100% (and strongly believe) that photography, if we are photographers and this is a photography magazine, MUST be discussed. We are a community, a photo magazine and adults and part of practicing our work is the hope and consideration that we will have the opportunity to discuss it, and to receive good and critical and thoughtful feedback/critique: both positive and negative. In this sense, your contribution is important and valuable.. As photographers we need critiqued, we need community, if not in the working, then in the exhibiting, enhancing, developing…

…as i wrote above, and talked about with Marc, I worried that people would NOT comment on the work because they felt, as Akaky has expressed, that words were useless….but the truth is that this photograph/diptych is NOT about Marc’s grief or personal history but his photographic attempt to reconstruct what the loss was, the identity of his father, the importance of artifacts in the face of vanquishment, etc….i can tell you I personally, as a photographer, appreciate your candor and words, as I am sure Marc will do. The diptych is NOT photographically pretty or particularly well-photographed (it’s intent), so the question: does the pairing of the images, does the idea work to create something richer than the piece as a photograph?…if not, then it failed…

you familiar with Steven Sebring?…the photographer and filmmaker…you’ve seen his work on photographed objects, inspired by working with Patti Smith on his film??…trying to get at the identity of a person….it’s true the pictures are more ‘rich’ photographically: light, exposure, for example…the question for Marc now, as both my wife and i suggested to him is this:

can he photograph the objects in a way that retain photographic power as well as the power of the juxtaposition of ideas?…that’s his goal now…

http://www.melbournefestival.com.au/program_media/3438/Childhood-Dress.jpg

thanks john :))

Akaky:….my sentence wasnt meant as a condemnation of people’s silence, surely not…for i understand that well…but that, as photographers, when a photographer asks or hopes for feedback and receives little from a photographic community its a personally stinging thing….and that is what i meant…but, by the way, language and words do help grief and help in the process of assurance…no one understands that better than you do…

running
bob

you familiar with Steven Sebring?…the photographer and filmmaker…you’ve seen his work on photographed objects, inspired by working with Patti Smith on his film??…trying to get at the identity of a person….it’s true the pictures are more ‘rich’ photographically: light, exposure, for example…the question for Marc now, as both my wife and i suggested to him is this:

can he photograph the objects in a way that retain photographic power as well as the power of the juxtaposition of ideas?…that’s his goal now…

http://www.melbournefestival.com.au/program_media/3438/Childhood-Dress.jpg

thanks john :))

Akaky:….my sentence wasnt meant as a condemnation of people’s silence, surely not…for i understand that well…but that, as photographers, when a photographer asks or hopes for feedback and receives little from a photographic community its a personally stinging thing….and that is what i meant…but, by the way, language and words do help grief and help in the process of assurance…no one understands that better than you do…

running
bob

John

Ian

thank you for your response and clarification of the editing/curating process.

It was with huge reservations that I posted my queries about Burn as you are all such a positive force, I am not doing it to be difficult or gain notoriety.

All question marks have been erased:-)))

Marc sorry for the interuption to the thread

Ian

it’s been a real pleasure…as a photographer, a colleague, a reader, and above all, as a friend…it’s been my pleasure…we’re very happy and proud of you amigo…

running
b

we were publishing simultaneous..i did not see your comment as i was writing mine…thank you for allowing your work to be published on BURN… i know it was not easy for you….and i look forward to helping in any way i can with your long term work….

the discussion here has been quite good i think…

many thanks for your hospitality in Toronto….and you know my doors are open for you anytime….

cheers, david

You are totally on target! :)))….nothing for me to add :)

yes, it was Mermelsteing that I was thinking of …and for the life of me last night I couldn’t think of how to spell jeff’s name (even though i tried google) :))…my brain is dead tired ;)))…and of course Joel’s magisterial work too…so happy to see your input here! :))))..espcially the reference to Szarkowski :)))

thank you so much :)))

very tired :))
cheers
bob

Not wishing, in any sense to follow Marc’s comments with a further summary of this thread, but I simply wanted to express my appreciation of the image AND the very thoughtful conversation it has provoked. I’m not a New Yorker, have never visited Ground Zero, am blessed to have my parents still on the scene AND I have learned a lot about both photography and our human condition from this dialogue.

I am grateful to all who have contributed.

i can think of only a very small handful of photographers who have been published on BURN who i have ever met or known in any way…i haven’t actually counted, but i am guessing a solid 90% are unknown to any of us…and out of the dozens of photographers who have been published here, i think only 5 of them have ever been in one of my workshops…most of the “familiarity” you sense has come directly from my relationships with the photographers right here on BURN and from mentoring BURN readers “behind the scenes” which i do all the time…you, in fact, are in line for such editing and discussion…

i always ask (beg) the photographer to please please put all pertinent information necessary for understanding the photographs published here…some do, some don’t….i often will do this several times and often to no avail…this is an exhausting process…..to make every single published entry fit a particular information “style” would require one full time person to just stay on the case…photographers are notorious for just not giving editors all the caption information they need…however, in most cases here the photographers do jump in on the discussion and eventually tell us all we would like to know…and , of course, different people want to know different things…

in the case of Marc, who i do know, i just sensed he did not want to say any more….this is after all very painful territory….i leave personal pain alone…..i am sure you understand….

JIM…

i think any representation of 9/11 is way more than a personal loss….we all have personal losses which are not represented in the media…surely, you can see that Marc’s “personal loss” reflects even now an international deep deep tragedy the outcome of which is not yet known….as i “personally” watched both towers come down from about 15 blocks away , i knew immediately that life for all of us had changed for at least several generations….

cheers, david

thank you for the opportunity for showing this work

BOB

thank you for helping me “see” that this is about identity

STOOP/GRACIE/BEN

your comments are totally valid and no offence was taken. the caption isn’t as descriptive as it probably should be but i was trying to move beyond the clinical tag of “rib fragment and ID card”. captioning is something i struggle with and thank you for bringing it up.

LISA

spoke with bob…no worries…

MIKE R

this diptych is the beginning foray into the conceptual aspect of this project as it relates to identity but i hear you; at this point, i’m also really drawn to the more traditional documentary images from my essay as these were more straight forward, “easier” to make. the conceptual view is going to be more of a challenge photographically and personally but i’m trying to push myself in new directions.

GINA

thank you. the image you are referring to is actually of a “family room” set up on the 20th floor in a building overlooking ground zero. it is a room filled with things that family members have left for their loved ones.

WENDY

thanks and you did make me smile. i’m waiting for that question in about 10 years…:)

JIM

loss is obviously universal. for me, personal loss became public and i think in a small way we all lost something on 9/11

MIKE

“Adam and the rib”…never occurred to me until you mentioned it…

ALL

thank you for your kind words. since 9/11, life has moved forward and i’m blessed with an amazing family of my own.

my father lives through them.

i am happy to answer any specific questions here burn or through email. thank you again for spending some time with my images.

curator Szarkowski’s “Mirrors and Windows” should be required reading/viewing for all photographers…thanks for bringing it up….it is the first book i have on my reading list for all students….

will i see you in new york this week?? i should be at the Powerhouse signing on thursday evening..or just stop by for a chat….

cheers, david

understand there are issues and you guys have an extremly difficult time deciding what to do. It is difficult to portray my thoughts through postings, the nuances of face to face talking don’t come across.

I want to reiterate that what you guys are doing here is incredible. This site/organisation/home/inspiration will certainly be a major force for photography in the future.

There will always be a certain amount of conflict when you work as a curator/editor in that inevitably you will be more familiar with some works than others, so an understanding of the “behind the scenes” story making is inevitable. Also you can only show/expose the work that you have come into contact with.

I just want to say that Burn is an amazing achievement and I respect that and the integrity of you guys doing all the work in the background. There have just been a couple of times when a little question mark has popped into my head, I needed to have confirmation that, that question mark should not be there.

I am not on the whole cynical, so if I felt it, others might feel it, and that needs to be banished for the good of Burn.

regards

ian

The first thing I thought of was that old essay by John Szarkowski in Mirrors and Windows… in it he gives us the idea of photographers exploring the contours of internal, personal meaning, or finding it, outside themselves, as the world presents it.

I thought that this piece, attempts to bridge, or reconcile these two great photographic impulses. The right side, the “window”, states a fact. This man lived. The left side, the “mirror”, creates a metaphor for the resilience of memory (the same dna that identified that fragment runs in that hand, a biological memory. It is a piece of a rib, held by a man named Adam.), of family and the fragility of life, something we all deny, until we can’t anymore.

I was here in New York the day Marc’s father died, and I, too saw the work of the great ones (Bob, you forgot Meyerowitz and isn’t it Mermelstein you’re thinking of, not Mertleman?) and I thought the only photographic document that came close to how that experience felt was Here is New York, by Peress/Traub, et al, and everyone in NYC that participated. I think the pros may have tried too hard, the events may have outstripped their grace and skill… only the relentlessness of a thousand witness snapshots could say what they could not.

And this piece, by showing us these two small objects, shows us something of the continuing enormity of the events of that day.

no one likes to speak of sorrow much more so imagine someone else’s sorrow.
i hope marc and whoever has had such a loss
would not think of this silence as indifference.
there is nothing to say in these instances
no matter how much we jar the head and the heart
there are no words that can be spoken
enough to convey thoughts and sympathy through the web

I think that is a fair, honest and legitimate approach. I actually agree 100% and Marc and I spoke about that on the phone last night. I think it hasn’t warranted alot of comments is because of a) the personal nature of the work (father’s bone, id card), b) the nature of the pain/huge even (death of parent, 9/11 in a non-outsider non-direct documentary project) and c) it’s root in Conceptualism (the idea more important than the photographic appearance.

this is the risk of the diptych and the reason ultimately we published it: that it is powerful and we thought it would give the audience something to contemplate. Like Katrina, there are few tragic disasters that have been as photographed as 9/11….and yet, this image and this project as it will continue is different. That is why i react so strongly to it. And i think your insight about others silence is true.

That is the risk of doing personal work. For me, the personal is the universal…..but, we rarely, it seems to me, celebrate that. I guess our collective nature.

thanks for the insight
Bob

First, let me say that I DO NOT choose the work published here. Only David decides what is published. Actually, I do not even see all the submissions. I write editorials (and in the future, essays/dialog starters), contribute work, write photographers who I think would be great to have here to generate discussion (they’ve been published already and continue to come in), but ultimately nothing is published here based on whether or not I know the photographer or not. I encourage people i know to submit. I write photographers I do not know, but ultimately this magazine is David’s vision. I agree with what he’s published, but my vision is very different. One thing David and I share, besides friendship, is a very eclectic and wide taste. :)) So, please do not think that I suggest work to Burn (i.e., David) because of my relationship with the photographer. I do only if i feel the work has merit or brings to the table something else that hasn’t been here. As has been true for the entire life of Burn, i’ve been a cheerleader and have tried to offer readers a different perspective and a WAY to view work that they may not readily applied.

I actually do not think at all that my familiarity with this story has any bearing on my reaction. I think that a reader definitely needs to have familiarity with and an appreciation with and probably acceptance for conceptual work, the nature that the idea trumps the image. In a sense this is a didactic working, though I’m not sure if it’s any less didactic than conventional work. One of my closest friends (based in Japan) will soon show work here, which is at the opposite end of the spectrum: also about historical devastation. The problem with showing work like this is that the audience will a) find it uninteresting photographically (because it’s power is not in it’s appearance or it’s photographic qualities) or b) too personal (hermetic) and unassailable because of it’s personal and grief-ridden nature. That is why I suggested it to David, because i felt it challenged Burn….not because Marc is my friend. there is a lot of work of his that i tried to encourage him not to submit, including the original Zero Ground. I continually run the risk of being accused of favoritism, but if you knew me you would know that just isnt the case. The same is absolutely true of David. He doesnt publish anything that anything that he doesn’t believe in photographically. And he grants no one favors based on friendship, it’s all merit-driven. I know, i’ve known him for a while now. So, i accept your criticism, it comes with the job i guess, but please know that it doesnt work that way.

Your observation about ‘insider knowledge’ is a legitimate concern. The problem is, I would argue, is that it has to do with the nature of how different people read different work. I’ve have only 3 friends whove published work here and I think i’ve met 1 or 2 others. That is 4 or 5 out of how many images and essays? And yet, i work very hard to try and read or react to the work. This is a more difficult problem: reaction and ability to react to work. Each work is an individual entity and each person comes to work in their own unique way. It is true that, maybe, knowing the ‘story’ behind the story helps, though i would argue that it doesnt really. It connects you, on a human level, but it does not allow you to determine (for yourself alone) whether or not a image or story is substantial. When i first saw Panos’ hotel photo, i DID NOT know it was Panos’ until i drafted a comment and read the others…i thought, what the hell ;)))….I just spent a week with the Magnum dudes and made a close and new friendship: Mark Power. I didnt know him at all and yet his work spoke to me profoundly, from Shipping Forecast to Superstructures to the work in Poland and his new project…i spent a lot of time talking with him, drinking with him, has it changed my relationship to the pictures? I dont know. I dont like them ‘more.’…but i do like him a lot….

Ian, i think it comes down to taste, familiarity other things. No doubt, you have legitimate concerns about a viewer’s relationship to work constituting a working angle. It DOES help that I know that picture contains marc’s dad rib and the id that was recovered at Ground Zero. Should this have been more clear in the beginning? Maybe (i still say no, but I understand Stoop’s and David’s concern for lack of ‘clear’ information). But even after my long explanation, did it change your feeling about the image? Most likely not…and that too is the irony about what i’ve been doing here at Burn and before that at Road Trips. I am actually not sure at all how much my writing or opinions or views or ‘insight’ (i use this word very very lightly ;)) ) has convinced anyone, ultimately…..it probably has not….

anyway, you do raise important points and I value them alot and please know that I do not consider your thoughts and post as ‘sour grapes’ at all….I will take a LOT more condemnation shortly and i guess that will come with the territory….but imagine, waking up with a pocket full of 30 photographers website/portfolio cards….and i dont even make the editorial decisions….it’s about perception Ian…aint that ironic ;)))…

and i would say only this: keep submitting :)))….and please know that every decision David makes he does autonomously and not based on whether he knows the photogrpaher or not (the vast vast vast majority of people published here were unknown to him and did know know DAH and certainly were not his workshop students: if they were, we’d published 5.0000 images by now ;)) )…hope that makes sense? :)))

Steve: thanks so much :))

cheers
bob

As I said initially about this photo, it is very hard to comment on such a personal image. Which is why I suspect the image hasn’t drawn much comment. I’m not sure I want to personalize everyone’s pain and personal loss, which is what this photo asks us to do. Loss is universal, but this loss is very personal.