Objective Photography

[Areactor]

Is there an Objectivist position of photography?

[AMERICONORMAN]

Of course!

Americo.

P.S. The best of which one does not have to RE-CREATE.

[Areactor]

lol. I guess I should have been more specific. Are there any Objectivist writings on the subject?

[stephen_speicher]

lol. I guess I should have been more specific. Are there any Objectivist writings on the subject [photography]?

"A certain type of confusion about the relationship between scientific discoveries and art, leads to a frequently asked question: Is photography an art? The answer is: No. It is a technical, not a creative, skill. Art requires a selective re-creation. A camera cannot perform the basic task of painting: a visual conceptualization, i.e., the creation of a concrete in terms of abstract essentials. The selection of camera angles, ighting or lenses is merely a selection of the means to reproduce various aspects of the given, i.e., of an existing concrete. There is an artistic element in some photographs, which is the result of such selectivity as the photographer can exercise, and some of them can be very beautiful- but the same artistic element (purposeful selectivity) is present in many utilitarian products: in the better kinds of furniture, dress design, automobiles, packaging, etc. The commercial art work in ads (or posters or postage stamps) is frequently done by real artists and has greater esthetic value than many paintings, but utilitarian objects cannot be classified as works of art." (Ayn Rand, "Art and Cognition," p. 74, The Romantic Manifesto.)

See the rest of the article and the entire book for Miss Rand's view of art.

[Areactor]

Thanks Speicher. I was wondering because presently I'm into photography.

My question to that passage though is does painting for postage stamps and posters make painting any less of an art like taking pictures for utilitarian reasons?

[stephen_speicher]

My question to that passage though is does painting for postage stamps and posters make painting any less of an art like taking pictures for utilitarian reasons?

As I understand your question, and as I understand what Miss Rand wrote, the objection to photography-as-art was that "selective re-creation" is not fundamental to the process of photography. It may have some artistic elements as a consequence of selectivity, but in essence it is not a re-creation of reality. But in regard to postage stamps and posters I read Ayn Rand's main objection to classifying that as art, lies in their essential utilitarian purpose.

However, note that Miss Rand also puts architecture into a unique class, one which combines art with utilitarian purpose, and does not re-create reality.

[Areactor]

More questions

Now by using photography for utilitarian purposes, Rand is only referring the commercial use of the camera?

[stephen_speicher]

Now by using photography for utilitarian purposes, Rand is only referring the commercial use of the camera?

In the quotation I provided Miss Rand's objection to photography-as-art rested on photography's essential lack of a selective re-creation process. The argument presented did not rest on utilitarian purposes.

You should read the book that I quoted the paragraph from to get the full flavor of the Objectivist view of art.

[coirecfox]

If I remember correctly, Rand said another quality of a work of art is that it is an end in itself. If this is true, I can understand why she didn't classify paintings for postage stamps as art. That painting when used for a postage stamp then becomes the means to an end.

[Nate_S]

Well for some of the best 'selective recreations' of photographs see the Photorealists. Particularly Richard Estes. Many of the Photorealists like Charles Bell due exact point for point photographic recreations using oils. However, Richard Estes makes some very conscious and very dramatic decisions in the way he chooses to portray his cityscapes. For this reason I've always put Richard Estes in a category of his own.

Check under artists, and then find Richard Estes

Here is two better examples

http://www.greatamericanpinup.com/estes

It also happens that the leading proprietor and authority on the movement is an avid Objectivist: Mr Louis K. Meisel. He owns a gallery in NYC devoted entirely to modern realists and has written several articles in various publications defending the movement against an onslaught of initial attacks from the supposed 'artistic community.' He has also published a series of very successful books which promote the movement and is almost entirely responsible for promoting and nurturing it into what it is today.

Mr. Meisel spoke at my Academy last year in support of his and Mr. Martinet's traveling exhibit of pin-up art. I pretty much sat there in awe hanging on his every word. He was a thoroughly engaging speaker and a breath of fresh air at my liberal cesspool of an academy. Don't get me wrong, the Illustrative and technical instruction is top-notch, but the liberal arts department is in shambles.