Photography Exhibitions and Photographers or, Curators?

[TheLostPhotographer]

I've already managed to be banned from Amateur Photographer forum for not complying with draconian rules (IMO obviously not theirs). I am now being censored from the BJP forum. A forum I've posted on regularly for some years.

Some photographer made a post for an appeal for images for her exhibition. I rather verbally said why I didn't like the idea. She accused me of being sexist (something I am most definitely not (IMO)) and then she complained to the BJP forum operators.

I made the following post in my defense:

No apology here I'm afraid. Plenty of reasons why I don't like this project and don't like the way some people see fit to promote their own name by using other people's work.

There seems to be a strange move towards photography exhibitions as artists curatorial shows. The skill is apparently changing the context of photographs. Many have gone by without even a mention of the real photographers involved. This years Deutsche Borse Photography Prize winner - Walid Raad presented a project taken by other photographers. Many of whom were not even known never mind credited. There are many more examples. The fundamental unwritten rule of any photography prize should be that the photographer is the originator and creator of the image entered. It's The Photographers Gallery. Not Photography Gallery or, even Artists Gallery.

I do like the idea that all photographers can submit photographs for inclusion in what were previously closed exhibitions. I notice the current East London photography fair has an open exhibition also. What I don't like is one artist promoting their own name with total disregard to any other input. Why people who get their work selected can't have a link to their website in an online exhibition doesn't make sense to me. And, the lucky dip £200 book vouchers! For crying out loud.

Personally, I think The Photographers Gallery is on the verge of ruining a hard earned, world renowned reputation. Tate Britain's recent photo show via Flickr was possibly a good idea in so much as it encouraged many people to visit who may not have visited otherwise. In that respect it was far more inclusive and possibly propagated far more interest in photography in an art context. Photography for everyone is a great idea. What isn't a great idea are the elitist, self-elected few who see fit to judge all the others. Perhaps someone has to judge the open exhibition entries? I don't think the Tate Britain Flickr thing was edited down at all.

Certainly popular times for photography exhibiting in London and no doubt London and the UK will benefit. However, I think the progression of new photography ideas will stagnate even more as a result. It's all very samey and boring. Just more of it.

As for the 'stroking genitals/massaging ego' comment I still fail to see how that was in anyway sexist. I don't see how any posts I've ever made here have been sexist. Offensive possibly - yes. They're intended to be a bit.

Anyone got 50 photographs I can have for my exhibition? I promise a chance of winning a couple of hundred pound book tokens in return for using your work to further my cause. No more promises mind.

As for giving the BJP a hard time for my post; that just about says everything that Helen Marshall is about. The post may well have been made under the BJP banner, but it was made in my name. You want to complain to anyone complain to me before you go using other levers. Some people accuse me of being sexist, I accuse others of being users. I would never complain to anyone else if someone's views upset me. I'd complain to them directly and often publicly.

So, no apology for being arrogant, outspoken or, offensive. The world has become sanitised enough. You want to read carefully censored rubbish for the masses go some place boring. If you can't take criticism and verbal abuse then don't put yourself in the public domain as an artist.

John.

The original thread is here: http://db.riskwaters.com/public/sho...19cb510b1608f6212a6b2447b8b14c9c&mbItem=32701

How unreasonable am I being?

Should photographers prizes be about the photographer or, the curator of the exhibition?

 

[Hertz van Rental]

I think you are being a little unreasonable here.
They are asking for submissions so if you don't like the idea then don't submit. End of story.
The terms and conditions, as well as an explanation of what the whole thing is about, is there so it's not like anything is being done behind closed doors. It's all up front. So anyone submitting knows what they are letting themselves in for.
It might appear that the 'artist' is trying to use other people to make the work but 'art' is primarily about ideas and as the artist had the original idea... and it's not like she would be using work without permission.
It also gives a lot of people the chance to get their pictures seen in venues where they would not normally get a look in (the Photographer's Gallery is notoriously difficult to get a show at - although some of us have had our work exhibited there :mrgreen so from one perspective it is a worthy project.
Is it any different from an artist (like Spencer Tunick) getting hundreds of people to take their clothes off to make a picture? Or making art out of found objects?
Of course it isn't.
Just because you don't like the idea it doesn't mean that it is wrong.
On the other hand, I'm not particularly keen on their response to you. To accuse you of sexism or such is a typical deffensive manouvre of someone who is very insecure.
My advice would be to let them get on with it and keep your own counsel. Her work is hardly going to change the world and will probably be forgotten a month after it's finished.
Life is too short to let things like this bother you

 

[TheLostPhotographer]

...
Life is too short to let things like this bother you

To right! I exhibited at The Photographers Gallery in the days when it was just another gallery. They've spent years gaining the reputation they have and now they're about to throw it all away IMO.

What does bother me about being banned is the fact that people are now claiming I said things that I didn't say in deleted posts and I'm not able to defend myself. Plenty of backward bigots posting there have made potentially career damaging comments and even remarks bordering on libel before. I never complained once. I like public forums for free speech and don't want to see them ruined by legal professionals. However, I would like to be able to defend myself.

One new poster comes along to promote her show of other peoples work. I upset her by using the term 'image whore'. She gets me banned. Anyone who reads that forum regularly knows I often contribute a bit of interesting fire and spit!

I won't miss it. It is possibly the most backward forum in the photographic sphere.

 

[Helen B]

Sheesh. The London Art Mafia strikes. What can you do?

I think that her remark about the forum being 'the BJP not the BNP' is particularly cheap and obnoxious. Reading the thread as it stands now, and being unaware of the remarks in the deleted content makes me side more with you than with her - you come over as Mr Reasonable. But hey, any project that lets Freddy Kruger post his lovely portrait of dear Maggie Thatcher can't be all bad. On the other hand, I'm almost certain that the person claiming to be Morticia Addams is an impostor.

So, I'm the only person posting here that hasn't had work shown at the Photographers' Gallery. Are the ICA and the Tate good enough substitutes? LAM heartland. I'm such a whore.

Best,
Helen

 

[craig]

I think you are missing the point. Or maybe I am, which is more then likely the case.

The concept is imaginative and so are the images. Sounds like she will be using thousands of shots. The end result will be fascinating in the production alone. Also think that it will be a strong community event. Seems fun getting everyone involved for one project. I guess it is slightly self serving. Then again I think of thousands of photos and that seems mind boggling. Let alone thousands of captions and links. I am more of a "let's have fun with our photos" guy as opposed to "what's in it for me".

Personally if I do not like the idea I just do not do it. In a perfect world we should be free to express our thoughts with out being censored and or banned. Clearly BJP is in the dark about that idea. I guess there has to be some sort of (draconian) order?

Love & Bass

 

[Battou]

Not being a registered user of that forum I cannot properly view the thread, but from what I can see is it seems to be some form of miscommunication. If I read it correctly she is trying to promote a site similar to one I am, am I correct or no?