“My primary photographic motivator is a fear of irrelevance.” – grEGORy simpson
Anyone who sinks a seemingly preposterous chunk of precious personal time and energy into a passion — particularly if it’s a passion void of financial reward — will inevitably encounter the same question: “Why do you do that thing you do?”
Were we a truthful species, most of us would likely answer, “because I’m not right in the head.” But few of us have the courage to proffer such an admission. So we invent plausible responses that we hope garner us admiration rather than admonishment.
Some of us tailor altruistic replies like, “to make the world a more beautiful place.” Others seek a medical explanation, professing that their obsession “reduces stress” or “provides inner peace and harmony.” Those with artistic aspirations choose the ever popular “to express myself” answer.
Since one of my many obsessions involves the avoidance of clichéd thought, I felt I needed to make up my own unique answer to those who questioned my fanatical, yet contrarian photographic tendencies. So whenever I was asked why I took photos, my stock answer became “a fear of irrelevance.”
I believed the response to be humble, honest and downright reasonable. So reasonable, that I included it among my second batch of Bartlett’s Rejects photography quotes. So reasonable, that I actually started to think it might even be true!
But recently, upon uttering my stock reply to a new inquisitor, I heard a faint voice emanating from one of my brain’s unexplored corridors. “And what exactly do you do that’s so relevant?” asked the incorporeal voice.
Uh oh.
Relevance is, of course, relative. What’s relevant to one person might not be relevant to someone else. A father’s photos of his children may be relevant to his family, yet inconsequential to all other viewers. A landscape photographer’s shots might prove relevant in justifying a desire to travel, but they’ll likely appear totally extraneous to everyone else. Fine arts photographs might be relevant to those with the necessary clout to define public taste, but are likely immaterial to those not seeking financial gain or social status.
I’m not a father. I suffer from spontaneous narcolepsy syndrome at the mere thought of landscape photography. And I suspect my photographs are quite far removed from the current decorum of the fine arts market. So how, exactly, am I relevant?
Ay, there’s the rub.
For many years, I have defined my own relevance as “helping to keep photography from devolving to the point where a photo is regarded as nothing more than an idealized Xerox copy of whatever’s in front of the camera.” I believe that the best photography is akin to poetry — a stylized, concise, and sometimes obtuse catalyst for stimulating thoughts and emotions that may be unique to each viewer. Suggestion trumps definition. Figurative defeats literal.
One look through Flickr, Instagram, Facebook or the dwindling titles at the local newsstand will tell you I’m not exactly succeeding in my quest. Yet here I am — continuing to take photos and write articles in the face of overwhelming evidence that I am, indeed, irrelevant by my own definition. In retrospect, there was far more hubris than humility in my assumption that I could somehow change the way 7.5 billion people interact with photography. And here I thought those who desired to “express themselves” were the arrogant ones!
So the next time someone asks why I take photos, I’m just going to go ahead and give ‘em the straight dope. “Because I’m not right in the head,” I’ll answer. Sometimes honesty really is the best policy.
©2015 grEGORy simpson
ABOUT THE PHOTOS: All three photos were shot with a Leica M Monochrom (Type 246), though each was rendered through a different lens. “Vacancy” employed an old, scale-focus, thread-mount Voigtlander 25mm f/4 Snapshot-Skopar lens, which I’m testing as a possible wide-angle companion for my old Leica III’s. “Truth in Advertising” was shot with a 21mm f/3.4 Super-Elmar lens for maximum relevance. “Hobnobbing” saw my ever-present 28mm f/2 Summicron lens mounted to the Monochrom.
REMINDER: If you find these photos enjoyable or the articles beneficial, please consider making a DONATION to this site’s continuing evolution. As you’ve likely realized, ULTRAsomething is not an aggregator site — serious time and effort go into developing the original content contained within these virtual walls.
I always look forward to your posts, you are relevant to those of us who like to read a blog with something different to say.
Martin: Many thanks for your most relevant reply. So that’s 1 down and only 7,499,999,999 to go. Is that a light I see at the end of the tunnel?
It’s not while you are alive. Once all the electronic data is long since lost, archeologists will be trying to decipher early 21st century culture via your negatives. Painstaking analysis will lead them to conclude that none of us were quite right in the head.
Linden: Most helpful! Courtesy of your wisdom I’ve added two new items to my “To Do” List:
1. Load a few rolls of Tri-X into my Leica M2, and take screen shots of all my recent photos. Since the arrival of the new Monochrom a few months ago, I’ve only shot digitally — so I’ll definitely need to re-package those newest images onto a more archeologically-friendly medium.
2. I need to design an elaborate “booby-trap” to protect the negatives. The more ingenious the booby-trap, the more it’ll trick future archaeologists into believing these are the most relevant and valuable relics of the era.
Thanks!
Egor,
As usual this post is aiming for the heart.
As one who takes photos for my own enjoyment (and won’t even bother sharing them with anyone in a formal sort of way as you do), irrelevant has a particular “taste”.
Here’s how I deal with my irrelevance: Irrelevant is difficult to achieve as it affects at least one person: me the artist.
In the case of an artist that shares his/her work to the world as you do, whether appreciated by masses or not, I think it’s not possible to be irrelevant: As long as the art is communicating something to the spectator, from awe to disgust even if it’s indifference, something passed from the creator’s work to the rest of the world.
One person or many doesn’t matter: art changed someone and/or had an impact regardless how small.
If you can change one person’s life that way you have changed the world. Now or later doesn’t really matter, time is not a human friendly concept, however, any contribution affects the whole, or to put it crudely one can change the level of the ocean by spitting in it.
Thanks for that, Serge:
I like your notion that irrelevance is nigh impossible since most of our actions, no matter how mundane, remain relevant to ourselves.
I’m also beginning to think that what’s actually “relevant” about ULTRAsomething isn’t so much what I write or photograph but is, instead, the way it attracts such thoughtful commentary from people like you and others.
Thanks Egor, I always read other’s comments as I read your posts and I see a constant: your posts and the posts of people who reply have substance and mindfulness.
While on the subject of relevance, I think it has to be related to the fact that, regardless of our individual skill level or aspirations and taste in photography ULTRAsomething’s soulfull approach to photo blogging (your approach) attracts people who seem as passionate about photography as you are.
I must admit that since I found this site I don’t spend as much time online looking for inspiration–especially when most blogs go on about technical reviews, techno-obsessive jargon that dull the emotional aspect of photography.
Thank you, Egor.
Much food for thought in this article, also “More Poe than Van Gogh”, and others.
To me, it strangely resonates with Albert Schweitzer’s “Bach and Aesthetics” chapter: “We classify the arts according to the material they use in order to express the world around them. One who expresses himself in tones is called a musician; one who employs colors, a painter; one who uses words, a poet. This, however, is a purely external division. In reality, the material in which the artist expresses himself is a secondary matter. He is not only a painter, nor only a poet, nor only a musician, but all in one. Various artists have their habitation in his soul. His work is the product of their cooperation; all have a part in each one of his ideas. The distinction consists only in this, that one idea is dominated by one of these artists, another by another of them, and they always choose the language that suits them best”.
The same must equally apply to photography. The medium that you choose is secondary; the artists that inhabit your soul define what you do with it.
Efrem:
Thanks for that Schweitzer quote. It makes me realize that if I would just read more, then I wouldn’t have to expend so much effort thinking! Someone’s probably already “solved” my dilemma-of-the-day before me. 😉
This quote was particularly prescient, since I’ve been seriously considering removing my self-imposed limitation that every ULTRAsomething article must somehow relate to photography. For example, would adding posts about music composition or sound design “dilute” the ULTRAsomething message? According to Schweitzer, the answer is “probably not,” since the message (and the messenger) will still be the same — only the material used to present it will be different. The follow-up question is “Would adding music to the mix chase away the bulk of the existing ULTRAsomething readership?” Might be interesting to find out…
Thanks again for taking the time to write and share. Much appreciated!
Egor,
I don’t believe music or sound would dilute the ULTRAsomthing message at all especially since everyone draws images from different layer of our sensitivity.
As you mentioned in one of your posts, your photos are inspired by music and you draw from visuals to create sounds. If anything, it would broaden the spectrum of it all, and add new layers of inspiration to everyone.
‘Beauty comes first.
Victory is secondary.
What matters is joy.’
Socrates (World Cup footballer).
Thanks Egor
When someone asks me why I take photographs, and especially using film, I simply tell them the truth. Because its enjoyable.