creativity/machine

Jeff of This Public Address responds to some of my recent thoughts on vernacular creativity in photography. He says:

I really must disagree with the idea that the philosophy on this non photography site is well developed. Actually, I find it rather naive. Having ?no rules? actually suggests the most difficult to adhere to rule of all?the rule of novelty?or, at the very least, the most counter-intuitive rule possible for artistic practice? that no human involvement is desirable. Disinterested artistic practice is a myth. Without interest, it isn?t art.

I think I actually kind of agree with some of this argument - that’s why I have such reservations about the lomography.com rhetoric, which has so many aesthetic rules, or rules of aesthetic practice, and yet claims to be a kind of “non-photography”. Maybe what we are looking at when there is an overt philosophy of ‘non-photography’ at work is actually better framed as ‘anti-photograpy’ - a politics of refusal which, like anti-fashion (as opposed to being unfashionable) nevertheless is closely engaged with, and demonstrates a knowledge of, the photographic canon, the avant-garde, and so on.

On the other hand:

The closest thing to ?street non-photography? I can think of comes from Chris Sullivan. The Journal of the Public Domain consists of objects found on the street. It neither invites, nor needs, any coherent philosophy. There is a difference between an organizing principle and a philosophy?trashlog has an organizing principle somewhat like Chris?s, and it seems to avoid any ?developed philosophy? as well. In both cases, human involvement (in selection at least) is readily apparent and needs no apology. Humans have notions and they almost always preconceive them. The idea of photography without preconceived notions is. to me, so much bullshit.

I like the work on both of these sites (and my favourite photolog Satan’s Laundromat is another example). But I think Jeff’s statements about them reveal where we part ways - I am familiar with this kind of unexplained, apparent “open” style of framing creative work from experimental and contemporary art music. The thing is, the artworld isn’t where my priorities lie.

I see nothing wrong in a “philosophy” that might promote a style of amateur photography that may or may not result in “art”, but that might enable people to move beyond both formulaic representation and slavish aspirations to professional standards; and therefore to engage more directly with and document, say, the architecture or everyday movement of people in their city…but then again, these are all issues I am still, and probably forever will be, thinking through.

And I’m mainly glad to see others are interested in the same issues.