I've thought about this with her work before as well, and like you I'm a little iffy as to whether it's empathetic or exploitative. I think there's elements of both, which makes it hard to define. But ultimately I think it comes down to the feeling that, as far as I can tell, she does not look down on her photographic subjects, unlike a lot of other photography I've seen that covers the same types of subjects. Great vid and great work digging into everything!
Thanks for the detailed response, I'm glad to see you enjoyed it, and that I am not alone in having the inability to define her ethics. I guess what I find most interesting is that critics of her find it so easy to take a strong stance on one side of the argument or not, which is maybe one of the main issues around being critical of any kind of art in the first place.
@@developingtank It's hard not to bring your own biases into the equation, i.e. "I am empathetic to these people, so I see what she is doing here", vs "I look down on these people, so I see what she is doing here". But for sure, with art and especially with artists who are no longer around to speak for themselves, it's hard to really take a definitive stance on anything.
@@decemberistGreat comments, I have a little understanding of some of the syndromic conditions they diagnose today and tend, rightly or wrongly, to use this in adopting a more empathetic consideration of these matters but well done on your research and open mindedness. A photographer friend like this has a very strong view about the socalled academic opinion of straights on her life and work. The great takeaway is that these people almost always have some great talent, almost genius, in some part of their lives.
Thank you for your thoughtful examination of Diane Arbus's photos. At age 18, I was a budding photographer, I was given a book of her work, and it resounded deeply with me. The plain honesty of her images, stark and unflinching, inspired me. As I was contemplating her photographs I learned that she had committed suicide, which made her images, and what inspired her, even more compelling. Whether one sees Arbus's photos as empathetic or exploitative, I think is very much, subjective. Beauty and ugliness is very much in the eye of the beholder. As you mentioned in the video, one has to appreciate the effect her photos had, in the time in which they were taken. They were bold, mysterious, shocking and groundbreaking. It's wonderful that they are still sparking discussion.
Thanks for the grounded and balanced comment. So many others have aggressively stated their opinions while somehow missing the point that all of this is subjective. I can see where people are coming from on both sides and I don’t think it’s necessary to take a hardline stance on either side of the debate. The only hard stance I can take is that the images are compelling and worth discussion.
Thank you 🙏 yes, I think it’s unlikely that someone would spend so much of their time and effort just for the sake of exploiting people. You’d have to be a truly terrible human being.
@@developingtank My thoughts exactly. I've actually written 3 pieces on empathy (two books, and the Empath's Oracle deck of cards), and after soooo many years of research into empathy, I have no doubt that her approach was to engage with the "other," and help display diversity to the world. Excellent video!!!
@@developingtank PS, maybe this is synchronistic; your channel focuses on photography and art: I just today finished the edits for the guidebook that accompanies my forthcoming deck of cards, called A Gothic Witch's Oracle. It's online if you'd like to look it up, but doesn't come out until October. Anyway, ALL of the artwork in that deck is photographic. I had the incredible honor of collaborating with one of my favorite photographic artists of all time: John Santerineross. Please look him up; I think you would greatly appreciate his work if you're not familiar with it already!
Nice, you seem like the exact kind of person I’m looking for my videos to appeal to. I think more research and a deeper understanding of art is missing with a lot of creatives today. So many want to fast track their way to some kind of monetary success without having a love, passion, and appreciation for their chosen medium.
Perhaps her work can best be appreciated by refraining from the either/or dichotomies you've used to discuss it. Empathic? Exploitative? Yes, and yes. Both/and. The real knowledge comes from positioning oneself in that difficult grey area in between, and living with the discomfort of being there without any definitive answer. Thanks for an intelligent and articulate examination of this difficult artist.
The point you made about what it'd be like to take these kinds of shots ourselves really flipped my head open. I was thinking about what I felt, but then when you said that in the intro, I thought, "Would >I< take a shot like that?" And that changed a lot. I guess I'd need to know what her real POV is and why she's doing it. (I'm only 4 or so minutes on, so maybe you'll get there.)
As a photojournalist unless I’m providing an editorial context I’m always cautious about the exploitative nature / dilemma in photographing the unhoused and mentally ill. She seems to shoot a large amount of portraits and have consent from subjects so I don’t see the exploitation of subjects. I see empathy. Brilliant technique in the film age.
I've thought about this with her work before as well, and like you I'm a little iffy as to whether it's empathetic or exploitative. I think there's elements of both, which makes it hard to define. But ultimately I think it comes down to the feeling that, as far as I can tell, she does not look down on her photographic subjects, unlike a lot of other photography I've seen that covers the same types of subjects. Great vid and great work digging into everything!
Thanks for the detailed response, I'm glad to see you enjoyed it, and that I am not alone in having the inability to define her ethics. I guess what I find most interesting is that critics of her find it so easy to take a strong stance on one side of the argument or not, which is maybe one of the main issues around being critical of any kind of art in the first place.
@@developingtank It's hard not to bring your own biases into the equation, i.e. "I am empathetic to these people, so I see what she is doing here", vs "I look down on these people, so I see what she is doing here". But for sure, with art and especially with artists who are no longer around to speak for themselves, it's hard to really take a definitive stance on anything.
@@decemberistGreat comments, I have a little understanding of some of the syndromic conditions they diagnose today and tend, rightly or wrongly, to use this in adopting a more empathetic consideration of these matters but well done on your research and open mindedness. A photographer friend like this has a very strong view about the socalled academic opinion of straights on her life and work.
The great takeaway is that these people almost always have some great talent, almost genius, in some part of their lives.
Thank you for your thoughtful examination of Diane Arbus's photos. At age 18, I was a budding photographer, I was given a book of her work, and it resounded deeply with me. The plain honesty of her images, stark and unflinching, inspired me. As I was contemplating her photographs I learned that she had committed suicide, which made her images, and what inspired her, even more compelling.
Whether one sees Arbus's photos as empathetic or exploitative, I think is very much, subjective. Beauty and ugliness is very much in the eye of the beholder. As you mentioned in the video, one has to appreciate the effect her photos had, in the time in which they were taken. They were bold, mysterious, shocking and groundbreaking. It's wonderful that they are still sparking discussion.
Thanks for the grounded and balanced comment. So many others have aggressively stated their opinions while somehow missing the point that all of this is subjective. I can see where people are coming from on both sides and I don’t think it’s necessary to take a hardline stance on either side of the debate. The only hard stance I can take is that the images are compelling and worth discussion.
Gorgeous art, great video. I'm also on the empathetic side of thought
Thank you 🙏 yes, I think it’s unlikely that someone would spend so much of their time and effort just for the sake of exploiting people. You’d have to be a truly terrible human being.
@@developingtank My thoughts exactly. I've actually written 3 pieces on empathy (two books, and the Empath's Oracle deck of cards), and after soooo many years of research into empathy, I have no doubt that her approach was to engage with the "other," and help display diversity to the world. Excellent video!!!
@@developingtank PS, maybe this is synchronistic; your channel focuses on photography and art: I just today finished the edits for the guidebook that accompanies my forthcoming deck of cards, called A Gothic Witch's Oracle. It's online if you'd like to look it up, but doesn't come out until October. Anyway, ALL of the artwork in that deck is photographic. I had the incredible honor of collaborating with one of my favorite photographic artists of all time: John Santerineross. Please look him up; I think you would greatly appreciate his work if you're not familiar with it already!
@crestfallenraven sounds like a cool project. I’ll look him up for sure. 😎
Nice, you seem like the exact kind of person I’m looking for my videos to appeal to. I think more research and a deeper understanding of art is missing with a lot of creatives today. So many want to fast track their way to some kind of monetary success without having a love, passion, and appreciation for their chosen medium.
Perhaps her work can best be appreciated by refraining from the either/or dichotomies you've used to discuss it. Empathic? Exploitative? Yes, and yes. Both/and. The real knowledge comes from positioning oneself in that difficult grey area in between, and living with the discomfort of being there without any definitive answer.
Thanks for an intelligent and articulate examination of this difficult artist.
Thank you for the intelligent and articulate response 🫡
Thanks for this video, you are doing important work. Just subscribed.
I appreciate it 🙏
Nicely done.. love your videos
Appreciate it!
The point you made about what it'd be like to take these kinds of shots ourselves really flipped my head open. I was thinking about what I felt, but then when you said that in the intro, I thought, "Would >I< take a shot like that?" And that changed a lot. I guess I'd need to know what her real POV is and why she's doing it. (I'm only 4 or so minutes on, so maybe you'll get there.)
Yes, that exploitative or authentic nature of what she did is really what we’ll never know to truly understand where she was coming from.
She was a genius...full stop.
What specifically puts her in that category for you?
I've seen her photos up close..they are fairly small and produce sizeable emitonal response...it's like no work ive seen before
@@developingtank
Another great video. 👏
Thanks as always 🖖
Thanks!
Thank you! 🫡
As a photojournalist unless I’m providing an editorial context I’m always cautious about the exploitative nature / dilemma in photographing the unhoused and mentally ill.
She seems to shoot a large amount of portraits and have consent from subjects so I don’t see the exploitation of subjects.
I see empathy. Brilliant technique in the film age.
Thank you providing a real world example from experience that backs up your opinion. I would tend to agree for the same reasons you’ve listed.
👏👏
🫡🫡
We're all voyeurs deep down.
True, you’d be hard pressed to find anyone who doesn’t have at least a bit of the impulse.