For many the rules of photography are set in stone, there to be conformed to, things must be ‘correct’. Exposure, composition, aperture, focal length, everything has a right or wrong way of going about it. Landscapes must be photographed in ‘landscape’ orientation, portraits in ‘portrait’. Rules of thirds or golden ratios must be respected at all times and woe betide anyone who captures a portrait at f/16.
But breaking rules and the boundaries that come with them is a quintessential aspect of art ‘the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination’. Imagination should not be bound by pre-conceived notions placed upon an artistic pursuit by others.
One photographer who understood this perhaps better than many was the American photographer William Eggleston.
In the mid 1960’s colour photography was in its infancy and there were few photographers who did more to push forward its use than Eggleston. Coming to prominence photographing the ordinary in a way few had seen before, he broke many of the accepted norms of the time. And whilst it’s now hard to imagine a time when using colour film was considered transgressive, 60 years ago that was indeed the case.
Amongst the photography elite, colour was considered vulgar.
Despite struggling to achieve acceptance, Eggleston continued his exploration of colour photography over the following decade. His steadfastness culminated in a 1976 exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art in New York. He rather provocatively titled it ‘Color Photographs’. Amongst the public, it was a huge success.
However, whilst breaking boundaries had delivered the elusive gift of recognition, it had not delivered acceptance amongst his peers. Amongst the photography establishment, Eggleston’s work was negatively reviewed and both his vision and style were dismissed and scorned. There were even calls for his exhibition to be pulled from display.
Perhaps the most established and prominent photographer in America during this period was Ansel Adams. Adams had become part of the photography elite, many might suggest that he had become, by this point, the self appointed ‘establishment’. A considerable talent, Adams was front and centre of American landscape photography and, by the time of Eggleston’s exhibition in 1976, had a amassed huge sway with the media, public and indeed, the Museum of Modern Art.
For Adams, the idea of this photographer having an exhibition made up of colour photography was just too much. To him, the use of colour film was an outrage. Not for the first time in his career (look up William Mortensen for another example), Adams decided to put his influential weight behind a movement to ‘cancel’ a photographer whose work he didn’t agree with. Famously penning a two page letter to John Szarkowsky, the curator of the exhibition, he heavily criticised Egglestons work and the museums decision to exhibit him. Pouring scorn he declared that Eggleston was nothing but a ‘put on’ and his work was ‘of the worst kind…..of no substance’.
The media critics agreed and Egglestons exhibition was labelled ‘perfectly banal’. But this did not translate to the public. The establishment becoming further riled when the exhibition grew in popularity amongst the public and celebrities of the day.
Eggleston rode this wave of criticism with dignity throughout and only publicly commented when asked directly. In his later years (he’s still going strong btw) he retorted that if he’d ever met Adams he would happily have told him that he ‘hated his work’…but he would have said it ‘to his face’…..a swift dig at the fact Adams never gave his critique to Eggleston himself.
Despite all furore, the exhibitions huge public success meant that Eggleston now found himself being invited to the top table of photography. Wined and dined as somewhat of a celebrity, it seemed that he had swam to clearer waters. The criticism and personal put downs weren’t over yet though.
One of Egglestons photographic idols was Henry Cartier-Bresson, he of the decisive moment, the 1952 book which Eggleston had read numerous times. At a dinner in France, Eggleston got to dine with his idol at the same table. I can only image how this prospect must have been. By this time, Eggleston was mixing it with the luminaries of the photographic world, but dining with one of your photographic idols; one of the men who inspired you and through whose teachings you learnt. This must have been a big deal.
Shortly into proceedings, and after some initial chit-chat, Bresson leaned over to Eggleston and said ‘William, colour photography is bullshit’.
Imagine how this must have felt. Not only had Eggleston had one of Americas most famous photographers writing letters to demand his work be pulled from exhibition. He now had his photographic idol look into his eyes and tell him that his work, his style, his observations, his voice, were nothing more than bullshit.
That must have been a bitter pill to swallow. But Eggleston did Eggleston and continued to stay true to himself photographing his story his way.
Many years later, Eggleston recalled his reaction to this slight from Henri Cartier-Bresson, ‘I stood up, left the table, and had a great night partying with a young lady, she didn’t question colour photography once’.
50 years on the conversations have (mostly) moved on from whether colour photography is acceptable for serious photographers. But the willingness of the photography community to critique and slate other photographers work, their passions, their vision and style, has not. It can be easy to believe this is a modern day internet based phenomenon. But as William Egglestons story nods to (and to a larger degree William Mortensen’s), this has been going on for as long as photography. The pictorialists of the early 1900’s quick to dismiss documentary, or modernism photography. The modernists quick to pour scorn back onto the pictorialists. The technicians readily available to point and shame those who don’t conform.
William Eggleston didn’t conform and is just one of many photographers we can learn from. His demenour in the face of an onslaught of criticism is to be admired. He shrugged it off and continued to embrace the telling of his own stories.
It’s easy to forget when faced with negativity and criticism (or even a lack of likes and hearts under a post) that we do not have to conform to other photographers opinions of what is right or wrong. But getting comfortable with the fact is of great importance.
Time has demonstrated that Ansel Adams, Henri Bresson and the other critics were wrong about William Eggleston and his use of colour. And whilst both were themselves boundary breaking photographers, we should learn from their fabulous photography but also from their mistakes. They were both wrong to decide that other photographers were of no value.
So, the next time you face adversity in your photography, be more Eggleston….Stand up, leave the table and party with those willing to push you forward, and not spend too much time with those wishing to pull you back.
Everybody can conform, it’s the boundary breakers that become legends.
See William Eggleston’s work: EGGLESTON ART FOUNDATION
Dave Laffan
Let’s Click Photography
