Adjusting the Ropes – Alexander Gardener

U.S. Library of Congres

On July 7, 1865 Mary Elizabeth Jenkins Surratt along with 3 others were hung in the Washington DC arsenal for the assignation of Abraham Lincoln.

Surratt was the first woman executed by the US government.

History records that, John Wilkes Booth was the man that actually fired the deadly shot that killed the 16^th president as he attended a play at Ford's Theater in Washington, D.C.. He died early the next morning. The rest of Booth's three co-conspirators were Lewis Powell and David Herold, who were assigned to kill Secretary of State William H. Seward, and George Atzerodt who was tasked to kill Vice President Andrew Johnson. By simultaneously eliminating the top three people in the administration, Booth and his co-conspirators hoped to sever the continuity of the United States government.
Mary’s son, John Surratt was a friend of Booths and former Confederate agent. Booth and his gang of would be assassins often met at the boarding house that Mary, who was recently widowed, owned in Washington DC.
She was arrested on April 17 and put on trial for be a part of the conspiracy to kill Lincoln. She was convicted on June 28, 1865 and sentenced to death a few days later. She would hang along with Powell, Herold, and Atzerodt on July 7, 1865.
The exact part she played in the plot to kill Lincoln has been the subject of debate over the past 150 years. Many claim she was a key player or at the very least she had prior knowledge of it. There is also some evidence to suggest that she way have helped the others to escape after the assignation. However, others claim that she was made a scapegoat by an angry Union that was eager to exact vengeance for the murdered president. We may never really know the whole truth.
Alexander Gardener was one of the most prominent photographers of the day.  Some of the most interesting and compelling images taken during the American Civil War were shot by Gardner. Gardner, who had photographed the body of Booth and taken portraits of several of the male conspirators while they were imprisoned aboard naval ships, photographed the execution for the government.
The series of images he shot of the moments before and after the execution are quite profound and can be at times difficult to look at.

The desire for justice juxtaposed with the idea of executing a woman during this time in American history has been captured completely in this image. I would consider it a critical part of the narrative that is the American Civil War. It is significant because it was the first of its kind.  

The Westborough Baptist Church Protest - Bradley C. Bower AP

Bradley C. Bower AP

My former father-in-law was and is one of the most intelligent people I have ever met.  Despite somewhat different political viewpoints he and I would have very passionate yet affable debates on a variety of subjects from politics to history.  His own world view was that of a retired Jewish liberal lawyer from New York City. Of all the things told me over the years, there is one thing I have never forgotten. He said, “Free speech is the one right that we as Americans should defend above all others. The more offensive and derisive that speech is, the harder we should work to defend it.”  His point was that anyone can defend free speech when it lines up with our own beliefs and sense of morality. But a person who defends speech that goes against everything they believe in, that person truly understands what free speech is all about.

On March 9, 2014 the controversial patriarch of the equally controversial Westborough Baptist Church, Fred Phelps died at the age of 84.  The Westborough Baptist Church first came to the national spotlight in 1991. The unaffiliated Baptist church is best known for its extreme ideologies, especially those against gay people. In a nutshell, their message is that all the bad things that happen in this country are a direct result of our tolerance of the gay lifestyle and God is punishing us because of it. They are most infamous for their picketing of the funerals of soldiers killed in actions overseas. The church is thought of as a hate group and is scrutinized as such by organizations as the Anti-Defamation League and Southern Poverty Law Center.
Since 1991 the church has become one of the most hated organizations in the country. One could spend an entire manuscript talking about the polemic church, their motivations and actions. Suffice it to say, the membership is always raising the bar when it comes to contentious speech. 

To be very clear I find their message ugly and extremely repulsive, but I defend their right to say it.  I also find any group or individual with an extreme point of view fascinating. Mostly it is because I want to know what makes them tick. I wish to try and understand that which makes no sense to me. 

That brings us to the image. If you Google for pictures of the Westborough Baptist Church, you will get literally hundreds like this. This is actually a somewhat milder sample the kinds of signs they flaunt. This image was taken by AP Photographer Bradley C. Bower. However, that is not the point in this case. The point of the image is not that it is necessarily iconic or even famous. It is merely a sample of how groups like the WBC often stretch the very boundaries of our notion of what free speech means. 

In 2010 the WBC won a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court. It basically said they had the right to protest funerals and that this right fell under the protections granted by the first amendment of the Constitution. 

The WBC knows all too well, the fact that their messages are so extreme and derisive is exactly what gets them noticed by the media and everyone else. It is also a powerful representation of how powerful imagery and words can be. 

Personally I think groups like the Westborough Baptist Church are very necessary to help us understand what it means to be accepting of free speech from all directions. There is a disturbing trend in this country to squash opinions that fail to line up with the popular world view, or whatever we happen to think that view is. 
American Novelist Brad Thor said it best when he stated, “I live in America. I have the right to write whatever I want. And it's equaled by another right just as powerful: the right not to read it. Freedom of speech includes the freedom to offend people.”

The image is iconic if for no other reason than that 

http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/wbc/default.html?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_in_America&xpicked=3&item=WBC

http://www.thecarrollnews.com/news/opinion/3222637/Westboro-monsters-ask-for-decency-respect

http://www.has.vcu.edu/wrs/profiles/WestboroBaptistChurch.htm

Trayvon Martin Hoodie Photo – Unknown

Released to public by family of Trayvon Martin

For the better part of 2012 and 2013 the most covered news story in this country was the shooting death of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin by neighborhood watch coordinator George Zimmerman. You would have to have just landed from another planet to have not heard this story or the national conversation it sparked. This picture of Trayvon Martin wearing a hoodie was at the center of much of that conversation.

As this is a blog about images and their place in history, I won’t be discussing what may or may not have happened on that February night in Sanford Florida or the subsequent aftermath that gripped the nation. My point with this is to talk about this image and its place in history.

The question is; do public images related to criminal cases, especially high profile ones, affect public opinion?  It is yet another tale of how the symbolism we assigned to this single image became larger the person depicted in it. How a picture does became a metaphor for each side of this controversial dialogue? How does an image like this become so iconic? Did the image drive the drive the conversation of race and guns or simply add to one already there? All significant questions I think.

After the February 2012 shooting a number of images of Trayvon Martin were released to the public, including this one. I have not been able to trace the exact origin of the image. It is only listed as being owned and provided by the Martin family. My best guess is that it is a self-portrait. The image immediately became central to the conversation mainly because the teen was wearing a hoodie at the time he was shot, as he is in the photo. It suddenly became source of controversy and protest as the image made its way across the landscape. I have noticed that in very high profile cases like these, the images the media choses to display about victims or suspects are significant. There is little doubt that images will often sway public opinion on way or another. The question then becomes does the media select images for a story like this simply at random to illustrate their story with no thought as to their impact, or is there a conscious effort to promote an agenda and a the photo is selected that will support that agenda?  These images can become a reflection of how society sees the different individuals.  The other side of this coin was the controversy of how Zimmerman was portrayed by the media in the photos they chose to depict him.

There is little doubt images render a mental picture for us. We are such visual creatures.  If you Google OJ Simpson for example, almost every image you will see is connected to some kind of criminal activity. These include his 1995 murder trial or his 2007 robbery conviction. The most famous or infamous of them being the one Time magazine put on its June 1994 cover.  One needs to deliberately search to find images that reflect his life before 1994. I don’t think this is a measured attempt at a conspiracy, but it does add to our perception as to the kind of man we now believe Simpson is.

Think back to every celebrity who has run afoul of the law in the past twenty or so years. When these stories break how are the pictures we are shown by are the media to illustrate the story are glamorous publicity shots we normally associate with the celebrity? Or are they mug shots or shots of them ducking the paparazzi while coming to or from a jail or courthouse.

Not that I feel a great deal of sympathy for these people. But I am forced to ask when the general public sees a news story about someone suspected of a criminal activity, do we also expect a picture appropriate to the situation and that is what we are provided.  Or is our desire created be the media’s intention to give us images that better sell their stories? Is it the chicken or the egg?

It is difficult to tell at what point what Martin was wearing became significant. However, on March 23^rd 2012, media personality, Geraldo Rivera became one of the first to comment that Martin was partially to blame for his own death because hoodies are so closely related to crime and the so-called “Gangsta” culture. Not only did Rivera receive a large amount of criticism for his comments, but it helped spark a counter argument if you will, when thousands of citizens attended rallies wearing hoodies in protest of the shooting. Celebrities began to Tweet pictures of themselves wearing hoodies. Many of these pictures were deliberately posed to be similar to the picture of Martin. One can even go to Amazon and order a hoodie with this photo imprinted on it. The Martin family has trademarked his name and likeness. The point the protesters was trying to make was that clothing is no justification for shooting a person

This image is significant for all of these reasons. Photos like these make us ask questions not only about the world around us, but how do we see that world.

The Dead of Antietam – Alexander Gardner

Library of Congress – National Achieve Collection – Civil War

A little over 150 years ago the American Civil War was in full purpose.  Because of the Industrial Revolution, humans were now able to kill each other more efficiently than ever before. The American Civil War was the test for that technology. It would prove to be a most profound one.

Along with the new machines of war, photography was also introduced in the 19^th century.  By the time of the war, photography had proliferated in to the most popular art form of the day. Photography studios were in every major city in the world and many small towns as well.

The first battlefield images ever taken were of the Crimean War (1853 – 1856). The relatively handful of images that came out of that conflict would be nothing compared to the thousands that would be shot during the Civil War. Hundreds of photographers would leave the relative safety of their studios and a life of taking simple portraits to follow the massive armies from battlefield to battlefield.

Many of the images taken by these entrepreneurial photographers were portraits as well. Photos that the soldiers had made to send home to their loved ones. Along with their cameras, photographers would carry makeshift studios along with them. It was a booming business. Soldiers would often pay as much as a ten percent of their monthly wage for a single image of themselves.

The demand for news from the front also created another market for photographs. Every newspaper in the country, north and south wanted compelling images to accompany their news stories of the war. In spite of the slow shutter speeds of the day, the art of battlefield photography was born.

A number of very talented photographers made a name for themselves during this time. Men like Alexander Gardner, Timothy O’Sullivan and most notably Mathew Brady. Brady would go on to be the most prominent photographer of his day. To have your portrait taken at one of his studios could be a real boost to your social stature. He photographed almost every prominent person of the day, including Abraham Lincoln.

On September 17^th 1862, the Battle of Antietam was fought near the small western Maryland town of Sharpsburg. Because of the terrible casualties this battle wrought it would be known as the bloodiest day in American history. Because Sharpsburg was a mere 65 miles from the nation’s capital photographers descended on it as soon as the battle was over. Mathew Brady dispatched Alexander Gardner, who was in his employ at the time, to the now quiet hills and farms of western Maryland.  He would return with some of the most stunning images ever recorded up to that point.

In October 1862, Brady displayed the images in his New York Studio. They would be nothing like the county had ever experienced. Viewers of the exhibit were both fascinated and horrified as the grim reality of war was shown to them in a way none had ever seen before. [1]

This image, which is of the members a confederate battery dead near the now famous Dunker Church would become one of the most iconic of the entire war. The area around the church had seen some of the bitterest fighting of the battle.

This image is iconic because it tells the narrative of the grim cost of war in a no holds barred manor. It also has an ironic quality when you consider the dead bodies strewn about such a place of worship. The Dunkers were pacifists who refused to fight.

In a  review of Brady’s exhibit appeared in the New York Times, the reviewer so moved by what he saw  he wrote, “Mr. BRADY has done something to bring home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of war. If he has not brought bodies and laid them in our dooryards and along the streets, he has done something very like it.” [2]

Because of images like these we would never look at war with the romance and allure that we had in days prior to this.

Gardner would go on to become a famous photographer in his own right. Despite the fact that many of his images are now in the National Archives and in the National Portrait Gallery, Brady died a penniless man. Patrons and friends took up a collection to pay for his funeral. [3] [4]

---

[1] http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/24/the-dead-of-antietam/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

[2] http://www.nytimes.com/1862/10/20/news/brady-s-photographs-pictures-of-the-dead-at-antietam.html

[3] http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/cwp/

[4] http://npg.si.edu/exhibit/cw/npgcivilwar.html

Dorthy and the Munchkins Take a Break - Unknown

The Wizard of Oz: The Official 75th Anniversary Companion 

by William Stillman   and Jay Scarfone  - HarperCollins Publisher

One of my fondest memories of childhood was when my parents would dress my brother Chris and me in our pajamas, pile us in the family station wagon and head out to spend a delightful evening at the local drive-in theatre.  It was like a giant adventure that would find my brother and I struggling to stay awake throughout an entire Planet of the Apes triple feature.  These experiences helped form my love of movies

.  

Once a mainstay of American culture drive-ins have largely become a thing of the past. I suppose with all of the changes in the way we experience movies today, drive-ins just don’t have a place in our society.

I still movies. They are such a wonderful art form. Movies combine so many disparate and yet similar elements all together to tell a story. There are movies I have seen countless times and will continue to do so. I especially love old movies. To me they represent a window into our past. They may not accurately represent how life was at the time, but they help us know how Americans wanted their life to be.  And there is just something about those old movies that seems to be lost in movies of today.

The art of making motion pictures began in the 1890's, but the decades of the 1930’s and 1940's are considered the “Golden Age of Hollywood.” I for one agree with that label.

“The decade marked by the Great Depression and leading into World War II is remembered as Hollywood’s Golden Age. During this period, new genres were formed, new stars were born, and the studio system rose to mammoth status. The eight major studios, each known for its distinctive style and stars, collectively produced 95% of all American films. More than 7,500 features were released by the studios between 1930 and 1945 to eager audiences. More than 80 million people took in a least one film per week at the height of the cinema’s popularity. This period also saw the introduction of the Production Code, B-Films, and the first animated feature of Snow White. Hollywood’s Golden Age began to decline in the late 1940’s due to the introduction of television, Hollywood blacklisting, and the ability of actors to become ‘free agents.’ A final blow to the industry occurred in 1948, when antitrust suits were filed against the major studios.” [1]

As I began to work on this entry into the blog I thought what would be the best image to accompany it. I usually find the picture and then write the text. In this case I had the story and needed an image that would go with it. It was then I remembered an image that I saw some years back of Judy Garland during the filming of The Wizard of Oz. I thought it would be perfect. I had thousands of classic Hollywood images to choose from that might have fit, but this is just a personal favorite. I can olny assume it was taken by a staff photographer working for MGM at the time.   

I love this image for so many reasons. Not the least of which is the wonderful juxtaposition and the fantastic narrative it tells. I think you would be hard pressed to find a person in this country that has not seen this The Wizard of Oz at least once. It is a timeless American classic.

A great photo is not always one that is well known in and of itself. I can also be one that gives you another perspective on something near and dear to your heart.

---

[1] http://ils.unc.edu/dpr/path/goldenhollywood/

Rhien II – Andreas Gursky

Owner - anonymous

In 1999 German visual artist Andreas Gursky took this photo of the Rheine River. In 2011 a three meter wide pint of the image mounted on acrylic glass sold at Christie’s New York for a record 4.3 million dollars; making it the most expensive photograph ever sold.

Two things came to mind when I read this. First of all, I am seriously concidering changing my occupation to “Visual Artist”. And secondly, how much disposable income do you need before you are comfortable spending 4.3 million dollars on a photograph?

This could be the very definition of what has come to be known as “Frist world problems.” 

However, as an artist myself, I felt compelled to put own my thoughts on the nature of photography and art as I do think it plays a significant role in our society.

I think this is a significant image because it says something about the nature of Fine Art Photography.

Since the first very photographers began to capture images in the early 1800s, they fought for acknowledgement from other artists and those in the art world as to whether their work should be considered legitimate art. I can say from personal experience that this battle still goes on today. With the recent proliferation of digital photography there is a very real feeling among some, including traditional film photographers, that digital photography does not require any real skill at all. Making me feel that my work is sometimes looked on as being in the same category as glow in the dark paintings on black velvet.

I was once asked by a fellow photographer what I would say to those who don’t see photography as art. My response was that I would say nothing. Personally, why would I try to persuade anyone how they should feel about art? It is completely subjective. What each of us feels when they experience any kind of art is as personal as it gets. Whether you prefer a multi-million dollar image of the Rhine River or some kind of whimsical picture of a precocious kitten that you saw on the internet; we all like what we like when it comes to the appreciation of art in all of its forms. I would never attempt to defend my work or attempt to persuade anyone who does not connect with it. I just don’t think it works that way.

I am forced to wonder however, if can make that next image that will make millions of dollars. I have a real passion for what I do, which would make it all the sweeter if I could figure out how to make a living at it too. One of the real up-sides of being an artist is having people compliment your work. It is even better when they want to give you money for it. Any artist who says that the money side of it does not matter is either a liar, a fool or is so self-conscious that they don’t want to be perceived as greedy.

As for Andreas Gursky. I say, good for him. I am not sure I would have a burning desire to hang that piece on my wall, but it matters not. It is a legitimate work of art regardless of what it sold for.  

For what it is worth, the person or persons who loved the image so much that they will willing to shell out 4.3 million dollars for it, remains anonymous.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/8884829/Why-is-Andreas-Gurskys-Rhine-II-the-most-expensive-photograph.html

The Loch Ness Monster - Robert Kenneth Wilson

www.telegraph.co.uk 

In 1934 a photo of a mysterious figure that was reportedly seen swimming in Loch Ness was made public. The blurred image was taken by London gynecologist Robert K Wilson and appeared in the London Daily Mail on the 21^st of April. Initially Wilson denied any connection with the photo, which lead to it being called simply the “Surgeon’s Photograph”. Those who believed in this misterious creature claimed it was conclusive evidence of a large dinosaur like beast living in Loch Ness.

The image instantly made the Scottish Highlands loch a destination for those seeking to get a glimpse of the elusive creature. Stories abound of those who have claimed to have seen the animal for themselves.  For the last 80 years the Loch Ness Monster has become an integral part of pop culture history, despite the fact that the photo was later proved to be a hoax and no real evidence of the creature’s existence has ever been uncovered.

Nessie has since joined the pantheon of supernatural creatures that walk or slither in the darkest recesses of our world. They include the likes of the Abominable Snowman, Bigfoot, The Chupacabra and the Jersey Devil, just to name a few.  I may not be a believer myself, but I certainly understand and appreciate the roll these creatures fill in our society. And whether you believe or not you would have to be living in a cave for the last 100 years to not know something about these legends. They exist everywhere on the planet and in every culture. Whether they are told on The Discovery Channel or around a campfire, they are stories we have grown to love.

The image is iconic for several reasons. If nothing else it proves how a single image can change the way we see our world depending on what we each see in it. Those who believe in the existence of creatures like the Loch Ness Monster Bigfoot and the like need very little persuasion to find their own truth in pictures like these. The will often endure wide spread ridicule from the rest of the human race for their passion and theories. They want to believe therefore they do. There is little doubt that when the image appeared in newspapers it cause and immediate stir, and we are still talking about it today.

It is also is a wonderful example of how we humans are very inclined to put their faith in things that seem to leave room for doubt. Is it because we live in such an expansive and diverse universe that we are so willing to believe in the extraordinary to make ourselves feel less insignificant? Or is it simply that our desire to believe in the supernatural makes many other things in our world that cannot be explained less scary to us? I am not really sure I just know I like it.

Now you may be inclined to dismiss those who believe in the existence of these creatures as ignorant crackpots, and you are certainly welcome to do so. To me, when you do you are missing a critical part of what it means to be human. It does not matter that the picture is of a real monster. It only matters what it represents. Like most photos that truth is a varied as the people who see it.

Is this a photo of a mysterious creature that secretly lives among us hiding in the shadows or is it simply an elaborate hoax? Either way, the image tells a wonderful story that lives on and on. 

http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/photo_database/image/the_surgeons_photo/