Love that you use the words 'challenging' and 'difficult' where many others would simply saying boring. Photographers like Eggleston show us that nothing is boring, it's only a question of how, and what, one perceives.
“If something is boring after two minutes, try it for four. If still boring, then eight. Then sixteen. Then thirty-two. Eventually one discovers that it is not boring at all.” - John Cage
@@AlecSothRU-vid Worry not, perusers of Eggleston. Just head over to The Photobook Guy, where I believe the whole Democratic Forest box set is shown. Grab a six pack or your beverage of choice, settle in to a comfy seat and enjoy: ru-vid.com/show-UCzjx1mZr9gR_wjIQF4HvYygvideos.
Thank you for this, Alec! As someone who doesn't have a formal education in art or photography, videos like this are an invaluable resource to learn about the importance of editing and sequencing. Thoroughly enjoyed this and I hope you'll do more this year!
This is gem! I feel like I’m taking an amazing class with an amazing teacher in my own home. Absolutely love learning your insights. I love the casual pacing and vibe. Thank you so much!
I think this might be the best photography video I've ever seen on RU-vid. And I'm not exaggerating. Your insights are so on point. Not surprised considering the quality of your online masterclass, but can you do it for your whole library ? Pretty please ? :D
This is my first video I've ever watched like this, and my first time experiencing Eggleston. I am blown away. The end of your video had me drawn in. Eggleston's guide is a seriously beautiful and equally ugly. Gosh. The emotions I had no idea I would find in a photo book.
Dear Alec, thank you. Your voice is soothing. Thoughts after watching: what tells apart a challenging photograph from an unsuccessful one. What makes a photograph worth looking at.If pictures are random , what holds them together. And what is modern art without an idea to support it. Warmest greetings from Berlin
Wonderful exploration. Thanks much for sharing. Your musings about the implied meanings at the end of guide (1976) made me think of the relationship between Szarkowsky and Arbus.
William Eggleston is my favorite photographer and this is by far the most comprehensive video I have seen on his work and a very good introduction. It is also a democratic way to have access to these very expansive books.
Hi Alec, thanks for your time and the channel. Maybe the way to resolve Eggleston’s lack of editing and choice over his published photos is to remember Lacan’s reworking of Descartes‘s self-possessing I which has become central to the liberal fantasy of the subject. Lacan also never wrote most of his seminars and used his students' notes and published those, his main point was that the self is not entirely a master of its domain, even if you could speak about self and mastership at all. He said “I think where I am not, therefore I am where I do not think.” (Complete quote: “I think where I am not, therefore I am where I do not think. I am not whenever I am the plaything of my thought; I think of what I am where I do not think to think.” I guess what I’m trying to get at is: If Eggleston took all these pictures, and the editor selection and power over the book does not erase Eggleston here, maybe it reveals to us something even more essential to Eggleston’s work. After all, why should good work or good selection only represent our work? Why do we even take these photos? Isn’t that maybe that is what is democratic about the forest. IG: @boynative.jpg
Well done Alec, inspiring, informative and at minute 41:31 Wolfgang Tillmans photo, It's a bridge in Rome, maybe Ponte Garibaldi, in case anyone was wondering. Thanks for these great vlogs.
I have been taking your Magnum education series extremely slow simply not to consume them so fast and continue listening to you. This video has just made my day! Looking forward to seeing more of these "ramblings".
It was interesting to hear how much you spoke in terms being moved bodily through the world by the photographs: now we're inside, now we're at his home, now we're in Miami, etc. These could be merely figures of speech, but I don't think so, especially given what you've said elsewhere about the final picture in The Americans. I've never really experienced looking at photographs in this way--ie. in the sense of having my self transported out to the places in the pictures. Really enjoyed the video. It would definitely be nice to see more.
If this is called 'rambling', then ramble on! I enjoyed every minute of this Mr. Soth. It's a nice opportunity and insight to hear (and see) one master talking about another master.
This was amazing! Eggleston is my favourite photographer and you've made me see more things in his photos. I am fascinated by the question of how far the editing of the pictures is relevant to the understanding of his photos. Maybe one should not see his "democratic" approach as a "concept" (i.e. as opposed to photographing a certain subject matter) but really as the absense of a concept - I mean, he was not intellectual about his pictures and he didn't care much about the editing, both of which would make sense if he were persuing a concept. To me it seems that Eggleston's choices of what to shoot/what composition to use etc. were determined to a particulary large part by his subconscious. It seems like he would shoot something because it "spoke" to him in a way that he was probably not able to explain himself (and that would maybe only become more banal when attempted to be explained). What, to me, supports this thesis is that he shot very fast, almost passing by, and that he was very reluctant to talk about the meaning of his photos. If seen that way, the point is not that he shoots an oven, because it's as interesting a subject as anything else, but because that particular oven at that moment in that light corresponded to a diffuse, maybe subconscious, emotion that he had (that to you in the video translated to "suicidal"). To me that makes sense, because even his most "challenging" photographs, that don't have any quality that I can rationally grasp like beauty, surprise, interesting colour or subject matter etc., they still have an emotional quality that speaks to me. As far as editing is concerned, the job of the editor would not be to find something like "coherence" or "a story", but rather to replicate the experience of obliviously drifting through a day, with no sense of time, direction or purpose and no interference to the stream of consciousness - just like a child playing outside all day. (Which I guess is just what you said in your video.) Maybe the best way to present his photos would be either in the order they were taken on that day, or randomly (i.e. by a random generator on a screen, different every time you watch them). Or you could see the editing process as an attempt at psychoanalysis and try to find a subject matter in the potentially subconscious choices that went into the photos - which is maybe what happened in the case of the guide, where the editor distilled the subjct matter of boyhood and the mix of nostaliga and anxiety that goes with the transition from boyhood to adulthood. Anyway, I was inspired by your rambling to ramble on a bit. I'll get a coffee and look through the "Guide" now, I think.
I watched your Magnum piece and this with great joy. I’ve learned more from these two interactions than you can imagine - what I have struggled with most of all in my practice is creating sense and story. I’m sure I’m not alone. Your teaching video and these reflections really do work very well together - I’d love to hear more about the creation of narrative - thanks for doing this.
Fantastic presentation and thoughts. I could watch you talk through your entire library in this format. It feels like the first time I’ve been challenged to think differently about work like this since I was in an art classroom. Thank you.
Thank you so much for this rambling Alec, it was very inspiring to have your insights. Still lots of question marks that make reading books so satisfying and frustrating at the same time. Your video motivates me to dig deeper on the editing side. Once again, thank you and keep on following your amazing journey. Cheers for France.
Highly enjoyable interplay between food for thoughts and space for them, and the rhythm of it all. Just enough signposts to stimulate orientation in the forest. Loved the fringe connections (Tillmans, Ethridge). Bonus: a calm, soothing voice. Thank you
Thank you for this, couldn’t come in a better time. I’m letting go the cameras I don’t use, in order to afford more books. The whole “democratic photography” idea is so fascinating...
Thank you so much for this video. I could listen to you talking about photography all day. I can’t wait to binge everything else on your channel and pretend I’m in some sort of dream university lecture.
Your reading of Eggleston's Guide really gave me a fresh perspective of looking at the book, thank you! I'm basically parroting other comments here but this format is really enjoyable and insightful and I do hope you'll be doing more of these.
Enthusiastic +1 to more of these, especially books that include narrative and discussion of photography or that are instructive. This talk is so good. Love it.
Thank you Alec. I was comfortably enjoying a morning coffee in my pjs with the sun on my back and found this. Yes, it was great. Led to another cup of coffee and a new inspiration for what can be photographed. John Szarkowski was such a master editor and poetic communicator of everything photography. Poetry. Sequencing. Less, not more. We are surrounded with more. 2020 has taught us that less is better than more. Unless we’re talking about good conversation and talks like this. Please keep them coming Alec, we need more.
Wonderful, Alec -- as Orson Wells once said "It's all in the editing" -- abeit he was the editor. And brings to mind the recent Christie’s auction of Michael Winkleman's ("Beeple") jpeg for $69 million, which was conceived -- in its mosaic presentation of all Winkleman's images over 13 years -- by the auctioneer, Noah Davis. Editor as artist; auctioneer as artist -- "Art is not a democracy" (Gore Vidal). Keep up the generous and good work. James
I love Eggleston, Shore, Keith Carter, and Jeff Wall. I really like the book “Democratic Forest,” also. For me photographs are “taken” not “made.” It’s all about what you see in that flash of comprehension of the scene in front of your brain, then it’s gone. Cartier Bresson was spot on, there is a decisive moment for every photograph, especially landscape pics. You grab it in an instant, and move on to the next, and the next...
Couldn’t agree more Alec. I always admired Eggleston’s democratic approach (it makes a great entry into photography for any amateur) but have come to find it problematic for me that he spent so much time photographing and then gave away control of the editing, it seems like so many of his books lack narrative and direction because of that - aside from Eggleston’s Guide of course which is a masterclass in editing. With such a huge body of work to select from it seems cheap to just select seemingly arbitrary categories, but hey my opinion counts for nothing. If he wants to photograph for the sake of photographing who am I to say that’s ‘wrong’? Speaking of democratic photography, have you ever seen the original 60 or so photographs that Stephen Shore edited for his American Surfaces series? I only have the later edition book that must have 300 or so images and always wondered which ones made the cut for the original exhibition. Not sure if he even reproduced it in book form? The evolution of Shore’s work might make an idea for another video?
Great talk, great format. As a non-American I also like your explanation of associations you have with certain elements in the photographs. I can think of quite a few more books I would love to see you discuss (photos, editing, presentation).
Thanks for taking the time to do this. So many "photography" channels on youtube are really about cameras. Getting your interpretation of Eggleston's work is really appreciated. I hope you will do more of these in the future. If you're taking requests I'd be interested in getting your take on somebody like Rinko Kawauchi - "Utatane". Also I liked your Magnum course. I've watched it several times.
The question you pose re editorial input/authorship, you have to consider that, true, a project for Eggleston may be 500-10,000 images taken during a period for a "project" and he would -- I can tell you firsthand experience with him -- rather be out gathering images than sitting in his office going through even 200 images for a project. For Bill, it's all the same thing. He doesn't care which you choose for that project most of the time. For him, the editor is a first filter to diminish the volume, to attenuate the sensory overload, then a first selection exists. At that point, an assembly and elimination process and Bill may, at some point say, "Let's replace that [particular] image with the one [he'll recall something he recalls and likes better] with x. So he does have input into the layout and the arrangement, even if he doesn't personally perform the initial shuffling. It's good to remember that even with great authors of fiction, except in the rare case of someone like John Updike, most writers work closely with an editor who can have as little input as word choice replacement to syntactic realignment or as large as structural upheaval and requesting specific content. Part of authorship is also deciding to work with someone who's artistic acumen is worthy of your vision.
I've always thought the same thing, the first Democratic Forest was strangely edited, and some of the photo choices were like "why?". Editing is so important of course, like when an otherwise perfect music album is marred by the inclusion of two or three songs that just don't fit, or the song order is not coherent at all, it's a struggle to listen to and engage with. Art is subjective of course, but I've spent more time trying to figure out if I'm missing something about a photograph, or if it's just not a very good photograph, than I have looking at the good photographs sometimes. 😆
Just watched. Please do more. I have always felt a push-pull sort of thing with Eggleston, often finding his photos “difficult” and “challenging,” as you put it, and his books “relentless.” I would love many images and question why others even existed. Your video helped me relax a little and be more open, less judgmental. Thanks.
@@AlecSothRU-vid For sue now, and pretty much any time I would guess. Wish I were a lot better at it 🤣🤣🤣. Took out my copy of “Guide” last night. Keep doing these!
William Eggleston's Guide was so life changing for me. Indescribably so. Like a karate chop to my imagination. Thanks for this discussion. It was hugely interesting and smart.
Thanks Alec, I loved hearing your personal thoughts on Eggleston's books and the ways they were edited. Are you taking requests? I'd love to hear you speak about Larry Sultan's Pictures From Home
Now I understand what kind of photographer I am a little more. I also like to photograph all sorts of what seems to be mundane items of the world around me and hate editing... 😬👍📸 Thank you for the talks I really enjoy them.
What a wonderful and truly valuable video. Your "ramblings" would be to RU-vid something like what Stephen Shore's daily photographs are to Instagram. It raises the medium to a different level. I add my voice to the chorus for more of these!
Loved it! Far too many channels going on about gear and the technical aspects of images rather than what’s happening in the photo, what’s the story, what is it saying.
Could you talk about Meyerowitz’s “Cape Light” ? Along with “Eggleston’s Guide” it was a very important book for a lot of us seniors. Love these talks, thank you.
Love this style, would love to see you do it with some of my favourites Robert adams, mark stenmeitz, Jem Southam, rinko kawauchi , dorthea lange and your own work!
I enjoyed this a lot. I've always been interested in the repetitive nature of the democratic forest, I feel like there is definitely something to the absence of people that adds a surreal quality to the work I can't quite put my finger on. Would love to see more content like this
Thanks for the great talk. The human mind is built for classification. It must be some genetic thing related to survival of the fittest. Give a random selection of photos to 10 people and they would all devise their own scheme of labeling and sorting them. It's one of the things I love about photo books. You have the images and then you have the order of the images. It would be loads of fun to put all of Eggleston's Democratic Forest images online and then have an app that allows people to come in and select/sort the images into their own playlist. I'd love to see the results.
