Part Three: Approaches to Objectivity
This is part three of a four part series comparing the Farm Security Adminstration with Mass Observation, their British equivalent organisation.
This is part three of a four part series comparing the Farm Security Adminstration with Mass Observation, their British equivalent organisation. If you’d like to access the full essay now, instead of in weekly sections, become a Paid Subscriber below, then open the introductory post.
Introduction (and full essay if you’d like to upgrade to a Paid Subscription!)
Part Two: Factors which led to variation in approach of the farm security administration and Mass Observation
Part Three: Approaches to Objectivity
Approaches to Objectivity in the Work of Walker Evans
To analyse Evans’ approach to taking photographs, this section will focus on photographs from his time working for the Farm Security Administration, and will then analyse how Evans endeavours to remain objective when photographing for the FSA.
“To Evans, the word “Documentary” has a definite and crucial significance. It means that the reality treated is in no way tampered with. Nothing is imposed on experience. Documentary, he says, is “stark record.” Any alteration or manipulation of the facts, for propaganda or other reasons, he considers “a direct violation of our tenets.[9]”
To achieve this “stark record” of documentary photography, Evans distanced himself as much as possible from the subject. He did not take candid photographs, or surprise his subject with a shock exposure. Evans’ technique was to inform his subject that he would be taking a photograph, setting up his equipment, giving the subject time to compose themselves for the photograph, and then firing the shutter. Distancing himself from the more popular techniques of documentary at the time (such as trying to take candid photographs of the subject or using compositional techniques in order to gain a more emotive reading of the work. A number of his contemporaries used this method, including Russell Lee, and Margaret Bourke White) achieved a more objective nature to the work.
This photograph shows two boys outside of a grocer’s holding some kind of melon, with a few more people in the background of the image, inside the grocer’s. The people in the image clearly know they are being photographed, as they are looking straight towards the camera, and also because the two boys are holding melons, showing off. The girl in the shadow of the grocer’s knows she is being photographed, because she is posing like a typical girl of the time, showing off her dress. Presumably the people in the photograph are the family of whoever owns the grocer’s from how they are situated together, and how the boys feel they are allowed to handle the grocer’s stock for a photograph. From being able to act how they want for the photograph, the people (especially the young people) put across how they ideally want to be perceived by the audience of the photograph, and thus are perceived in this way on the surface. The boys holding the melons want to be seen as strong and manly, and are, for a time. If the viewer delves deeper into the image they realise that the boys only want to be perceived this way. By this time however, the fact that the boys are posing is somewhat irrelevant. The viewer has already been exposed to how the boys wish to be perceived. The composition of the image is straight on, quite far back from the people in the image, to achieve a better composition of the building they are situated in. This also effectively pulls Evans out of the scene, making the image less personal in this way.
This photograph depicts three men standing or sitting outside a Barber’s shop in Vicksburg, Mississippi. A car takes up the bottom right-hand corner of the image, with a white driver. Evans photographed the scene from straight on, trying to use as basic a composition as possible, as opposed to a more emotive composition that some of his contemporaries (such as Russell Lee) may have been prone to use. He has also set up quite far away from the subjects of his photograph, either at the other side of the road, or in the middle of the road. This was presumably to intrude upon the situation as little as possible, as well as to achieve the desired composition of the image.
The people in the image almost certainly knew Evans was photographing them, not only because one of them is looking directly at the camera, but also because of the time and effort involved to set up a large format camera, which Evans used. He probably informed the men beforehand that he would be taking a photograph, allowing the men to compose themselves how they wished for the photograph. However the posing in this photograph is a lot less obvious than in the last photograph. The building in the image appears to be crooked due to how Evans composed this in conjunction with the road. This is perhaps the most crucial element of the image in pointing to the poverty of the people in the image. However, the building could have equally been situated on a hill, and Evans have knowingly composed the image for the building to appear crooked due to making the road the level point of the image. If so, this would counteract Evans meaning of documentary, “that the reality treated is in no way tampered with.”[10] There is a racial juxtaposition present in the image, in that the car in the photograph is being driven by a white man, while the three black men in the image are sitting or standing around outside a Barber’s shop. This implies that the white man is wealthier than the black men, and also points to the fact that the black men are the real subject of the image, rather than the white man, as Evans photographed working class people for his work with the FSA, and the white man clearly is not from a working class background. Having said that, the black men in the image are dressed relatively well, this is not an exposure of the working class, intending to shock the reader into action. Another factor within the photograph which points to the area of the photograph being a poor area is the ragged curtains or sheets in the window of the Barber’s shop. From this fact, a viewer could assume that the shop the men are standing outside of has closed down. However, the building is not a central part of the image as it could have been. This component of the image is shifted to the background of the image by the way Evans photographed the scene, thus making the men in the image the focal point.
Evans usually took his photograph from quite a distance away from the subject to give the reader less of a personal involvement with the subject. He also informed the subject that he would be taking a photograph, allowing them to compose themselves suitably for the camera. These elements distanced Evans’ involvement with the subject as he made himself as much a stranger photographically as possible, taking away any personal connection with the subject. He composed the photograph in as simple and straightforward a way as possible, to avoid any techniques which would sway the audience of the image one way or the other, thus giving a realistic impression of the scene. In this way, from being as neutral a photographer as possible, there becomes a certain ambiguity in how we read his images.
Approaches to Objectivity in the Work of Humphrey Spender
Humphrey Spender was the main photographer on the Mass Observation project, and was encouraged to remain as much as an impartial observer as possible, to serve the same purpose as other observers at the time, but instead of writing things down, he took photographs. Spender’s approach left “things to speak for themselves and not to impose any kind of theory.”[11] Spender’s orders to remain impartial almost forced him to shoot candidly; “I had to be an invisible spy – an impossibility which I didn’t particularly enjoy trying to achieve.”[12] Spender used a handheld 35mm camera with no flash to be as unobtrusive as possible while shooting candidly. [13]
This image depicts two young children sat on a rocking horse in the centre of an open space. An integral part of Spender’s approach was his use of compositional elements to imply that he was an objective participant. In this photograph he achieves this in a number of ways. The most obvious of which is an out of focus bar of some kind almost in the centre of the image. Another way he does this is from using a very loose composition in a lot of his images. For example in this image other objects from the playground are encroaching into the edges of the image. This loose composition gives a snapshot aesthetic to the image, as if Spender almost has not considered the composition of the image, therefore giving the image a more neutral edge. This is implied because if the image is a snapshot, the photographer has less of a connection to the subject, in that through carefully setting up a composition, the subject will be more likely to realise the photographer is photographing them, and so respond to this by posing in some manner for the camera. The main factor in Spender’s approach which implies this objectivity was that he mainly shot candidly. This means that if the subject doesn’t realise they are being photographed, they will be themselves. This aspect of Spender’s work relates to the idea of unmediated documentary photography, with the photographer remaining as neutral a component as possible, with the subject being unaware that they are being photographed.
This image shows a man sat on a bench, with another two men sat on a bench in the background of the image. Again the image is, or at least, appears to be candid. The composition seems to be more considered in this image, with one bench in the foreground and one in the background, with a statue in the far background of the image. Even though this image is more aesthetically pleasing than the first image, it is also less objective because of this. With such a considered composition the photographer makes decisions on how they want to represent their subject, therefore changing the audiences view of the subject in some way, for example in this image, because of the composition, the viewer will favour the man in the foreground of the image rather than those in the background. Another device used by Spender was photographing the same scene multiple times, in order to catch something more interesting in the frame. A contemporary audience of Spender’s photographs in the 1930’s wouldn’t be privy to the knowledge that Spender photographed the same scene multiple times however, due to the editing process that goes into the creation of a book, such as Worktown People. An archive of Spender’s photographs now exists on the Bolton Museum website, allowing viewers to see his editing process, which adds another element to how his work is perceived.
A second exposure of this scene shows an old man pushing a pram in front of the man sat on the bench in the foreground of the image. This brings more depth to the image, but also, combined with the knowledge that Spender photographed the scene a number of times, reduces the audience’s perception of his objectivity. This is because Spender therefore considered how to improve this already photographed scene, changing the audience’s views again through the manipulation of the composition.
A third image further enhances Spender’s preference of photographing the same scene more than once to achieve a more interesting image. This image shows a sign saying “no through road,” with a demolished building in the background.
The second of this series contains a car in the bottom left-hand corner, making for a more interesting image.
Another image, from the Worktown People book, a study of Bolton, produced for Mass Observation, shows Spender’s techniques in being objective. The photograph is of a group of children leaving a school, some being led by the parents. One of the children is staring directly at the camera. Spender presumably shot the photograph candidly, as that was his prevailing technique when photographing for Mass Observation, and by chance, the child is looking at the camera. All of the other people in the photograph seem to be unaware of the camera. Another device which Spender uses in this image, in a similar vein as the first image I have analysed, is to use an out of focus object in the foreground of the composition. This, as well as the pillar of the school building encroaching into the right side of the composition again displays Spender’s loose compositional approach.
Overall I have found that Spender used a number of devices in his photography to remain a neutral observer, in line with the other observers of Mass Observation. The main element in his work to achieve this is photographing candidly; people would be themselves if they didn’t know they were being photographed. Another important part of Spender’s practice was his loose composition which, in a similar way to Walker Evans’ device of distancing himself from his subject, achieved a sense of objectivity.
Approaches to Objectivity in the Work of Russell Lee
Russell Lee was one of the later photographers to join the FSA, in 1936. He was assigned to take photographs of mid-western America, and soon became one of the most valued members of Stryker’s team. Lee followed the outline that Stryker set out for him, taking some of the most renowned photographs of the FSA period, but also some of the most controversial in regards to using elements of his photography to influence the audience’s view.
This image shows a small boy sat on the floor next to some luggage. A device used in this image to achieve a sense of objectivity is the composition of the image. The pavement at the bottom of the image is crooked, and Lee has cut off one of the boy’s feet. This implies that Lee either didn’t think about the composition or hastily set up the camera to get his desired shot. Both of these incidences would give a more objective slant to the image because in the first instance, a photographer uses composition as a means to put forward his own views on the subject, the composition of an image is integral to how a viewer views the image. In the second instance, with the photographer hastily setting up his camera, he has less time to impart his will on the subject, or the subject has less time to react to the camera.
The composition however is the only aspect of the image in which Lee endeavoured to remain objective. Every other factor of the image was an attempt on Lee’s part to influence the viewer’s perception of it. The child appears to be either lost, or more probably, waiting for his parents, which, in itself, is quite an emotive thought, but combined with the fact that his parents are probably migrant workers, judging from the luggage behind him, this becomes quite an important tool in creating empathy for the child from the audience, as this was a current issue at the time. The way the child is sitting, and his expression, are other factors in creating empathy in the image. He is sitting with his legs apart, and is lost in thought. The viewer wonders what the child is thinking about, creating a link between the subject of the image and the viewer. Tied on the child’s shirt is a tag of some kind, as though the child is part of the luggage. This de-humanizes the child, which again creates empathy. The final factor of the image which achieves this subjective viewing are the people standing behind the child, who seem to be ignoring him.
The second image analysed shows a group of workers cutting down long grass on the outskirts of a graveyard. The composition of the image appears to be more considered than the last image. Half of the image is taken up by the workers and the graveyard, and half by the sky. A tree borders the left edge of the image. The way the image was planned gives a lot of emphasis on the sky, of which appears to a very warm day. The weather conditions the workers are working in is a factor which increases the audience’s pity for them.
Presumably, judging from the purpose of the FSA photographers, to document the farming situation in America, the people in the image are poor farmers. At the time the photograph was published, this would have been an emotive issue for the viewer, and so photographing the workers in such a thought- provoking manner, working in a graveyard would have swayed the viewer’s opinions on the issue. The type of work the people in the image are doing is another way in which the image is made more subjective. Cutting grass is quite a physical process, which creates empathy with the viewer, in that the workers are involved with such manual labour.
Lee’s most famous photograph for the FSA depicts four children eating dinner, according to the text, on Christmas Day. The image was very effective and was used by a lot of newspapers at the time[14]. Again Lee uses obvious devices in the image to get a reaction out of the audience. The children are clearly very poor, judging from the food on the table, which is bread and soup, and also the condition of the room they are eating the food in, which looks to be little more than a shed. Lee uses these factors as a main part of the image through his composition, the children taking up most of the image, giving the viewer no choice but to look at them. Another important element to the audience’s understanding of the image is the text used with it. The audience are told through the text that the particular meal they are eating is Christmas dinner, which further informs the audience’s opinion of the image. Through the text, the image is also dated, at 1936, making the image a “current” image at the time of publication, and also informing audiences now of the date the image was taken.
From my analysis of Lee’s work I have found that he approached photographing his subject in a different way to both Walker Evans and Humphrey Spender. Evans and Spender endeavoured to remain objective whilst photographing their subject, whereas Lee used devices in his practice to try to provoke a reaction from the audience of the photograph, in favour of his subject.
Approaches to Objectivity in the Work of Julian Trevelyan
Julian Trevelyan was a collagist who worked with Mass Observation, living in Bolton for a period, and produced a number of collages during this time.
This collage is a landscape of Bolton, including houses, trees, and a river, but is predominantly made up of factories, with the sky covered in smoke coming from them. He made the factories a very prominent feature of the collage, with them taking up the top half of the image, as well as being reflected in the river. Almost every chimney from the factories is producing smoke. As well as this, in the centre of the image is a dilapidated looking tree, raising the issue of pollution in the image. Trevelyan’s political views are raised in the image through his use of newspaper cuttings to create certain aspects of the landscape, including buildings, bridges and hills. He used headings from the newspapers to put across his views, for example, “weavers dissatisfied” and “250,000 spent on gaiety.”
Trevelyan used these quite obvious elements in his collage to make a connection, and therefore imprint upon the audience his own ideas and opinions on both Bolton itself and the politics of the time.
References
[9] Stott, W. Documentary Expression and Thirties America, New York, Oxford University Press, 1973, p.269.
[10] Stott, W. Documentary Expression and Thirties America, New York, Oxford University Press, 1973, p.269.
[11] Wells, L. Photography: A Critical Introduction, London, Routledge, 1997, p. 92.
[12] Wells, L. Photography: A Critical Introduction, London, Routledge., 1997, p. 92.
[13] Spender, H. Worktown People, Bristol, Falling Wall Press, 1982, p.17.
[14] Hurley, F. Portrait of a Decade, New York, Da Capo Press, 1972, p.80.
Great article Paul, I'm fascinated by each author's approach to objectivity. All these are great examples of documentary photography in its purest form.
Once again, great work. This is the historical period of photography that I believe helped launch activist photography as we now know it, for better or worse. Its a time rich in subject matter for conversation. I appreciate this.
The one issue I can't wrap my head around, though, is the role of the subject in "subjective" photography. Take the image of the children at their Christmas meal. Let's remove the caption--that's an editorial insertion that none of the other photos have. And let's time-travel and make Evans the photographer. With these same elements in place -- the same soup and bread, the same ragged clothing, the same dilapidated shack, the same disheveled children -- how does Evans possible make this photo an "objective" one? The emotive aspects of that subject matter -- I believe -- would be impossible to overcome objectively.
Please tell where I'm wrong in this, but it seems to me that yes, of course, photographers chose to intrude or not intrude on a scene to influence hearts and minds. But in many cases, the scene itself defines the photographer's role. To remain "objective," Evans would have had to walk away from this shot.