My only real point however is that not EVERY image has to be so challenging to our social views in order to "be" photography. Perhaps a certain "type" of photography - but not to define the art as a whole.

I still believe that it was an error to word such an article in a way that leaves one to feel that if a photo isn't challenging - in it's content - then it simply doesn't "count". There is nothing wrong with simple joy and pleasure being brought forward by a simple photograph.

As long as it pleases the viewer and evokes some emotion -whether it be a smile, a tear or a laugh - it serves a purpose and in "my humble opinion" is photography. I just don't think we should sound as though we are trying demean all photos that don't fit this articles definition.

Perhaps I'm too harsh but I've spent too many years at too many galleries dealing with too many people who scoffed at anything that wasn't offensive or challenging to the masses .. and to be honest with you I'm tired of their attitudes. Perhaps if this world appreciated more simplicity we wouldn't be in as many messes are we currently are.

Again - if I misinterpreted the intent of this article, I sincerely apologize. I only feel that somebody needs to defend those artists & photographers who choose not to do just what others say they should and instead do what they love and brings them joy and hopefully does the same for their audiences.

I think we have to be cautious how we express these sentiments. Too many photographers / artists are eager to feature death, injustice and destruction without including the "good stuff" as well. It can leave those of us who feel the need to celebrate these good things - perhaps even in defiance of all the bad stuff happening around us - with a bad taste in our mouth, as though our viewpoints are not valid.

The reason why I wrote my comment as is is because of these points (and others) in your article:
[Photography should incessantly question reality with the passion of a martyr. It should make our leaders fear it, our priests condemn it.]

[It should beg for perfection, over and over, pointing out every little detail of injustice, abuse, destruction and greed.]

Though your exact words did not state the phrase that you re-quoted from Alesia, that describes the mood that I got of from the article. Many viewers and photographers associate negative connotations like banality and repetition with beauty/love imagery more than they do with imagery of destruction/despair. I don't though...I see it on both sides...I see it too much and for bad reasons like I mentioned.

From your follow up comment, I see that you did not mean it that way, which is good. Glad that this article has people thinking, regardless of their views. Good stuff.

The "constant stream that passes by at a low buzz" though could also be called life, and photography has always been too many things at once, even for photographers.

Maybe we should stop looking at pictures ad nauseam, to clear our vision... and to let our eyes and minds start over?

The concept that it must tell tales of destruction, negativity and pain in order to be relevant and true is a narrow view of the world.

True, I agree, there is much repetition and banality in imagery today. However, that exists on both sides of the road. Too many photographers are obsessed with whatever brown faces are suffering and telling "poor them" stories instead of using those same images to channel hope, power and inform. They are pain voyeurs who are deriving pleasure from their own self-centered thought that their personal and intellectual depth increases with every image of pain displayed. They are melanin chasers who are more exploitive than they are exploratory and that also has to stop.

Two previous Blackstar posts touched on this: http://rising.blackstar.com/please-no-more-pictures-of-dying-africans.html and http://rising.blackstar.com/want-an-accurate-portrait-of-africa-hire-local-photographers.html

Photographers have to tell different types of stories...stories that are relevant to a variety of existences. They have to tell the stories for truthful reasons that are beyond their own needs and personal existences, whether those stories are those within the realms of comfort or without. Both comfort and discomfort are necessary to truly see the world as it is.

Using your camera to expose the true and raw beauty of the world around us can be just has powerful. Why should we fight for change and struggle to make a difference if we feel there is nothing to fight "for"?

A powerful image does not only come in the form of defiance, an act of war or a question of reality. The photographer who only focuses on these things has become a cynic. There is still beauty and love and tolerance within our world and it is up to artists and photographers alike to remind everyone that these are indeed the things we must preserve, protect and fight for.

So yes - never underestimate the power of your camera. But remember power comes in many forms and the strongest form of that is the power of love. Without it nobody would care about the photographs of the suffering, the inhumane, the injustice ... we can not leave beauty or love out of the picture.

Alesia

The talent to achieve what you write about is rare - those who have it should nurture it and aim high.