The fact that Salgado's photos are aesthetically nice doesn't bother me. What bothers me more is the mysteriousness of the photos. If Salgado is attempting to keep the subjects in the photo mysterious, than he is an a way being exploitative because he is photographing them more for the sake of beauty and art then to inform people about what is going on throughout the world. If Salgado's photographs were accompanied with the stories of the person or people in each image, the photos would be a lot less exploitative. The story could either be in the words of the subject or written by Salgado himself.
The fact that Salgado is taking photographs in locations where cameras, museums, and photo books are uncommon means that the individuals in the photographs likely don't know what will become of the photographs. Salgado must be making a lot of money from his photographs. Does he give some of the money back to the subjects or to organizations that help the people in the countries and places he photographs?
Looking online, I saw the Salgado changed professions from development economist to photographer early in his career. Also, it appears that he does include writings and captions that tell about what is going on in the regions he portrays. He doesn't write about the specific individuals he photographs but rather about the places he photographs and the situations in the countries he photographs. This makes me think that his photos are beautiful and informative, and may influence the viewers of his work to effect change in positive ways. And his photos are exploitative but they are not as exploitative as I first thought. Just because someone lives in poverty or a war torn area doesn't mean they shouldn't be photographed beautifully.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment