After reading
Cara Finnegan’s article I was not only intrigued by the collection of the FSA
photographs at the Library of Congress but I was also fascinated by how much of
an impact the words chosen for a caption can make when it is been seen along
with a photographic image. I wanted to discover if there were other ways in
which the overall interpretation and understanding of the FSA photographs by
the public was impacted by the activities of the FSA staff. Arthur Rothstein, one of the FSA
photographers, later wrote: “The documentary photograph does more than convey
information. It instructs the viewer in some aspect of society in which truth
is revealed.”[1] Another one
of the FSA photographers Walker Evans was not interested in his photographs
being literal documents since he believed a photograph meant to educate must
also have style.[2] Hence Evans
introduced America to America by creating a more positive portrayal of the
sharecropper’s lives by highlighting what made them strong not vulnerable,
which clashed with the harsh reality of the sharecroppers’ suffering.[3]
Although Judith Davidov’s article focuses on a different collection of
photographs at its core is the idea that documentary photographers usually
interpret a scene in some way before taking a picture.[4]
Photographers affiliated with the FSA framed narratives aiming to instruct
viewers about hardships experienced by Americans during the Great Depression. I wondered who else besides the photographers could shape what the
people would see when the FSA images were published?
Roy
Stryker, head of the FSA photographic division, also impacted the meaning of
the photographs through his editorial decisions. Stryker viewed himself as
guardian of history whose mission was to accumulate as many photographs for
future generations as possible.[5] He wore this mantle since he firmly
believed he was obligated to educate the public.[6]
Stryker in insisting on having total control of the FSA file would select
images to keep in the file while killing negatives he did not think worthy of
being in the record.[7] For him
negatives were just the first draft and therefore dispensable[8]
Stryker also provided shooting scripts for the FSA photographers to indicate
what he wanted photographed.[9]
While
researching more about the FSA collection I discovered 100,000 35 mm negatives
were killed.[10] A negative
is killed when it is damaged in some way that renders it unsuitable for making
positive prints but still leaves most of the image intact. In the instance of
Roy Stryker he killed negatives during his FSA years by punching a hole through
them. Why had some of the negatives been killed and others not?
One
can only speculate why some of the negatives were killed. However, in thinking
of why the photographs were taken in the first place, it is highly probable
that a portion of the killed negatives were not ideal propaganda for advancing
the New Deal philosophy and social reform. Arthur Rothstein emphasized in his
book, Documentary Photography, that
the goal of documentary photography is “to move people to action, to change or
prevent a situation because it may be wrong or damaging, or to support or
encourage one because it is beneficial.”[11]
In other words a documentary photograph can be a propagandistic tool for social
engineering. Publications publishing documentary photographs during the
Depression Era, such as the Survey
Graphic, sought to compel the American people to see why the New Deal
programs were necessary.[12]
It is also important to note that
some of the killed negatives were sometimes just simply terrible pictures.
When
I read “Killed”: Rejected Images of the
Farm Security Administration there was a series of negatives that resonated
with me. The negatives were of pictures taken in Hale County, Alabama by Walker
Evans during the summer of 1936 of families residing in that county.[13]
Here I will be focusing on one family in particular. The Burroughs family had
five members: Floyd Burroughs Sr. and his children Floyd Burroughs Jr., Othel
Lee Burroughs (who was called Squeakie), Charles Burroughs, and Lucille
Burroughs. The mother of the children does not appear in any of the prints or
negatives. I selected one intact
negative relating to the Burroughs family along with killed negatives for
comparison in my reflection.
In
one killed negative, which is simply titled “Floyd Burroughs, Jr., Hale County
Alabama”, Floyd Jr. is sitting against the wall of his family’s dwelling with
his hands holding an object while in the background the inside is visible where
Othel Lee is crawling around on all fours and Lucille is standing in the door
frame.
Floyd Burroughs, Jr., Hale County, Alabama. 1936. FSA/OWI Collection. Library of Congress.
Another
killed negative focuses upon Othel Lee holding a bottle and sticking his tongue
out. Floyd, Jr. is still partially visible in the frame.
Floyd Burroughs, Jr., and Othel Lee Burroughs, called Squeakie. Son of an Alabama cotton sharecropper. 1936. FSA/OWI Collection. Library of Congress.
Both
of the above negatives would be considered terrible pictures and lacking in
rhetorical appeal according to Stryker. Personally, I find them compelling even
though they may not be considered good pictures. They are necessary to keep in
FSA file and made accessible at the Library of Congress not only because they
document the Burroughs family, but because they also serve as documents of
Walker Evans’ evolution as a photographer as well.
A negative that Stryker found worthy of
keeping in the file is both visually appealing and fulfills the educational
mission of FSA documentary photography. It has similar elements to the first
killed negative example. Lucille is still standing in the doorframe while
Floyd, Jr. is sitting against the exterior wall of the dwelling. However, this
time the composition is different. Lucille is visible in the doorframe at a
different angle. In the foreground Floyd, Jr. has his thumb in his mouth while
he is clutching something to his chest. Othel Lee, sitting next to his older brother,
is looking down at the bottle he is playing with. Overall this image reflects
Walker Evans’ philosophy that a documentary photograph should be educational
with style.
[Untitled photo, possibly related to: Floyd Burroughs, Jr., and Othel Lee Burroughs, called Squeakie. Son of an Alabama cotton sharecropper]. 1936. FSA/OWI Collection. Library of Congress.
[2] James Curtis, Mind’s Eye, Mind’s Truth: FSA Photography Reconsidered
(Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989), 44.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Judith Fryer Davidov. “The Color of My
Skin, the Shape of My Eyes: Photographs of the Japanese-American Internment by
Dorothea Lange, Ansel Adams, and Toyo Miyatake.” The Yale Journal of Criticism 9, no. 2 (Fall 1996): 223-244.
[5] James Curtis, Mind’s Eye, Mind’s Truth: FSA Photography Reconsidered
(Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989), 10.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[10] Allen C. Benson, “Killed Negatives: The
unseen photographic archives” Archivaria
68 (2009): 4.
[11] Arthur Rothstein, Documentary Photography (Boston: Focal Press, 1986), 33.
[12] Cara A. Finnegan, “Social Engineering,
Visual Politics, and the New Deal: FSA Photography in the Survey Graphic” Rhetoric
& Public Affairs 3, no. 3 (2000): 336.
[13] William E. Jones, “Killed”: Rejected Images of the Farm Security Administration
(2010): 5-8.
[14] See http://www.loc.gov/collections/fsa-owi-black-and-white-negatives/ for the negatives in this collection.
No comments:
Post a Comment