The Guardian newspaper published an article recently about the Christmas Dad and the impossibility of buying presents for them. Basically, they men who have achieved a point in life where they have everything they need. I have realized that I am indeed in that category. I am in the fortunate position to be debt free, reasonable well paid and every year I am a nightmare to buy presents for.
My wife always around November starts asking for a Christmas present list, and after much soul-searching the best I can ever come up with is books.
Not that I need more books. I have a birthday late in the year, and again I ask for books, but I am lucky to have completed any of them by Christmas. In fact, I calculated that I have probably enough unread books to keep me going for an entire year of continuous reading. However, any other present would be too expensive or too complicated to explain, and the fact is, if I had really needed it, I probably would have already bought it.
So what do you get for the person who has everything?
Everything but time itself
The weird thing about growing older, is that life never turns out as you expect.
I had assumed, as I move into my 7th decade, that I would have more time to spend on hobbies, but the truth is as you grow older you instead accumulate responsibilities, which in turn eat into your so called "free" time.
I have around the house multiple half-baked projects, that I never really get a full run up to complete. In my youth, I would spend weeks doing these sorts of things, but now I am lucky to spend a day a month.
So what do you get for the person who has everything? The answer is time.
My wife is always telling me I need to take my holiday earlier. The problem is, I always feel guilty in doing things on my own. I love both my wife and family, and I want to spend time with them, but when I do, I constantly want to go and do things on my own terms.
So with that in mind, I decided to take a "me" day and go to London to see a photography related exhibition and with a bit of luck a little photography
The question was therefore which one?
My first thought was the Victoria and Albert. I love the V&A. It is like the the world's biggest and best attic, but photography is just an addendum on top of everything else gets subsumed into the huge morass of objects.
I there decided instead to go to the National Portrait Gallery(NPG). Despite going to London many times, I had never visited.
It was also hosting the Taylor Wessing Photo Portrait Prize, so it seemed as good as anywhere.
National Portraits
The NPG is hidden behind the larger and more prestigious national gallery on Trafalgar square, and as such gets far less footfall.
The NPG is in itself a bit of an anachronism. I mean, why have a gallery based on one genre. After all, we don't have a National Landscape gallery, or a National Still Life gallery. The other thing which differentiates it from all the plethora of other galleries in London, is that it is the one gallery in which photography and painting are held in the same value and displayed equally, so next to a Gainsborough will be a Bailey.
Also, all the pictures shown represent people, living or dead, who had desires, prejudices and ideas just like those viewing them. The test of a great portrait is how well the character of the subject is expressed to the viewer.
In this regard the skill of a portrait photographer needs to exceed the portrait painter, since while the latter can modify their image to show the character of the subject, a photographer is limited to only what they see in the studio at the time.
I will admit now, that I am very poor at taking photographic portraits.
Here I am not alone. In a recent club competition, the judge bemoaned the lack of good landscape photographs entered in the end of year show. I am willing to bet, however, that te represented portrait photography will be even more worse. What is considered portraits in these sorts of competitions can be split between glamour photography, where a model is paid for a pack of paparazzi wannabees to take shots and portrait montages consisting of heavily HDR'd black and white images showing sentimental story lines that are laid on so thickly it would make a pre-Raphaelite brotherhood painter blush with embarrassment.
However, neither of this are true portrait photography. They are too artificial,contrived. A good portrait has to bare the soul of the sitter and provide some measure of the person's life or character to the viewer.
Looking at some of the images in the portrait prize exhibition, made me realize why few portraits do well in club competitions. The view of a portrait's worth is very much driven the viewer's experiences and prejudices. How you engage with the image is based on so many individual aspects, that no two people will view the same image in the same way
For example, in the portrait prize exhibition, I was not particularly drawn to the winning photos. The one that stood out for me was this one.
If I entered this as a club competition entry, the judge would complain about the arm across the image, the cluttered background, the bright spot in the top left. It fails to meet the standards that what we are taught in clubs define a good photo.
However, having teenage daughters myself, I recognize the look on the subject's face. It is one I have been subjected too many times. It is a combination of gained confidence, the arrogance of knowing they know best, combined with the "I am only allowing this image to be taken under duress" look.
However, to anyone who has not tried to photograph similar people, it would not have the same resonance.
Selfies
The classic single selfie |
The group shop |
The setup |
The multiple selfie |
The watcher |
The mum selfie |
The teenager selfie |
Big in Japan
Finally..
So how was my Christmas present?
I really enjoyed the NGP, but more importantly I enjoyed the opportunity of taking it at my own pace. Even more so, the photographers gallery. I would not inflict this on my family, but i savoured the opportunity to peruse at my leisure
The more important question was what I did come out of it? Well, a better appreciation of the art of the portrait, some nice street photographs and a new view of Japan.
More critically, I came away with a stronger realisation that you take photographs for yourself. Whether someone else likes them is a bonus, the most important thing is that you yourself now you did the best job you could
I'll leave you with a few more images that I took that day
Happy Christmas 2023
The eyes have it. King Charles III and Malala Yousafzai together |
Sara Forbes Bonetta |
An example of how a photograph can misrepresent a character. This man could be anyones grandad, but was responsible for multiple massacres in the West Indies |
Murderous sociopaths - the very definition of Christmas |
The last supper |