I like to get to as many photographic exhibitions as possible.
This can be a challenge, since the majority are in London, and of those that are not, they tend to be held at inconvenient times.
Despite all the odds stacked against me, I have actually managed to go to three events this year.
All 3 were very different and each says something different things about photography.
So let's begin the journey:-
Exhibition 1 - Royal Portraits: A century of photography - Kings Gallery, Edinburgh
The exhibition covered royal portraits from its earliest days to the modern day
This was the only exhibition that had an entrance fee; This was understandable since the image owners are not rich people. :)
Also, they did not allow photos to be taken in the gallery, which was a bit weird. I guess having an image on a commoner's phone would be a dangerous precedent. The upshot was however, I cannot show you any images from the show.
This is not a big issue, since I am almost certain that whoever you are, you will have seen many of the images already.
The exhibition showed the progression of royal portraiture from the formal to the latter, more modern, relaxed style.
At the time, the early images did remind me of something that I could not quite put my finger. Later, I realised it was the communist style leader portraits where every imperfection had been removed, in case the populace got the idea that these were actually just normal humans.
One interesting thing was how the style of image changed as our perceptions of royalty evolved, from the early deferential images, through the 70s punk era, including the famous Sex Pistols' record cover (that at the time was considered almost subversive, but nowadays, post Diana and Harry, seems almost tame). Finally, we have the more relaxed images, where the royal family tries to propagate the idea that they are just like us, as the barriers are broken down through paparazzi intrusion, the internet and the need to generate clickbait, to the point now where it is hard not to see the Royals as a Kardashian spin off.
The other takeaway was just how bad some of the images were. With the early images, you could let them off due to limitations of equipment, but considering a Royal gig is much sought after, and the best photographers in the world often vie for it, some of the images were underwhelming.
For example, there were 3 images by Annie Leibovitz. They try to put the queen in a more relaxed setting, but seriously, one of the images had terribly blown highlights. Of course, part of the issue is that access is limited and tightly controlled, so there is very little scope to control the setting. However, the worst one was this one from the coronation of King Charles III
 | ||
| Coronation images by Hugo Burnand. (Copied without permission, and I am now in the tower) |
When I first saw it, my initial reaction was that it was AI-generated. My second was it was a Charles look-alike cosplaying, like on a Game of Thrones set. The background, how Charles is sitting and the way the crown sits on a jaunty angle, just seem both wrong and dull at the same time.
And this is the problem with Royal photography. Like the Emperor's New Clothes (King surely - Ed). Images are not there to be criticised, but fawned upon. Even in the more modern, relaxed era, images are controlled and censored, so removing any true creativity.
Exhibition 2 After The End Of History: British Working Class Photography 1989 – 2024 Stills Gallery, Edinburgh
Exhibition 2 could not be more different.
It was at the Stills gallery, which is a small photographic gallery just off, ironically, the Royal Mile.
The images were from a number of photographers on the theme working class and it contained the type of photos which would be hated in any camera club setting.
Unlike the royal images, the photos could not be in any way considered beautiful, photogenic or comforting. Instead, they were of mundane scenes from the British heartland of ordinary people doing ordinary things.
One of the abiding mysteries is how these photographers make a living, since these are not images to hang on a wall or adorn a chocolate box. These images will not appear in international Salons, nor would they win club competitions, but they are all the more honest just for that reason.
What they are is life in realistic detail, and do not represent some fairy tale. I was drawn to a set of images by Kavi Pujara
Chris Shaw
 |
| Chris Shaw |
Kavi took a set of images from their native Leicester. Leicester is a city I know well, and I have always enjoyed the vibrancy of the city due to its vibrant mix of cultures.
Kavi captured the dichotomy of 1st and 2nd generation immigrants, caught between seeing themselves as British, but at the same time having deep roots back to India. It is a useful reminder, with the hysteria about immigration, of how quickly immigrants become part of a society, and even if some parts of it will never accept them as truly British, they consider themselves as British as your average Anglo-Saxon.
I always found it interesting how some right-wing politicians, such as Pritti Patel and Kemi Badenoch come from 1st generation immigrants families. It's almost as if they feel let down by the reality of the UK compared to the myth they had been sold, and make it their life work to take Britain back to an ideal that never existed
Kavi Pujara
Exhibition 3 Mao Ishikawa, Meads Gallery Warwick
The 3rd exhibition I did on a whim, since I realised it was only 20 minutes from work in lovely Warwick (well, actually Coventry, but Warwick sounds better)
The gallery is on the grounds of Warwick University and helpfully stays open till 10 pm so I had plenty of time to get there and fight the hordes getting in (me and 2 bored museum attendents)
Mao Ishikawa is an Okinawan native, and since I have a fascination with all things Japanese, I thought it would be a great opportunity to see some Japanese photography
Her photography was very much tied to the Okinawans' experience. While Okinawa is part of Japan, it also has a subculture and language of its own. Also, after World War 2, for 30 years, the US occupied Okinawa, which created a huge conflict between natives and the large number of US servicemen on the island.
Mao's photos are not easy viewing, and cover the underbelly of life on the island, such as violence, prostitution and drinking. As a woman and native, she was well-placed to observe and photograph them. She also did the same on a trip to the US to stay with a black ex-boyfriend in a poor part of the US.
Again, none of these images are ones you would hang on the wall, and they were often brutally honest and graphic. However, many of these people would have no voice or evidence about their existence on earth, and as such, such works are more valuable than any pretty landscape shots
It shows a part of Japanese society that never gets mentioned. However, the work that resonated most was a gentler piece documenting the actors in an Okinawa acting troop, as the performers got older and were not replaced, so they slowly died out. Again, it showed part of life, which, if not recorded, would disappear without a ripple and therefore is invaluable.
So, 3 very different exhibitions, and the question is what I took from each of them. I have to say, the Royal Portrait left me cold. While the other two made me question why I take photographs.
I have felt for some time that as photographers, we have a duty to record what is around us, warts and all. These images will not win awards, competitions, or Instagram likes, but they may be the only record of your area, and as photographers, we must record and share the events in an honest way.
Dialogue With Photography by Paul Hill , Thomas Cooper
Finally, I have also been reading
This is a recently re-published book, originally published in 1979 of interviews with a whole set of photography greats from Man Ray, Cecil Beaton, Henri Cartier-Bresson and Ansel Adams, among others.
When done originally, photography was still struggling to be accepted as a legitimate art form, and many of the photographers had worked through the glory days of published photography, but were hardly household names.
Nowadays, I can review their work with a click of a button, but then access was far harder. As such, it is a great time capsule of the pioneers of photography.
While you won't get many insights on how to become a better photographer (Most struggled to explain why they did the things they did ), you get a better understanding of how photography came to be where we are now, and it is greatly recommended
