‘The way we see things is affected by what we know, or what we believe’ (Berger, 1972: 8)
Task:
With your peers, you should now discuss:
• The nature of the development of Trilogy.
• How successful you think the edit was in each of the intent of the 3 components: Woodland, Underwater and Mountain, as contributing to this larger portfolio of work.
• Any additional contextual/critical ideas you could apply to this work.
• Any ideas which might contribute to the development of your own practice/critical evaluation.
“The curious truth about his pictures is that they are neither landscapes nor German……And yet this rain–soaked wood was in Scotland, that sea floor off the coast of Cyprus, this mountain in California.”. (Darwent, 2007).
Darwent suggests that the best way to consider Cramer’s ‘landscape’ photographs is as abstracts. I assume there is truth in Darwent’s revealing the locations they were taken in and that they were not constructed sets. On that basis I would argue that they are of the natural environment, of features of nature that can be identified and examined, and therefore do not fall into the genre of ‘abstract’. They are evocative in the sense that they invite enquiry creating a context that is both puzzling and enlightening.
I think of the Trilogy as attempting to show the bottom, middle and top of the earth. This interpretation is reinforced by the trees in the ‘middle’ often not showing the bases of their trunks or their tops. In addition the underwater images , through showing peaks and troughs that extend downwards and the mountains with sky above represent the bottom and top respectively. Perhaps this is too simplistic? Alternatively, Cramer appears to like photographing things relating to vertical structures, particularly this that convert a sense of height.
By not including recognisable reference points, objects, people or animals he encourages a focus on what is there; inviting a naked or raw analysis untainted by semantic knowledge of descriptors which would skew interpretation. We are then gleaning meaning from fictitious imagining of what is not there in order to see and feel what is there.
In considering the impact of the images and which could be excluded or should be included from the three sets I would either have arranged them in a developing sequence or removed the one(s) that were tangibly different. For example, in the underwater display of 8 images in two rows of four there is one that stands out (no 5) with a pool of light illuminating the scene (as compared to others with a rather misty appearance). I would place this at the beginning or end and then show a sequence becoming murkier or lighter depending on its position. However I can see why it is in 5th position to balance the second most lit image on the top row No. 3 and thereby make a presentable set rather than try to convey meaning and a possible story.
In looking at the images I do feel invited to speculate on what lies through and beyond each image and outside of it. By virtue of not being fully clear there is a mysticism, an untold story that maybe harks back to tales including Red Riding Hood and Hansel and Gretel as Eva Wiseman (March, 2006) observed (cited by Clarke, 2007, p87). I also see resonance with sets and scenes in films such as Robin Hood, Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. I wonder whether Cramer was influenced by the German fairy tales in his decision to make these images and the way he has photographed the locations?
Three things struck me while thinking about Cramer’s work in relation to my own. Firstly, since starting to take images as a teenager I have taken landscape scenes with a near reference point and a depth effect, looking into and through the image. I noted this in a previous module exercise.
Secondly, I have recently taken some images where lighting and air pollution, for me, have resulted in adding an atmosphere to the images.
Thirdly, I have more recently in the last module, tried putting images together as a tryptics with a common subject or theme (https://sarah-newton-77zw.squarespace.com/new-gallery-3). Whilst not in sets that form a trilogy as Cramer presented I am encouraged to experiment further with ways of presenting that may convey greater meaning than individual images alone.
In conclusion, although not instantly ‘taken’ by these images the more I look at and into them the more I construct my own narrative for each one and all (i.e. the whole set) at once, as if I am piecing together a sequence in a film where there is a search for light and clarity. Absorbing nature and time in one go.
References
Berger, John. 1972. Ways of Seeing. Penguin Books: London.
Clarke, Michael. 2007. Verbalising the Visual: Translating Art and Design Into Words. Worthing, Sussex: AVA Publishing.
Darwent, Charles. April 2007. Daniel Gustav Cramer. Available at: https://www.domobaal.com/exhibitions/41-07-daniel-gustav-cramer-01.html. [accessed 18-03-2018].
Domobaal. 2007. Daniel Gustav Cramer: Mountain (Trilogy Part Three). Available at: https://www.domobaal.com/exhibitions/41-07-daniel-gustav-cramer-03.html. [accessed].
Sarah Newton Photography 