The Real And The Iconic

As Szarkowski points out; photography deals with the actual.  But it is also just an image of the actual- not the actual themselves (Szarkowski, 1966).  My photographs often contain barely a trace of the actual.  To the obvious extreme, but past the point of deception, and instead to spark the fantastical.

In C.S. Peirce's semiotic theory the index is based on the image reflecting actual representation. 
Lets look at this simple image representing some natural produce of the midwest:

Fig. 1: Slade 2018.

In this image the Icon would be- a squash, or a squash family.
The Index of the squash may be food we eat.  Or food we are able to grow.
The Symbol is a little more interpretive and may be the struggle of being different, or fitting in with a crowd.

C.S. Peirce may not of enjoyed my style of images, or regarded them in the family of photography at all.  Many current photographers, ones who strive for the indexicality of the image, may agree.  Yet the trace is there, even if the manipulation is more obvious.

My images are not unique in their genre.  Similar to my work are the dream like tableaux of Martina Lopez, who, when introduced to computer editing over a decade ago immediately recognized its potential (Hess).

Fig. 2: Lopez 1994. Revelations in Time 1 [cibachrome print]

In photography, is 'automatism' (Cavell, 1971) a must for an image to be considered true photography or does a 'trace' of the actual qualify? If the first is true then I am not sure my images are photography at all. But if the second is acceptable them my images are photography in what is becoming its new form, in a most illustrative example.  The process is there from 'birth' (Arnheim, 1974), and even though it is manipulated in post, its origins in photography still make a difference, even though my images are edited.

For example here are some images from a recent project session:

This is Jane*.

                                                              Fig. 3: Slade 2018.

Jane has Microcephaly among other diagnosis.  She is 100% care dependent.  She is non-mobil and non-verbal, and she has to be fed by a G-tube. She has surprised doctors by bypassing her estimated life span.  Jane has 3 sisters, 2 of which were born with Cystic Fibrosis. Their family lives an alternate form of 'normal' life.  Here are the 4 girls together:

Fig. 4: Slade 2019. Four Sisters

Only a family that cares for a severely disabled child can understand the extreme difficulties, countered with the extreme joy that child brings into the home.  The whole family cares for Jane in uttermost unselfish and tender ways.  You only have to watch their interactions to see the joy and love that she returns to each one- similar to the joys of a newborn babe.  I myself have heard her giggle.

Here are some SOOC images of Jane that I captured:

Here is the image I completed for the mother:

 Fig. 5: Slade 2019. Child Alive

The Icon is still a child.
The Index may still be that of disability, as exhibited particularly in the hands and feet. 
But the Symbol becomes life and beauty.

In this image, particularly when you look at the eyes, my goal was for the 'trace' of the 'real' to be a trace of her beautiful SOUL.

Her mother's reaction to the image:

"I'm seriously crying right now. This is the single greatest gift anyone could ever give me. You are insanely talented.This girl is life!" 

The mother complimented my talent- but only because I illustrated Jane in the way she already sees her everyday.

What truth does photography offer us?  I believe the truth it offers is the proof of Human Connection.  The photographic image crosses all cultures and knows no human diversity.  Each human may connect individually, and in vastly differing ways.  But the connection is there nonetheless, evidence of some universal human binding agent.



UPDATE:
 This weeks webinar was particularly interested and I presented my images of Jane for discussion.  A great discussion ensued that covered everything from why I represented her the way I did, and the value of some of the SOOC photos- particularly the power in this one:

                                                                Fig. 6: Slade 2018.
The combination of her eye contact, and the caregivers hand on edge speaks volumes in this image.  It made me interested to look back through my other images to view the SOOC images in a new light.  And perhaps include them in my project in juxtaposition with the edited ones (there was a suggestion that the raw may be more powerful than the edited one but the conclusion was it is the edited one that sparks the conversation about the raw).

I also got some wonderful suggestions for future resources to visit or revisit- I will note them below:


The Documentary Impulse by Stuart Franklin
Mary Ellen Mark @
http://www.maryellenmark.com/books/titles/ward_81/index001_ward81.html
also 'Ward 81' hardcover
Leon Borensztein
https://www.leonborensztein.com/sharon
Wendy Ewald
http://wendyewald.com/portfolio/margate-towards-a-promised-land/
Clementine Schneidermann
https://www.clementineschneider.com/publications-1/
Another Way of Telling by John Beger
Jo Sutherst
Photography Degree Zero; Reflections on Roland Barthes' Camera Lucida
The Photography Reader by Liz Wells
The Documentary Impulse By Stuart Franklin





Figure 1: Bren SLADE. 2019. Private Collection: Bren Slade.

Figure. 2: Marrina LOPEZ 1994. Revelations in Time 1 [cibachrome print]

Figure 3-6: Bren SLADE. 2018-2019. Private Collection: Bren Slade.

ARNHEIM, Rudolf. 1974. On the Nature of Photography, Critical Inquiry

CAVELL, Stanley 1971. The World Viewed, New York

HESSE, Gary. Digital Allegory Martina Lopez. V&A 2019 [online] Available at: http://www.johnvalentino.com/Teaching/Art190/Projects/190Proj3/Lopez/MartinaLopez.html)

PEIRCE, C.S. 1986. Philosophical Writings of Peirce, Dover Publications;New York. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central.

SZARKOWSKI, John 1966 The Photographers Eye, New York: Museum of Modern Art

*The children featured here in this project are real, their names are not.