Criticising Photographs - Why Bother?

I've listened to classical musical for as long as I can remember. Many years ago a girlfriend chided me for a tendency to analyse and to immerse myself in musical history and composers biographies. "Just listen to the damn stuff - it doesn't need any explanation". Well she was right, but also wrong in a way. Music is the only one of the arts that can engage our emotions while dispensing with any intellectual activity. (If you think painting/photography can do this, think again). The study and analysis doesn't make the music sound any different, but it adds a layer of understanding that, for me, greatly enhances the whole experience. And any activity that contributes to our human experience is worthwhile in my opinion.

Take the case of Beethoven's 5th symphony. We don't need to know anything to appreciate that the music begins in a troubled, and questioning mood and ends in a blaze of exultation. If we look into theory we might be interested to know that musically speaking it begins in C minor and ends in C Major (amongst other things). If we look into the case of the man we find that Beethoven, although a troubled soul firmly believed in the capacity of man to rise in triumph and spirit from adversity. We note in passing about his deafness. It would be a mistake to try and label passages of music with personal analogies, but in the end we know that the 5th symphony could only have been written by Beethoven. Knowing this also explains the ridicule heaped on Classic FM when during their first day of broadcasting they played the end of the symphony in the morning, and the beginning in the evening.

I encourage anyone who is troubled or is questioning their worth or position in the world to put this work on their IPod or whatever, turn the volume up and go for a walk in the countryside.

Why this musical diversion? Well, the example illustrates criticism. Note that I didn't really say whether I liked the work or not, although that could be inferred. Even if I personally didn't like it, the comments would still be valid as criticism. If someone asks me about Beethoven's 5th, or why I like it, or if I want to recommend that my children give it a go, I'm better equipped. If this works for something like music where the critical challenges I think are greater, then surely it's worth the bother.

And so on to photography.

Some photographs can only be fully unravelled with analysis and external knowledge. Even seemingly simple photographs, like a sunset for example, still require the co-operation of our intellect - at it's simplest just to invoke memory. Photographers, like painters may spend a lot of time, trouble, anxiety and effort over their creation. We cannot do this justice in a few seconds of looking. There are also direct benefits of criticism for ourselves - it enhances and develops our sensibilities and our ability to articulate our thoughts and emotions. This can be useful in other areas, and can also help us think about and improve our own efforts. If we are good enough at it we can inform and enlighten others, maybe even the photographer themself!

These days with such a plethora of photographic images available I think it's even more important to take time over looking. Phenomena like Flickr present a bewildering array for us to look at. Most of it is technically acceptable because of digital processing, so if we are to do justice to the best of these we need to cultivate our ability to get beneath the surface, and avoid the 5 second, bubblegum approach to appreciation. I think it is relatively easy to develop a basic critical approach if you don't already have one, and if you find it difficult to talk about your reaction to images.

The next few articles will describe a formal approach that is well known, tried and tested. I'm going to try and illustrate throughout with one particular image. I haven't decided which one yet - all will be revealed next time