I can’t stand these damn shows on museum walls with neat little frames, where you look at the images as if they were pieces of art. I want them to be pieces of life!
W. Eugene SmithRead
I would that my photographs might be, not the coverage of a news event, but an indictment of war - the brutal corrupting viciousness of its doing to the minds and bodies of men; and, that my photographs might be a powerful emotional catalyst to the reasoning which would help this vile and criminal stupidity from beginning again.
Interpretation
The quote emphasizes the purpose of photography as a means to expose the harsh realities of war and provoke emotional responses for change.
W. Eugene Smith expresses his desire for his photographs to serve as more than mere documentation of war; he wants them to be a powerful critique of its brutality and to foster a deeper understanding of its impact on humanity. By portraying the physical and psychological toll of war, he aims to evoke emotion and spur reflection, ultimately hoping to prevent the repetition of such atrocities in the future.
In practice
In a speech about the role of art during conflict, one could quote this to emphasize the responsibility of artists.
I can’t stand these damn shows on museum walls with neat little frames, where you look at the images as if they were pieces of art. I want them to be pieces of life!
I've never made any picture, good or bad, without paying for it in emotional turmoil.
Most photographers seem to operate with a pane of glass between themselves and their subjects. They just can't get inside and know the subject.
Up to and including the moment of exposure, the photographer is working in an undeniably subjective way. By his choice of technical approach, by the selection of the subject matterand by his decision as to the exact cinematic instant of exposure, he is blending the variables of interpretation into an emotional whole.
I try to take what voice I have and I give it to those who don’t have one at all.
The photographer must bear the responsibility for his work and its effect …[for] photographic journalism, because of its tremendous audience reached by publications using it, has more influence on public thinking than any other branch of photography.
The public history of modern art is the story of conventional people not knowing what they are dealing with.
The Photograph is an extended, loaded evidence — as if it caricatured not the figure of what it represents (quite the converse) but its very existence ... The Photograph then becomes a bizarre (i)medium(i), a new form of hallucination: false on the level of perception, true on the level of time: a temporal hallucination, so to speak, a modest (o)shared(i) hallucination (on the one hand 'it is not there,' on the other 'but it has indeed been'): a mad image, chafed by reality.
I maintain that anyone who still refuses to see, for instance, a horse galloping on a tomato, must be an idiot. A tomato is also a child's balloon - Surrealism, again, having suppressed the word "like."
Dogmatism of all kinds--scientific, economic, moral, as well as political--are threatened by the creative freedom of the artist. This is necessarily and inevitably so. We cannot escape our anxiety over the fact that the artists together with creative persons of all sorts, are the possible destroyer of our nicely ordered systems. (p. 76)
Actors search for rejection. If they don't get it they reject themselves.
People ask me if I ever thought of writing a children's book. I say, 'If I had a serious brain injury I might well write a children's book', but otherwise the idea of being conscious of who you're directing the story to is anathema to me, because, in my view, fiction is freedom and any restraints on that are intolerable.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.