2012

Christianity, the Fall of the Roman Empire, Tristan and Isolde, Johannes Gutenberg, Michelangelo, Martin Luther, Nicolaus Copernicus, Cervantes, the Declaration of Independence, the Wright Brothers, James Joyce, Pablo Picasso, CG Jung, Albert Einstein, Salk and Sabin, the Beatles, Men Walk on Moon.

Farewell, Age of Pisces, and we thank you.

  Copyright secured by Digiprove © 2010 mike langer

© 2010, mike langer: photographs & meditations. All rights reserved.

Iðunn: The Unconscious Perception of Blonde Hair

This tritone portrait of my friend Stacy provides a striking contrast to the eternal, timeless quality found in my previously posted portrait, Aglaea. Here we see an image that is more about the here and now, and reflects a very different, less grounded energy.

Some of our reactions to this photo may in large part be due to Stacy’s hair color. As social psychologists and visual artists have frequently pointed out, there is invariably an unconscious association between blonde hair and youth. Accordingly, when we look at a person with blonde hair, we activate all of the unconscious archetypes that are associated with what I refer to as “life in the field of time”. The metaphor (and genuine biological reaction) came into being because infants and toddlers have light hair. As they grow older, the lighter hair gets darker.

Stated another way, blonde hair relates to time, and dark hair relates to eternity.

In Norse Mythology, the goddess Iðunn, or Idunn, was an archetype associated with youth and fertility. She reminds me of the Empress card of the tarot, the incarnation of the life-giving mother and the enjoyment of the senses and pleasures present in the field of time.

  Copyright secured by Digiprove © 2010 mike langer

© 2010, mike langer: photographs & meditations. All rights reserved.

Sweet Corn

Would corn by any other name taste as sweet? This family farm offered home-grown corn, tomatoes, and fruit preserves on the day that I drove by with my camera.

  Copyright secured by Digiprove © 2010 mike langer

© 2010, mike langer: photographs & meditations. All rights reserved.

Susan Sontag, Redux

The reason why god permits so much suffering in the world is because he’s usually not conscious of what he’s doing.

Carl Jung was the first person to articulate this idea, in his 1952 book, “Answer to Job”. In order to better appreciate Jung’s paradigm, it should be noted that the Swiss psychiatrist viewed god, or Yahweh, as a metaphor for the human unconscious.

I thought about this recently after re-reading Susan Sontag’s “On Photography” and her 2003 sequel, “Regarding the Pain of Others”. Sontag’s essays on photography have helped me to better understand, or rather, to better feel, the very surreal and completely subjective psychological relationship between the individual photographer/creator, the subject, the viewer of the finished image, and the image’s ultimate perceived meaning or emotional effect. Photographic images are by their nature completely subjective works of art, and accordingly should not be intended, or pretended, to depict reality (assuming it’s even possible to define reality at all.) Jung’s analysis in “Answer to Job” reminds us that photographers aren’t always conscious of what they’re doing throughout the creative process.

One of Sontag’s most perceptive and memorable observations in “On Photography” concerns her depiction of “photojournalists” and their tendency to avoid, or remove themselves, from any moral responsibility to intervene when recording images of human suffering or violence. This disassociation can occur, for example, when a photographer witnesses one human being inflicting harm on another. Instead of taking action to help the victim, the photographer convinces himself, or herself, that their professional duty or subjective role as an “observer” takes precedent over conscience, compassion, or moral responsibility. As an example, think about of all those photographers in Paris who took pictures of Princess Diana as she lay bleeding in her car, or the photographers who, over the past few weeks, have taken photos of wildlife drenched in oil, the result of the BP/Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico.

Another of Sontag’s conclusions– and ultimate thesis– is that the photographic process is based on manipulation, intentionally or not. I agree, but I don’t think  this is necessarily a bad thing. To Sontag, however, this revelation evokes moral outrage and hostility. At the risk of engaging in psychoanalysis, my own view is that her strong emotional reaction is likely an indication of her own complexes and insecurities regarding the issue of manipulation. In truth, all art is manipulation, to the extent that “manipulation” is a synonym for the creative process.

Sontag’s ideè fixe emerges once again in her essay “Regarding the Pain of Others”, the last book she ever published prior to her death in 2004. Her focus here is on the psychological and political consequences of the widespread dissemination of images that show, or are intended to show, the carnage and brutality of war. As Sontag correctly points out, the photographer, subject, viewer, and the image itself enter into a subjective relationship in which the ultimate emotional reaction of the viewer is usually not the one that was intended by the author or distributor of the photograph. Writer Stephen F. Eisenman provides us with an excellent analysis of this concept in his 2007 book, “The Abu Ghraib Effect”.

The impossibility for a photograph to depict any type of “objective reality” is, for me, one of the most fascinating aspects of taking an active part in the photographic process. Whether the construction of the image’s message is intentional or the result of an unconscious act does not matter. Its value, meaning, content, and emotional or cognitive effect will likely be lost in translation, depending on the attitude, psyche, and social conditioning of the intended viewer or audience. Sort of like good poetry.

This post was updated on June 21, 2010.

  Copyright secured by Digiprove © 2010 mike langer

© 2010, mike langer: photographs & meditations. All rights reserved.

Sunflower Waiting for Two Bees

The Sunflower originated, or at least, was first cultivated, in Central and South America some 5000 years ago. A bright and striking flower without subtlety, it was worshiped by the Aztecs, Incas, and other indigenous populations due to its resemblance to the sun, the primary “male symbol” in our human world of opposites.

Like many tribal groups whose survival depended on their ability to fight off invading hordes, the Aztecs’ and Incas’ most important gods were primarily male, reflecting the priority they placed on the warrior archetype. In fact, after the Spaniards conquered the Americas, they attempted to ban all sun and sunflower worship due to their mythological association with tribal warfare and aggression. The Spaniards knew that the first step in controlling the native populations was to deprive them of their gods.

Today, sunflowers and the pollinator bees (mostly honey bees) that are necessary for the flower’s reproduction are each others primary gods. The bees fertilize the flower’s stigma with the “male pollen” that they carry from flower to flower. In turn, the flower provides the bee with nectar, which becomes the vital food source for the colony.

For the past several years, our bee populations have been threatened by colony collapse disorder, the cause of which is still being debated. Albert Einstein predicted that the human race could not survive if there were no bees to pollinate the plants that are vital for the eco-system and our food chain.

Mythology, the displacement of native populations by other peoples, botany, and an impending ecological crisis. One photograph can say a lot.

  Copyright secured by Digiprove © 2010 mike langer

© 2010, mike langer: photographs & meditations. All rights reserved.

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes
This site is protected by WP-CopyRightPro

Protection Plugin created by Jake Ruston - Sponsored by Akumal Beach Resort.