Martin Munkacsi Three Boys at Lake Tanganyika 
Henri Cartier-Bresson FRANCE. Ile-de-France. Yvelines. 1955Acclaimed as a surrealist, his early work did achieve the intentions of the surrealist movement. The objective of surrealism is to capture the unexpected chances and juxtapositions in reality to create symbolic or significant imagery. His later and more mature images differed on a fundamental level from the intent of true surrealism. There was a more natural harmony in all of the parts in regard to one another. The decisive moment is the moment of subconscious equilibrium, not the mere improbability of chance presenting the desired result. He liked to refer to these moments as an encounter with reality and he rarely left things to sheer chance because as an artist he was in control. The ability to predict light – sun and shade, bright or dark – to anticipate movement – of people or nature – and to control what events at which he chose to be present, all lend that aspect of innate manipulation to the final outcome.
In beginning of his foray into photography, he would wander the streets with his camera, ready to seize the image of the world in its actual state of transformation and change. This was the first experience of his in the world of photojournalism. It was also the beginning of the way in which he revolutionized photojournalism practice. He did not start out photographing in his native land of France; rather he traveled to Berlin, Brussels, Warsaw, Prague, Budapest, Madrid and a short time later in the United States. The earlier years of his career were not assigned, there was no direct intention, and this freedom led him to just follow any whim and to photograph was interested him in purely ascetic terms. Generally, he chose to document the commoners, the poor and hardworking, the average Joe of the era. Perhaps they were more open or maybe because of their struggles there was a more human nature to their characters, but in any case this was Cartier-Bresson’s main subject originally.
After his experiences on the battlefield and being held as a prisoner of war for 35 months, the focus of his photography shifted. Though it was less of an actual shift and more of a general broadening of his social range and subject matter. Despite these changes, he never moved away from his interest in human behavior and the irreplaceable manifestation of an individual’s character. In his photos one can see with ease man and woman, young and old, rich and poor, powerful and weak, individuality and conformity, singular and group, group and crowd, but Cartier-Bresson makes it each viewer’s assignment to sort out the deeper message: of good or evil, of sorrow or joy, of contentment or restlessness.
It was also around this time that instead of narrating the human behaviors in photography, he started recording history. It was a new challenge. All it took was an instant. The vision and truth of each situation is grasped through an innate ability to read the conditions and act on instinct. He had fantastic luck in this area. It has been said that artists often have the greatest outcome in their works when they are at home, when it is easier to ascertain the meaning of fleeting symbolism, whether in speech, movement, a look or assembly. Henri Cartier-Bresson, it seems, was at home where ever he traveled. He was also always in the right place at the right time. He was in India at the time of Gandhi’s death, in China when Mao seized power, and others. To recount history one must be there to witness it. This interest in preserving and detailing history is what truly defined him as a photojournalist. His photographs, coupled with the written accompanying passionate explanations, allowed him to cross the boundary between superfluous artist and visionary. He was comfortable roaming; it was a kick back to the launch of his time spent with a camera in hand.
This was the true abandonment of literal surrealism. There was no pretentious ardor of capturing the spontaneity of life, and then ending up with a dead reinvention of reality. It was Henri Cartier-Bresson that took the ideals of surrealism and applied them with a subtle technique and genuine curiosity to the world in a manner that is inspiring. Through his travels and own experiences he was able to embody in his art the humanity of the world. The desire to travel and set down a historical legacy was driven by his desire to know himself. This is the reason he was so proficient at mastering the imagery of history.
Questions
- What are the strong points/weak points in the presentation. Are there any unanswered questions you have and find important to the overall understanding of Henri Cartier-Bresson?
- How do you perceive Henri Cartier-Bresson’s character and how is that seen in his photographs?
- Look at Martin Munkacsi’s Three Boys at Lake Tanganyika and Cartier-Bresson’s photo from FRANCE. Ile-de-France. Yvelines. 1955. What of C.B.’s inspiration can you see in Munkacsi’s photograph? What similarities/differences are there? How do you think C.B.’s approach to photography differed from Munkacsi’s based on the compositions of these pictures?
The presentation was very thorough; however, I would have liked to hear more about his time as a prisoner of war and how it impacted his photography. Such a monumental event in someone’s life must have dramatically impacted him as an artist who is “behind the lens.” Also, it would have fascinated me to see more of his photography when he wasn’t getting paid as a photojournalist because I think that more accurately reflects his vision and character. I also thought the presentation ended very quickly and felt like I was left without a conclusion or wrap-up.
ReplyDeleteBy looking at Henri Cartier-Brensson’s photos throughout his life, I believe some inferences can be made about his character. The photography he captured was raw, which speaks volumes about him as an artist. Nothing was exaggerated by Photoshop or set up to get a scene to look good on film. As mentioned in the presentation, he would sometimes even walk around with a black cloth cover over his camera to go completely unnoticed. This tells me that he wasn’t flamboyant or wanting to produce an image simply for money. By not posing images but rather capturing a raw scene where the scenery and subject is caught in a microsecond of emotion, he tries to reveal the character of the subject by capturing true emotion. In many cases, it would be a lot easier and a lot less time consuming to just pose images; however, by spending the extra time and patience to capture a natural and free picture it reveals the character of the artist as someone dedicated to his work and proficient at what he does. He had a true passion for what he did and it wasn’t just a job or money in his pocket, with these facts in mind I can infer that he was a genuine and selfless person.
When looking at Martin Munkacsi’s Three Boys at Lake Tanganyika one sees three naked boys running towards a lakeside about to hurdle their bodies into the cool, crisp water. Their nudity shows the lack of planning or staging in this photo; Munkacsi captured these young boys in the moment. This photo could not be staged; by looking at their body language one can see their sole focus is running into the water, completely unaware of their nakedness or the fact that someone was photographing them. By looking at Henri Cartier-Brensson’s photos throughout his life you can see this same emotion in his photography—that the subjects are hardly aware they are being photographed. By looking specifically at Brennson’s FRANCE. Ile-de-France. Yvelines. (1955) he was also able to capture excitement and youth by “going undercover” and not allowing the subjects to be aware of his presence with a camera. The differences between the photos come with the unabashed naked boys in comparison to the newer times when nudity isn’t as accepted, and actions are more reserved. Whereas the boys are running into the waves, the teenagers are swimming in a marked off swim zone. Munkacsi captured freedom in his artistic photograph; Brennon captured the restraint of a generation and their desire to be free.
There were various strong and weak points in Ashley’s presentation of Henri Cartier-Bresson. First, there was good information that I found very interesting. Cartier-Bresson was an intriguing man and I enjoyed learning about him. One weak point was that I didn’t really know what the thesis of the research project. Was it about Cartier-Bresson being a surrealist or maybe how his 35 months as a prisoner of war affected him? If the thesis had been more clearly stated, the presentation would have related a bit more to Henri Cartier-Bresson’s character. Also, I would have enjoyed learning more about his time as a prisoner of war. It must have had a big impact on his life and I would like to know how it changed him as a person. I did like learning about how this time changed his art. One especially interesting part of the presentation was when Ashley talked about how Henri Cartier-Bresson helped found Magnum Photos. The artist that I am researching, Steve McCurry, is part of Magnum Photos. What Ashley explained about the group helped me understand that it must be an important part of McCurry’s career.
ReplyDeleteHenri Cartier-Bresson seems to be a very determined, compassionate person. He was involved in a French undercover group in World War II. This must mean that he was brave and passionate about politics. These character traits can be seen in his photographs. Cartier-Bresson took many pictures in dangerous places such as the one of the Gestapo informer and pictures of China when Mao took over. He exposed people to politics and what was happening around the world.
Martin Munkacsi’s Three Boys at Lake Tanganyika and Henri Cartier-Bressen’s France definitely have some similarities and differences. Some of the obvious similarities are that the pictures are of boys playing in water. Both sets of boys are very excited about the water and are having fun. Also, they are both in black and white but I believe that is because there was no color photography and so they had no choice. One similarity in the composition is that the main focuses of both photographs are of three boys. In Munkacsi’s photo, the three boys are running into the water and in Cartier-Bresson’s, the two of the boys are standing in the water and the third is diving in. One difference is that the background is what looks like an ocean in Munkacsi’s photo, while in Cartier-Bresson’s the background is a swimming pool with many other people.
Cartier-Bresson’s picture shows some of Martin Munkacsi’s influence in the composition. None of the people in either photograph are looking at the camera. Both photographers seem to want to capture who the people are. They accomplish this partly through not having their subjects pose, but just taking a picture when they are in the middle of some action. While there are these similarities, I think that Cartier-Bresson’s approach to photography is different than Munkacsi’s and is shown in these pictures. Munkacsi seems to want the background to be simple so the subjects are more obvious and striking, but Cartier-Bresson does not mind that there are many people in the background of his image which can be distracting and can draw attention away from the main subjects.
I learned a lot about Henri Cartier-Bresson in Ashley’s presentation and I can see how his character comes through in his art. Martin Munkacsi seems to have an influence on Cartier Bresson’s photography, but they are still distinctly different. Henri Cartier-Bresson was an interesting man who was a very talented photographer.
#1
ReplyDeleteI don’t know if it is really an easy question to answer, or even an appropriate one to ask. But I am very curious as to how Henri Bresson’s work affected other people. You could start with how Bresson’s work reached other people. I think I remember you saying something about his work being featured in National Geographic, but I have absolutely no idea as to why his photograph Behind the Gare St. Lazare Behind the Gare St. Lazare is so iconic. I have seen this photo time and time again but I really don’t know a thing about it. It seems to me that Henri Bresson’s work struck a chord, figuratively speaking, with the masses and for that his images have been reproduced a countless number of times. Did he ever talk about the goals of his photography? You spoke about how his images were both planned and spontaneous. Did sit around and wait for the right “spontaneous” moment to happen? I would love to know just a little bit more about how his images reached people and how they affected them, whether it be through magazines, newspapers or something else.
I really liked the quaint way in which Bresson photographed people, trying to catch them in their natural form. If I ever saw someone sneaking around with a camera painted all black snapping shots of me I think that I would become a bit suspicious of him or her. Your presentation left me with a great mental image of an enigmatic Frenchman hiding in the bushes with a camera. I spent the rest of the afternoon thinking about where I would hide in the dining center if I wanted to take pictures of people ordering their food.
#2
His character seems to be a tough one to classify. I have only had a small bit of exposure to his life and work, but from what I can see it appears that he enjoyed everyday life very much. A quick Google Image search for his work reveals frame after frame of images from everyday life. That is not to say that this is a negative aspect of his work. His photographs feel genuine, real, and honest, and I really do like them. I don’t know what this says about his character. It is certainly complex and I wonder how the important life events you mentioned affected him.
His stint as a prisoner of war is very interesting to me. I wonder how this experience is reflected in his photography, or how it affected the way he took pictures. As to question number two, I’m not really sure what part of his character I see in his photographs. They seem overtly optimistic, and I wonder if this was a part of his personality. The first page of my Google image search contained an image of a grinning Henri Bresson with the sleeves of an untucked dress shirt rolled up above the elbows. The only insight into Henri Bresson’s character that I can derive from his work is that he seems to take pleasure in the day to day activities of the world. His photos of boys playing at the beach, men jumping over puddles, women reading the paper, and the person walking in front of him turning around, all show a fixation with what he saw every day.