Marlon
This is Marlon, age 12. He was one of the many curious kids who were intrigued by my large camera while I was shooting in town during a Bingo fundraiser. Marlon is a local kid who has grown up in the Pavones area. I found his somewhat urban style of dress interesting, particularly his shirt which has dollar signs and English words on it professing his "Rawthentic" and "Raw and Uncut" persona. Both the language and the symbols on the shirt are signs of the influence of American culture in Costa Rica. Costa Rican currency is called colones, and the symbol for it looks more like the symbol for a cent.
The familiarity with American dollars, also speaks to the location of Pavones and its proximity to the Panamanian border. Pavones is only about 1 1/2 hours from the border town Paso Canoas. Many locals go there to shop, and I would bet that this shirt was purchased there. Panama uses American currency.
As I tried to communicate with Marlon in my garbled and simplistic Spanish, I told him I would send him a copy of the photo. He responded politely by saying "thank you" in English.
7 comments:
Those look like tattoos on his shirt.
Hi Lily,
I like your comments, both written and visual, on the ideas of cultural barriers, which language is certainly a part of. Though there are many benefits to a global community, are elements of individual culture lost?
Yes! There begins to be a homogenization of culture. Maybe its a good thing in some ways, but it does seem that something is lost. And the particular aspects of culture that are being disseminated... material culture... I don't know that it brings positive changes.
Based on the comments above, would it be safe to say that your series of images is meant to document that homogenization? Or is it meant to document what's left of the native culture?
I agree with Bill's comment on the stiffness of the subjects. I'm wondering if the time you spend with them and your relationship to them (you said your spanish is not always the best) might also be what's keeping that stiffness. I also wonder if it's important that the subject always be staring at the camera. The image of the two woman you posted below might have been more interesting if it focused more on what they were doing. I'm sort of intimidated by those stares, and I don't feel I can really get into the image because of it. If this work is about the native culture, I would like to see more images that show me more about this culture.
Anyways...just a few thoughts. I really like the image of the boy though. I like his t-shirt. I'd wear it.
Well, really I'm interested in accumulating images that, together, create a portrait of Pavones. I'm interested in this town for many reasons... one of the interesting things is the changing culture... which is now rapidly changing due to the addition of phone lines and internet 1 year ago. So I'm looking for both traces of native culture, and traces of the mixing of cultures in the area.
I'm also interested in the wide array of ethnic backgrounds in the area. On this last visit I really focused on Ticos, and also details of the town itself... more images to come.
As far as the direct gaze of the subjects, I see what you're saying about feeling intimidated. However, I completely disagree. For me, it is really important that the subjects gaze directly at me and at the viewer. It's essential that the subjects have some power in who's doing the looking. I am already an outsider in the community, and by having the subjects engage the viewer directly I feel that it helps reduce this voyeuristic feel and changes power relations.
In the image of the 2 women, they are engaged in a an activity that speaks to their culture - peeling shrimp and preparing ceviche in the open air kitchen of their restaurant. Ceviche is a Latin American (and Costa Rican) traditional dish. The thing that is interesting to me is that Tatiana has her ipod earbuds in one ear - a sign of technology and culture that simply didn't reach out into the rural outskirts of Pavones 10-20 years ago.
Thanks for your thought-provoking coments.
Hi Lily,
Just a thought:
It is clear that you have thought very deeply about this work and are working to translate those ideas into photographs. It is also clear that you want to be respectful to the people in the photographs and not just treat them as subjects. I think that you are doing a good job of that. Your camera is always at eye level with them, even when photographing the kids.
My one criticism, and it is a criticism of a lot of photography with a social agenda, is that maybe you could write a better paper about this topic. As of now the images look like a lot of other people's photographs that work with large-format: posed and deadpan. Whereas in the better images from Intimate Distance there is a clear aesthetic style that is all you in the way that you use color, light, space, etc, and how those things provide a certain emotional flare. I think as a visual artist, we need to develop intellectually and aesthetically. And while I see this work as a giant step forward intellectually, I see it as a slide backwards when it comes to aesthetics. Now if aesthetics are not of any concern to you, then I guess my comments are a moot point. If your point is to purposefully subvert aesthetics, then you are successful. But I think that too many people do that nowadays. This is probably a symptom of so many photographers getting formal educations.
Bill,
Isn't that always the challenge? To integrate both aesthetics and a compelling idea into one photograph? I am certainly trying to do so when I shoot, but sometimes it is easier said than done.
And in reference to the Intimate Distance work, that body of work was completely emotional for me. Every photograph was, for me, delving into a really painful moment in my life. I don't know that that kind of emotional level can be maintained... or if I even want to do so.
But I certainly know what you mean about utilizing light and color, and I do hope to integrate that sensibility into my new work. Thanks for your comments.
Post a Comment