Interviews with Master Photographers + Bonus (PDF Scans)

Interviews with Master Photographers: Minor White, Imogen Cunningham, Cornell Capa, Elliott Erwitt, Yousuf Karsh, Arnold Newman, Lord Snowdon, Brett Weston
by James Danziger (Author)

More Info HERE

File Format: PDF Scan - fair quality
File Size: 15.8 MB
Publication Date: January 1977



I read this review and it sums up rather well how I feel about where I'm at on the book; thus far anyway 'cause I'm mid-read - but I really do like it so far . . . understanding very much the importance and dynamic of how well the interaction 'tween the interviewer and the person being interviewed plays into the final outcome . . .

Fascinating book with insights from some incredible personalities, and a wonderful snapshot of the era, as photography reached its arty, accepted stage and exploded in popularity and serious appreciation.
Would have earned five stars for the mostly great concept and subjects, except for some meh subjects/interviews and the slightly clunky style of the interviewers in general; they have questions they want to run through, Q&A and move on, and they usually don't get conversational with the interviewee or follow up on the answers. Think 70s TV interview by a stiff guy in a grey suit holding notecards. Maybe it's a difference of era, but any amateur youtuber or podcaster today would be expected to maintain better flow, and this kind of jumpy Q&A session would probably only be seen in a satirical context.
Would have been four stars except writing out this review reminded me that some of the interviews were a waste of time, while others felt unfinished. But the content here is mostly quite good, so I give it a strong three stars. It's worth reading at least some of it.

I was surprised by which interviews ended up being the most interesting, and which were a disappointment. I'll give a quick (or sometimes not so) comment on each.

Minor White was just what I expected: the wise old philosopher poet, teaching his viewpoints. One of the more enjoyable interviews, with a lot to learn from his attitudes and observations. He seemed like a lovely man with a lot of worthwhile teachings for anyone of the right mindset to listen. "I'd take her to church, and then I'd go out photographing while I was waiting. As far as I could tell, we were both doing the same thing."

Imogen Cunningham was less interesting than I expected, and as acerbic as her reputation. She talked about how much she loved Stieglitz, complained about Curtis not getting enough recognition, ripped on Edward and Ansel, and threw shade at Minor, who was apparently a friend of hers (and they died on the same day, shortly after these interviews). She seemed to delight at taking jabs at others within the photo world (gleefully pointing out how she'd shot a portrait of Ansel that showed his broken nose, which he'd previously tried to hide, and hinting at wanting to knock him off his pedestal), but didn't have much insight on that world. Gives the feeling she was that mean old lady down the street who's actually pretty cool if you stop and meet her on her level. Right about this though: "Most people just think of photographs as something that is simply a way to present subject matter."

Cornell Capa was a disappointment. I wasn't familiar with him, but I certainly knew the family name, so I had expectations. He was eager to talk, and was passionate about his International Center of Photography, but he came off as very much stuck in his own little bubble. He seemed to genuinely not understand why art buyers were interested in the art photography that he didn't care about, and not interested in buying his brother's famous photo of a soldier getting shot. That's not just a limited view as a photographer, that's a lack of basic understanding as a human being; I don't trust someone who's that obviously oblivious but won't stop talking about himself as "one who sees." He expressed great confidence in his own abilities as someone who "knows how to see" and who wasn't doing a lot of active photography at the time but could easily pick it up whenever and create great work that would matter, but I'd never heard of him before this book, the samples of his work here aren't memorable, and there's nothing here to suggest he was much more than the self-impressed brother of Robert Capa, who ran a major photo organization. I took extensive notes as I read this book, but his section only generated two notes on five lines, taken from one page, and looking at them amongst the notes I got from other interviews it seems like I was generous to give him that. Frustratingly disappointing interview with someone so wrapped up in his own worldview that it ceases to be interesting outside of it. This one is long and skippable.

Elliott Erwitt was a familiar name to me, but I wasn't very familiar with him. I think the way he's presented here doesn't do him many favors, partly because he had (at this point) the kind of personality that starts you off prepared to be exasperated, but I know from other sources that he did some exceptional work far beyond what's shown or discussed here, and it was an interesting interview with some good history and insights. "Photographers are really very pompous and very serious, generally speaking." Did he already read their Capa interview??

Yousuf Karsh was the biggest disappointment here I think. I expected a fascinating interview with someone who did such legendary work, whose photos are widely known even among those who don't know his name. While it was a pleasant enough chat with a nice man, with a little of his history and approach, it wasn't the wealth of insight I expected. I actually only bothered to make note of one thing from his interview, his standard advice: "Be a student of the humanities, because if you are, it makes you a more sensitive recorder of life." Nothing else stuck out to me in his 14 pages; a great surprise. Perhaps the most interesting part was how he initially fought against letting them record him because he was so wary of having his words taken out of context, so perhaps it's no surprise then that a man so overtly concerned with how he'll come off in an interview is too careful with his words to say much of anything.

Arnold Newman was certainly the biggest surprise here. I wasn't aware of ever hearing of him, though he did some very famous portraits. I wasn't expecting much, but this interview was just *overflowing* with insight and interesting observations. It took forever to get through it because I was making note of multiple passages on just about every page. While the less interesting interviews caught my attention with only one or two items, Newman's filled four pages of notes, out of 10.5 total for the whole book. Creativity, composition, intentions, what matters in portraiture, ethics, painting, teaching... Don't know if I'd call this the best/most entertaining interview here, but it is certainly the most dense with commentary on the reality of photography. "You can't teach any creative medium. All you can hope to do is open a few doors and windows to people. You just try to light a fire under their ass."

Lord Snowdon seemed like one big curveball. An upper crust looking Englishman named Antony Armstrong-Jones who went to Eton and Cambridge and goes by Lord Snowdon because he was the 1st Earl of Snowdon... due to his marriage to Princess Margaret. That's right, Wiki informs me he was the brother in law... of the Queen. Yeah. And known for his "royal studies," meaning royal family portraits and such. It certainly paints a pompous picture in advance. But then his constant themes are helping the less fortunate, being respectful and caring, and bucking against pretension. He designed a wheelchair, a special aviary at the zoo, and was eager to describe himself as a failed architect. "Failure" seems to be one of his key words and themes that he's eager to dwell on. But as he goes on about his priorities and views, it starts to feel like he's so focused on calling out pretension that he becomes pretentious in his own right. He is very fixated on his work not having an identifiable style and not making any attempt to be art, and on rejecting photography as a whole as an artform, and embracing it as a journalistic tool and a means to his noble ends. But the combination of the work shown here and how he speaks about his views gives the impression that he wasn't a "master photographer" so much as a dude who cared a lot and had a camera and connections. He had high horse views about how pretentious all the art photographers were, how photos shouldn't be treated as art, even as he sold books of his own artistically intentioned photos, even as he described working with the Swiss printer to get the right shades of red, and described his intricate formula for presenting his photos in exhibitions so the viewers experienced his left/right divided mood concept... so after earning a lot of good grace with me by subverting my expectations at the beginning, by the end of the interview I'd heard enough to find him a rather insufferable hypocrite, taking shots at everyone above him as he furrowed his brow over the humble importance of his documentary snapshots. He seems like a nice man, or someone very skilled at coming off as one, but he's frankly ridiculous in how he sees himself and the world he's a part of. His views are contradictory to the point of absurdity. End result: I've never heard of him anywhere except in this book, and I can't imagine how he got in here amongst this company, aside from him being a celebrity among royal watchers (years before this interview his wedding in Westminster Abbey was the first royal wedding broadcast on tv). I found several aspects of his personal history absolutely fascinating and I related to them strongly, and still I left the interview wishing I'd never heard of him and his confused outlook.

And Brett Weston was of course... Brett. It's the only interview that begins with almost a warning disclaimer that he was "difficult to interview" due to his unwillingness to answer their questions. In truth, they wanted to ask questions relating to art critic interpretation and philosophical symbolism, and Brett thought this was a dumb thing to try to discuss with him and more or less told them so. "I'm just a photographer. I'm the wrong person to ask." Brett was blunt and sometimes a little rough around the edges, but he gave interesting interviews when engaged properly. These two went in sounding more like art history librarians than photographers in their focus, and when the subject of the interview answered the door with a beer in his hand and told them their personal approach to photography bored him, they had trouble figuring out what to do with the conversation. That said, Brett was happy to talk in some candid detail about his personal history, his father, his brothers, Ansel, Imogen, Modotti, O'Keeffe, Stieglitz, Steichen, Siskind, HCB, painters, shooting styles, cameras, methods and technique, Zone System opinions, darkroom habits, and whatever else they asked about. Interviewers better prepared to follow up on his answers and engage him on the subjects he was responsive to would have come away with a lot more. He actually came off as being one of the more willing subjects overall, but there's a tension from the interviewers. A missed opportunity, but still an interesting and amusing interview. "I was simply staggered by the image on the ground glass... It's stronger now than ever before."

I'd feel a little remiss, though, if I didn't acknowledge that Brett did come off a little disagreeable in his fixation on bringing the conversation back to his distaste for "bleeding heart" politics making its way into photographs. He described Imogen as, "marvelous. Caustic as hell. [We saw that in her own interview.] . . . not a great artist. . . . kind of bleeding heart and a bit of a Parlor Pink." Brett seemed to be feeling a little venomous on this day, and it's a somewhat jarring reminder that, as he acknowledged himself, he was not as lovable as his father, at least on the surface.

I detail some of the moments that put Brett in a worse light as a bit of a warning to other fans buying this book mostly just for him, as I did. I admire his work greatly, and I generally like him and agree with his photographic opinions, and I've developed a certain sympathy and empathy toward him as I've gotten to know more, but it took me a long time to take him seriously enough to give his work a chance because he did make such a negative and unlikable first impression when I first heard about him. It's like that old thing about how you should never meet your heroes, though in this case I wasn't personally too shocked when his non-photographic viewpoints came off a little objectionable. I had an idea of that from the beginning, and this was a reminder that I identify with him not because he was a sweetheart but because he was a rough edged, shy, misunderstood photographer, and a true 20th century master. Some of his remarks would have been better left out, but the interview gives an impression that he was having a beer after working since 4am, maybe he had a little more before and during, the interviewers approached him from an angle he can't stand and he told them off, after that they came off as being on the back foot as they shuffled through their notes trying to adjust their plan, and while Brett was willing to talk he was in a mood to be a little abrasive to them. That's my take on it. All that said, I was surprised that he was nothing but sweetness and admiration toward Ansel, despite ripping the Zone System.

Basically, what I'm saying is that if these interviews had been conducted all at the same time and place, they would have ended with Minor toddling off to bed early after a cordial farewell to Karsh, an irritated and slightly borracho Brett kicking Snowdon's ass, Newman pretending not to notice but secretly approving, with Imogen cackling from the sideline. No one would notice when Erwitt slipped out, and Capa would still be sitting in a corner talking about ICP, having never noticed the others were even there. A Force ghost version of Ansel would appear just to shake his head and disappear again.

So, overall, an interesting book of interviews with some mostly pretty interesting characters. Two of the eight interviews are probably better skipped, but the rest are entertaining and more or less insightful. But it has to be acknowledged that this would have been a better book if the authors had become master interviewers before interviewing these master photographers—when given gentler personalities they didn't pull much out, and when faced with big personalities they got tossed around a little, and the rest of the time they were just a little clunky and inexperienced.

____________________________________________________________________

BONUS: As referenced from the interview with Minor White -



Acting: The First Six Lessons
by Richard Boleslavsky (Author), Rhonda Blair (Editor)

More Info HERE

File Format: PDF Scan - fair quality
File Size: 11.6 MB
Publication Date: June 2010



Acting: The First Six Lessons was first published in 1933 and remains a key text for anyone studying acting today. These dramatic dialogues between teacher and idealistic student explore the field of acting according to one of the original teachers of Stanislavsky’s System in America.

This new edition of an essential text is edited by Rhonda Blair and supplemented for the very first time with documents from the American Laboratory Theatre. These collect together a broad range of exciting unpublished material, drawn from Boleslavsky’s pivotal and unprecedented teachings on acting at the American Laboratory Theatre. Included are:

• "The Creative Theatre Lectures" by Richard Boleslavsky

• Boleslavsky’s "Lectures from the American Laboratory Theatre"

• "Acting with Maria Ouspenskaya," four short essays on the work of Ouspenskaya, Boleslavsky’s colleague and fellow actor trainer

• A new critical introduction and bibliography by the Editor.

Hidden Content:

**Hidden Content: You must click 'Like' before you can see the hidden data contained here.**