InsideYou are an insider if you have a privileged position upon taking the picture. A famous example of an insider is Nan Goldin in her book 'The Ballad of Sexual Dependancy'. The photographs taken here are of her friends. She is in such a privileged position as a photographer that only someone in her position could have taken these photographs. It interests me how in the photograph on the right the photographer, although she is an insider seems so comfortable and participatory to the scene that she becomes distant - almost becoming an outsider? It is an incredibly beautiful photograph because of how personal it is. The couple could have even forgotten that the photographer was there? On the contrary, if she was an outsider and the couple didn't now her, their reaction would be completely different.
Roger BallenRoger Ballen is a very interesting case when it comes to discussing the inside/outside because of his very personal inside claim to what most people would think of as being outside photography. In his interview with the Guardian Roger Ballen said, "People constantly compare me to Diane Arbus." But for him, his photography is self reflective, like 'looking in the mirror'. One of his most famous works 'Boarding House' is what has brought people to compare him to Arbus. The subjects are of 'marginalised and mentally unstable South Africans' who live in this self dependant compound. However when watching the film made about his time there, you see a very close relationship between him and the people there. I believe that he is has taken photographs that only an insider could have taken. He would have needed the trust of these people in order for him to create these scenes. He has a unique privilage that Diane Arbus never managed to achieve - she will stay the voyeur while Ballen participates.
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/apr/05/roger-ballen-outland-interview 'Roger Ballen caused a storm with his portraits of marginalised and mentally unstable South Africans. Is he merely reflecting a broken society – or exploiting his subjects? Sean O’Hagan meets the controversial photographer' |
The photograph on the left is a pinnacle discussion point from the argument presented in the essay 'Inside/Out'. Godeau stands with Susan Sontag and refers to her criticism of the photograph in her book 'On Photography'. They say that it is unethical due to its exploitative, objectifying nature. You can see why due to it being a photograph of a man who at the time would have been referred to as a 'freak'. He is towering over his two parents, his mother seeming very surprised and his father disappointed. At the same time, despite his stature, he is the one who seems the most vulnerable. He is the one who has to lean down as to not hit his head on the ceiling, he must walk with a walking stick, he must he looked upon like this by his parents. To photograph this man is affirming his position as an attraction or something to be looked upon. The position the photographer holds is one of an outsider. This distant, unsympathetic act of taking a photograph is exploitative when looked upon but does it do any real damage? Should we pass laws to say you are only allowed to be an ethical photographer who can only take Insider photographs..?
Susan Sontag argued that certain forms of photographic depiction were especially complicit with processes of objectification that precluded either empathy or identification [...] Arbus was indicted as a voyeuristic and deeply morbid connoisseur of the horrible. Nan Goldin |