Published 08.06.2007
In her recent show at Angles Gallery (2006), Judy Fiskin showed
a grainy, black and white Super-8 film titled The End of
Photography (2006). As the declarative title suggests, much is
at stake in this project. At only two minutes and fourteen seconds
long, this poignant, elegiac work is pragmatically conceived to
ensure that the viewer can stand comfortably for the duration of
the film without losing interest or suffering from distracting
fatigue. This is essential since the argument Fiskin makes is as
simple as it is radical and therefore requires clear, concise
substantiation: the hundred and fifty year history of photography
as we know it has come to an end. Fiskin's argument does not hinge
on the same arcane ideas that have accompanied the multiple deaths
of painting since the 1970s, but rather on an easily observable
fact: the formal processes that once defined photography as a
medium are nearing obsolescence.
The film is unapologetically plaintive and nostalgic, but these
rather unfashionable traits do not detract from the persuasive
effect of the piece, largely because the quantitative claims made
throughout ring true. Over the faint crackle of static, a dry,
raspy female voice introduces the film with a simple question,
'What was
lost?,' implying, of course, that the loss in question is complete,
and what we are about to witness is a eulogy. Accompanied by
trembling, uncannily emotive shots of residential neighborhoods in
urban Los Angeles, the same arresting voice provides an inventory
of the objects, processes, and experiences lost with the slow
disappearance of conventional photography: 'No more film, no more
canisters, no more reels... No more enlarger, no more timer, no
more safe-light, no more negative carrier, no more dodging tool.'
As flickering images of washed out 1950s era apartment buildings,
untended hedges, and unremarkable architectural details play across
the screen the somber voice continues, 'No more apron... No more
tongs.' The faintly agitated, obviously manual camerawork ensures
that no frame is ever completely at rest, and so the stillness that
distinguishes photographic images is evoked only through absence.
'No more squeegee... No more darkness... No more radio,' the film
continues, before drawing its inevitable conclusion, 'No more
photography.'
For Fiskin, photography is constituted by its nuts and bolts, by
its medium specific processes and materials. Digital photography,
the unnamed shadow presence throughout the film, should not - it is
implied - be classified as photographic in the truest ontological
sense because its materials and processes are of an entirely
different order - there is no water, no darkness, no tongs, no
trays... no radio. To appreciate fully Fiskin's film, one must set
aside a number of widely held prejudices instantiated with the rise
of postmodernism. The End of Photography is a work fueled
by single-minded conviction, by nostalgia, by sentimentality, and
by the notion that photography should be distinguished from all
other media. Fiskin's is not an reactionary argument but one driven
by the simple assurance that the methods we understand as
photographic today are not comparable to the methods of the past
century and a half, and in the silent shift from one process to the
next, something - in fact many things - have been lost.
- Christopher Bedford