I’m Looking Through You
I’m Looking Through You is an expansive visual poem celebrating the glamorous surface of Los Angeles and its reach.
The Corpse of Content
An Essay By Tim Davis
I’m old enough to admit that I’m pretty good at photography. I’m, like, good at it.
I know how to wrestle or squeeze significance out of almost any situation. It is one of my few consistent beliefs that there is an infinite amount of significance in the universe, an almost bottomless well of tell-tale to draw from. I know how to pull back into a wide embrace and allow the camera (which doesn’t care where it is positioned) to pitch up its admiration for the world’s surfaces by stretching the tension between described and describer. I know how to lie down on the floor and look under a chair. I don’t mind asking someone to move over a little, or to pretend they’ve swallowed a cherry pit (a good strategy, by the way, for getting past a portrait subject’s guardedness). I know how to come back later when the light is right. I will gleefully trespass if it means getting the picture right. I will dissemble. I feel able to almost WILL an image into existence.
But there are bad days; days where it’s hard to know whether to pull the car over here or keep driving. There are days when nothing pops, when the world feels drained of contrast or saturation or certainty. There are days when I’m unsure what I’m looking for. I’m not one of the handful of photographers with an obviously palpable visual style. Lee Friedlander can make one of his pictures anywhere. He visually warps and wonks and crosshatches and unkilters and ajumbles it, and it’s a Friedlander. Dostoevsky describes an artist with a similar, in this case, newly emerging style, in his story “Bobok”:
Yesterday a friend came to see me. “Your style is changing,” he said; “it is choppy: you chop and chop, and then a parenthesis, then a parenthesis in the parenthesis, then you stick in something else in brackets, then you begin chopping and chopping again.”
The rest of us have to have something to say. We need content, and it’s not always forthcoming. On these days, I fantasize about dead bodies. I’ve had long reveries, walking down a highway in Tennessee, or next to some unsparing spillway in northern New Jersey, about what would happen if I found a human corpse. Would I call the police? Would I photograph it first? What if the light was wrong? Would I wait to call the police? Would I try to make it a dramatic image, or simply stand back, and let the dead body emanate its own unacceptability? It’s happened enough times that I gave the phenomenon a name: “The Corpse of Content.” It stands for the photographer’s yearning for content so potent it’s taboo, that Fijian or Tongan or Malagasy word that means both forbidden and sacred.
At least part of the reason corpses are taboo is visual. We are wired to study and analyze human movement and we don’t know what to do with an inanimate body. A corpse is a corrupt patch in the lyrical visual code that allows us to recognize our lover’s hair swaying in the wind three blocks away, built from 300,000 years of scanning for hesitant sabertooth breath down there on the veldt. Photographers are X-Men whose mutation is visual acuity. We live to see distinctly, and need content to feed on, so the human corpse scratches a double Darwinian diet niche. You find an open parking spot. You find an interesting face in a crowd. You find an unusual angle. You find a dead body.
At least since Lascaux we’re familiar with how artists arrest motion, scattering the world with corpses. But little worlds of stillness are not the same as awkwardly, desperately still bodies in an otherwise flowing visual field. A corpse is like an instrumentalist in an ensemble who suddenly stops playing. On January 5, 1996 I attended the premier of a production of Leos Janacek’s The Makropulos Case at the Metropolitan Opera House. It was a glamorous night. Film director James Ivory had paid for my ticket. Lauren Bacall sat in front of us, wrapped in furs. The opera is about a century-long lawsuit brought by an immortal opera diva so she can finally die at age 337. Jesse Norman sang the role and I wish I could say she was magnificent. But in the first act, tenor Richard Versaille had a heart attack after delivering the line “You can only live so long!” and fell ten feet off a ladder, dead. Confusion was palpable. The conductor yelled, “Richard, are you all right?” The audience’s audible gasps reminded me of a recording from November, 1963. Boston Symphony Orchestra director Erich Leinsdorf turned to the audience and said, "The president of the United States has been the victim of an assassination." A wave of sighs and shrieks filled the auditorium until Leinsdorf continued, "We will play the funeral march from Beethoven’s Third Symphony." Stillness in chaos is irrational, impossible. The premier was cancelled. We went out for borscht.
…
In 2008 I went to Bulgaria to work on a project with the artist, Daniel Bozhkov. Daniel isn’t just any artist; he’s my favorite artist.
If you’ve ever felt you had a good idea, check it against one of Daniel’s. His ideas come complete with variations, internal memos, self-parodies, public, private and spiritual valences, hummingbird sugar sweetness and glad handed parody. He once worked with Hemingway lookalikes and professional perfumier to create “Eau d’Ernest,” a cologne that was supposed to smell like the author. He’s made a corn maze shaped like Larry King, and yoghurt modified by his own DNA. Daniel and I flew to Sofia on a discount airline, one where not only was there no free baggage or meal, you had to hold your breath to give the plane extra lift. We set up in the Hemat Hotel, an old communist-era structure I called the Soviet Marriot. On the first morning, I woke up early and had breakfast in the dining room. The more a country has been conquered, the better its cuisine. Bulgarian food is a lovely peace treaty of Turkish, Slavic and Greek and as I helped myself to my first minced meat Princesses, I glanced up at the breakfast bar TV. It was Bulgarian Shark Week, and a program was playing about Bethany Hamilton, the professional surfer whose leg was bitten off by a shark, and who has continued to surf and thrive as a champion. At least since the invention of movable type, humans have had to deal with the displacement of taking in one narrative while observing another. Think of the first crusader who sat on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount and whipped out his copy of the Canterbury Tales. We see it in Eve Arnold’s famous photograph of Marilyn Monroe reading Joyce on a child’s playground. I feel that way whenever “Sexy Sadie” comes on in Home Depot, and I did, again, watching this blonde Hawaiian girl’s tragedy and triumph play out in this all grey space, like an alarm waking you up in the tobacco-stained suit pocket of a KGB agent.
Our project was to search the city for imaginary former Soviet monuments. In the corner of one large square, there was a small alpine hut and a Coke machine, which we decided needed a Monument to Tooth Decay. I photographed the site, and Daniel sketched a giant tooth to be combined later into an architectural rendering. We drove toward the edge of the city, eventually stopping at a 60s-era sports complex. Like much late Communist architecture, it had the charm of dental surgery, and was filled with cavities to boot, with one or two shambolic badminton games going in inside. Just across a field of rubble another arena seemed totally abandoned. A guard sat at a barbed wire gate and after a short conversation, and briefer bribe, he chinned us through with a stern, “No FOTO!” I was carrying an enormous tripod and my 4x5 View Camera and brightened with my jauntiest We’re All in this Together, right, mate? Ignorant Foreigner smile.
Stripped to bare concrete, the place was quite decayed. Snapshots of almost naked women taped to the walls whispered that the building was being used as some sort of illegal rave or sex club. Mostly it spoke the universal language of the abandoned building: wet concrete or drywall or wood, similar in all cultures, and resolutely uninteresting to me. Just as religions and dictators tend to backdate their origin myths to give them more gravity, photographers try to sop up extra meaning by photographing old things. 100 percent of images are technically old, so we think of photography as connected to the past. But photographs age better when they start out fresh, addressing the contemporary world. In Latin, a patina is a shallow dish. After a few minutes, we knew there wasn’t anything to shoot. Snaking our way out, Daniel suddenly stopped. I saw his face, in everyday conversation as expressive as a Nepalese mask, distend with shock. A leg was sticking out from under a stairwell, its bare foot bloodied and distinctly, definitively still.
The leg was severed. Cut clean at the top of the pants, its naked foot was dirty on the heel and ball and cleaner if bloodier on the arch, showing that its owner had been walking (running?) barefoot in this powdery concrete. Here was my corpse, my content, filling this unphotographably clichéd space with pure immediate meaning. I knew I had to photograph it, despite the “NO FOTO” thug outside and the crackling fear of who may have caused this atrocity. But there was a problem. The leg’s severed edge was in a deep recessed shadow. No photograph of it in its current state would show that it wasn’t attached to, say, a passed out reveler. I took a deep breath, gathering strength from ancestor Alexander Gardner at Gettysburg, and dragged the leg into the light.
Today was one of those days. I stepped out of my house into the sparkling Lambrusco of a Los Angeles March morning and headed downhill toward Macarthur Park. I love the utterly aimless photographic walk. There is nothing that makes me happier than having nowhere to go and all day to get there. Most of the time when I try to go make a particular picture in a particular place, it doesn’t work. It’s sad watching the world not conform to my imagination. Part of the endless pleasure of being a photographer is the sweet tooth shudder of the Australopithecus deep within us, finding a field of salmonberries or a fresh killed dik dik. But sometimes you don’t find anything. You go hungry. Sometimes it feels like you’re not good at it.
You’re walking on a sidewalk on a street alive with light. The light is so pleasant it’s meaningful: library volumes of light, captains’ logs, best-selling second novels and dissertations of light. Light you could talk to all night and wake up knowing you’re in love. Everything looks good. But are there pictures here? You keep seeing things; interesting things. A man washing a phalanx of yellow handled shopping carts, the spray jetting off them scattering rainbows around. The sugar rush fills you with boldness and you scamper down an embankment to the supermarket parking lot. You nod at the workmen and they nod back. You’re in, right here right now in front of something beautiful and resonant. You’ve finally managed to cross the dance floor to talk to the high school crush and he’s all ears. You have something to say, but do you know how to say it? You can’t seem to find an obvious place to put the frame. You raise the camera up, but the buildings and cars in the background feel illegible. You don’t get the connection between the radiant ritual you’re observing and the stucco Tetris just beyond. You get down on your knees to frame out the city, but then you’re oversimplifying, and it feels cheap. Overcomplicated or Oversimplified; Too much sky or too much street. These dualisms are warning signs you’re not seeing a picture. You’re seeing a thing and trying to build a picture around it. That’s when you give up.
Giving up is hard to do, but sometimes it’s the only thing. For years I’ve threatened to write a book on the pleasures of quitting. I once answered an ad in the New York Times for a photo assistant and spent one grueling day making gin bottles glisten. During the next morning’s meeting this one-named photographer raved and raged and referred to himself with in the third person: “If you want to work for Hashi, you’ve got to be on time! If you want to work for Hashi, you do this all day and never complain!” I stood up from the meeting table, looked around at the eight or nine studio employees all with anywhere else eyes, and gathered myself. “I don’t want to work for Hashi,” I grinned, and descended down into 23rd street morning sun like Norma Desmond at the end of Sunset Boulevard. I spent the day watching Harold Lloyd films at the Museum of Modern Art and feeling utterly reborn
I spent half an hour trying unsuccessfully to make that shopping cart picture. Luckily I was rescued by my wife, who called, jumping through the phone, yelling, “Get over here immediately!” Her studio was in the Ladies Choir room of Immanuel Presbyterian in Koreatown. The church is a great argument for why we need organized religions: because they build enormous, ambitious buildings, which, when people stop believing in God, become community centers. This giant Gothic slot canyon is a hive of sincerity and inclusion, with services in Tagalog, Spanish, Korean, Ethiopian and other African languages. The church says it practices “Radical Hospitality,” housing undocumented immigrants and hosting to teacher trainers, homeless counters, actual human angels of all orientations. It feels as far from Hollywood as you can get, concerned only with quiet survival and fulfillment. I raced up flights of stairs to find my wife, eyes wild, pointing out the window. From its heavy stone sills, you could see down into what is usually an abandoned alley. But no place in Los Angeles remains no place for long. Below, a bloodied young man lay motionless in the trunk of the car. A woman stood over him, holding the hatch door open. Even amid a thicket of film equipment all I could see was the impossibility of death. To this day, when people look at this picture they often don’t notice the camera and sandbags and production assistant. A corpse rings a bell and it takes a minute for its soundwaves to decay. But once I realized I was looking at a film production I saw the entire picture immediately. Its frame and focus inevitable.
I’ve found that in most of the world, when you ask someone if you can photograph them, the acceptance rate is about 35%. People are shy, humble, skeptical, and in most of the U.S.A., increasingly paranoid. But in Southern California, the acceptance rate is closer to 75%. Are people more confident, better natured, neighborlier than elsewhere? Is it the weather; the slower pace of life? The central myth of the place is one of sudden glory, and in my conversations with its citizens, I find an almost universal hopefulness about their personal prospects. I met a man sitting under a canvas canopy in the parking lot of a gas station in Van Nuys. He was the proprietor of an illegal Razzle Dazzle type game, where, for prizes, marbles are dropped onto a sheet of a hundred holes. The game is designed to be confusing. No one ever wins Razzle Dazzle. This man had scars on his hands and face. He had been in jail. His girlfriend had stolen his money and his dog. But, he insisted, he was just about to open a string of topless carwashes. The American Dream. And while he waited for people to wander over from a bus stop to drop fistfuls of wadded dollars onto his carpet covered card table, he took out pencils to color in a page of butterflies swept through with the bubbly word “Believe.”
But even in a land where all human interactions can become publicity, you can’t just walk up and start photographing film productions. Dream factories are serious about their sleight of hand, even as they stage confessions in diners and autopsies in alleys. In the narration to Los Angeles Plays Itself, Thom Andersen writes, “Los Angeles is where the relation between reality and representation gets muddled.” Caterpillars crawl into cocoons before becoming butterflies. Playing dead might have been the first form of acting, but it can’t be easy to hold perfectly still in the trunk of a Corolla. The actor playing my corpse was good. The trunk kept opening and closing and he kept being there, inert as that thing they call a “still.” I was forced to peek over the windowsill so as not to be seen. The heavy stone and mullioned panes stayed out of focus in the foreground giving my still first person credentials: a P.O.V. A picture like that says, “I see.” My heart raced as I was spying on this secret within a secret, this double taboo: making a picture of a picture being made. And here, in your hands, the story of a story of story of a corpse.
#
Bar Fight as Artist’s Statement
An Essay By Tim Davis
Even the sidewalks are blindingly bright. Los Angeles is a shockwave of tawdriness, the devastation rolling east from the sea, and in Mar Vista (which possesses neither Mar nor Vista) you can feel it on your teeth.
The signage stumbles forward drunkenly and whispers a light-lidded bossa nova: SUN COIN LIGHT LAUNDRY. The city is a cocktail lounge in a cocktail dress with June Christy on the Hi-Fi only when you squint it’s untreated mental illness washed up in all the spaces where there aren’t actual cars. I walk down a side street swinging and swaying with Sammy Kaye, singing ditties of myself. I’m photographing almost constantly these days and trying to keep track of how the whole thing works. A photograph is a key and from it I’m trying rebuild the ring, the lock, the building, the block, the city. There is nothing neater and more self-assured than a photograph—that lovely parallelogram filled with light—and I am busy registering the uncertain mess it sets off. The photograph is the joker you’re holding but what’s in the rest of the dealt-out deck?
Today I’m thinking about inside and outside. Not in some abstract way but in practice how it feels to photograph inside as opposed to out. Outside everything is less leveraged. The light is generalized, bouncing off of countless surfaces in all directions until it’s voluminous. The landscape is unaccountable. If you drew lines from the camera lens to everything you actually attend to in a photograph you might look like some fallen funnel cloud but on the street you’d be missing most of what is out there. There are too many angles, too great an array of surfaces and subjects, and most of it is far away, hard to feel with impact, gauzy and limpid with atmospheric perspective. The minute you step inside, light sources, geometries, subjects become simplified. There are fewer variables in each photographic equation and it’s easier to identify your x. As the anarchists chant, “Whose streets? OUR streets!” The landscape belongs to everyone, the horizon an open border as hard to manipulate as gravity. Inside the walls can talk, and they are talking to you. Tiny camera movements make extreme statements inside architecture. Try winking your right and then your left eye indoors and out. See how extreme the difference is indoors between the array of planes your left and your right eye sees. Outside, not so much. Inside we echolocate.
I keep stepping off the perfect sidewalks of Mar Vista, despite the 70-degree opalescent sky and the jacarandas alive just this week with purple flame. Walking outside in Los Angeles feels like being flirted with by Alain Delon or sung to by Nina Simone. But today I’m hungry for the hot centrifuge of the indoors. A midday midweek bowling alley full of students getting pharmacy degrees with knee-bucklingly beautiful soon-to-be starlets dolling out the silly shoes. A Mixed Martial Arts gym empty except for two straight (I asked them) salesmen, writhing on the mats in the mating ritual of bush pythons. A dance studio where fiancées learn to fox trot. A bar.
A photographer walks into a bar. The place is deep dark and mercifully free from renewal. Every renovation is a wave of extinction and this place is reeking of its original biome. My eyes adjust and I push past two fellows, recent AARP barflies in porkpie hats and dyed fus-manchu, and toward the gleaming cash register. The thing has a soul. It’s stood here since time immemorial changing earnings into cirrhosis and beggings into dreams. When Tom Waits dies they’ll cut him open and find this cash register. As I gaze into its coy and calamitous chrome, I realize that nothing around me admits to being 2017. The entire scene is preserved in 1975; the year Jaws was released and the serious artists who had taken over Hollywood realized just how much money might really be in it. For all its dedication to the new and imminent, Los Angeles is marbled with the boom that followed Jaws and Star Wars’ repositioning mainstream Hollywood at the center of global culture. You’re always striding right into 1975, to the chiropractor in Van Nuys, to the record store on Pico, and this dive feels like the epicenter of unchangedness.
No one is behind the bar. So I take out my camera and start to figure out how to prop it up properly. I don’t have a tripod with me, and am constitutionally unable to take noisy photographs, so I find myself improvising camera supports. I’ve stuck cameras in the crotches of trees and balanced them on windowsills and other people’s cars. Here we accede to the syrupy slowdown of photographing indoors. They can drop a probe on a comet but they can’t figure out how to make hand-held cameras photograph in low light without having pictures pixilate like potato-starch-grained autochromes. Free from film’s ominous sounding Reciprocity Factor, digital cameras are actually marvelous at photographing in low light if you use a long exposure and a tripod. Or a pile of napkins or the thing that holds the packets of jam. The world is full of braces, and in this case I use my wallet, fat with receipts and Indonesian cash unspent on a recent trip.
After I’ve made just one shaky, overexposed frame, the bartender shows up. Photographers have what I call “Naydar,” that is the ability to sense an authority figure coming to tell them they can’t photograph here. I brace myself for the dreaded question, the most disingenuous question ever asked by any store manager, homeowner, security guard, tiger mother in the history of disingenuity: “Can I help you?” I ready my stock response to this thinly veiled kick in the pants—No, I don’t need any help, thank you so much—but it never comes. He’s cool. He looks at the register, and says, “There’s only one guy left in the area who services these things. He got out of the service in World War Two, opened the repair shop, and he’s still going.” We talk about cash registers, more specifically about how beautifully this one works. He has to call the guy maybe once every five years. They don’t take credit cards here. I love this man. He sees my excitement and reflects it back, and the act of taking a photograph sheds the invasive, colonialist rhetoric swirling around image making these days. We’re focusing. I keep talking, but am really taking pictures, and am feeding him lines to keep him going: “What kind?” It’s a National, from the 40s or 50s. His words start to fade out as I zero in on my picture.
Something’s nagging at me all this while. Is this whole thing pure nostalgia? Am I drawn to the gleaming chrome and the light through liquor the same way my students are toward falling down factories and grisly gas pumps? I try to discourage them from this easy assent to the value of the past, telling them that photographs that attend to the present accrue value as they age. Walker Evans wasn’t looking the 1930s. He was looking at NOW. NOW is the nervous system of a photograph, and more it feels the wind of the present on its face, the more its extremities tingle. So what am I doing here, and why do I care? I know the scene seethes with the veiny ache of artificial light. Most outdoor light falls to the fusiliers of our enormous yellow dwarf, warmer on sunny days and flatter and bluer under cloud; ochre in the highlights and cyan in the shadows, like a bruise. Think of how dramatically different the color is inside and outside our bodies. Outside, humans are a tasteful lot—like a season set of cashmere sweaters—Ebony Brown to Pale Rose. Inside, we’re gaudy as a brothel. I love the picayune green and howling cherry goof of the little Christmas lights slung around. But still, I’m hording patina. I’m nostalgic for this place I’ve never been, and nostalgia kills.
Just then, the bartender comes over and leans on the register. He’s been talking all this time and I’ve been nodding my head while shunting almost all my attention into the picture, which now he physically enters. The human body is comically complex compared to the flat, rectangular photograph. We will never reach Peak Portrait, the moment we tire of the quantum equations it takes to fit a body into a box. It’s too unlikely a thing to do, to take the filigreed ballet of even our schlubbiest movements and set it against a simple parallelogram. In a banker’s box of old snapshots, even in the external hard drives of a the world’s public school portraitists, you won’t find two solutions to the problem that exactly the same. My nostalgic still life, with its safe geometries of corporate America’s attempt to package bacchanalia, has come a little bit alive. I tell him, “Don’t move, your arm really makes my picture more interesting.” He replies, “I should’ve been a hand model.” Sometimes the Unknown Comic in sky blesses us with strangers who are smart and funny. I make a few frames, and feel confident I’m making something lovely, when he sidles off through a beaded curtain into a back room.
I keep shooting. These pictures are the tailings and uranium waste of digital photography. The ability to make more pictures after you’re completely satisfied is akin to eating two last handfuls of Doritos after you were full of beans fifteen minutes ago. They are junk food. While I am piling on, gratuitously orange mouthed, “Born To Run” comes over the bar’s stereo. Now it really is 1975. Springsteen’s album of that name came out that year. The record is the exact pop music equivalent of Jaws, made by a young man hailed as an auteur, who has decided to shed the scruffy artistry of his youth and make something that no one will not buy. I stop taking pictures, amazed at the rotund fullness of the virtual time machine I’ve entered. And as the sound colludes with the picture I remember that my camera is also a video camera. Should I shoot this as a video? The ability of a still camera to become a movie camera is a shocking surge in evolution. I imagine Gutenberg waking up one day and realizing his printing press could also thresh wheat, or Segovia that his guitar was good for tying flies. There are so many swirling epistemological questions around the making of a photograph. “Should this still image be a moving image” almost always means you’re done taking that picture. It’s a distraction on the level of an earthquake; the more you hear, the less you think about the image.
I hear the barflies comparing Springsteen stories. “I saw him on the River tour, at Exposition Park.” “I saw him in ’77 at a fucking Jai-Alai place in Miami.” I’ve never seen Springsteen perform, but I know this show is over, and I pack up my bag. One of the barflies turns to me and asks, “What are you really doing?” I’ve ignored these dim sitters, shouldered past them to pay attention to a cash register, and now one of them is asking me the probing question I’m always longing to be asked. I’m so busy making pictures, and thinking about making pictures, that with every brush against a stranger I’m armed with real conversation. I immediately flash on this man with his bad tannic dye job and loose-fitting black track jacket as a great barroom sage, a Kerouac or Bukowski, boring into my soul. He really wants to know. So I lean into to him. I’ll later admit he looks like a roadie, or someone living off the royalties from playing percussion on one Doobie Brothers b-side, but, touched by his genuine interest, in the moment he seems priestly, berobed. I think, hard. “I’m making pictures of the beautiful, glamorous, complicated surface of this city,” I say, feeling pretty good about my synopsis of what is a sprawling, profligate, intuitive project with no clear end in sight. It’s a pretty nifty little crystal. He picks it up and polishes it: “Not the elevator pitch about what you’re doing. What are you REALLY doing?”
I’m consecrated. All my life I’ve failed to make gear-gliding small talk, assuming everyone wanted to cannonball into the nitty gritty. All my life it’s been off-putting and abrupt. I remember the first capital A art party I attended, at a loft on Greene Street in Soho. I sat next to a famous painter who melded abstraction and erotica, and proceeded to tell her my theories about how reactionary abstract art is, and how her genital-punctuated gestural paintings were saving us from this self-indulgent and wall-pretty form. She stared at me for four utterly inscrutable seconds, turned to a side table, snorted a line of cocaine and walked away. Some large percentage of my initial interactions with human beings has gone this way. So Fu Manchu Uno’s probing question touches me deeply. I go on a long ramble around my recent ideas and practices, the background music fading out like in the movies, about how to see Los Angeles at a walking pace; about today’s indoor/outdoor revelations; about the vertical framing I’ve been trying out; about how I feel like a solo explorer here on the ground, open-eyed, in a city that coasts by mostly in the imagination. I’m overdoing it, like the youngest daughter in a Victorian novel, finally getting attention from the dashing stranger. But these are my people. The ones who want to know. We don’t make small talk. We push each other’s buttons. This is a zendo, an agora, a soapbox, a debate, not a dim bar in a nowhere corner of LA.
His eyes are unstable and illegible, like an ocelot’s spots in a dappled jungle. When he speaks, I’m on full alert: “No, I mean, where’s the money in it?’ The shockwave of tawdriness begins as a slow trickle. This can’t be. Am I wrong about all this? His mindful probing is starting to feel like a bullying shove. Here is where I should respond with pure vulnerability. I should talk about how lucky I am to be on sabbatical from a life as a professor, the privilege to experiment and probe without financial pressure. I should tell him how miraculous it is that a kid who grew up with no money has a life that is mostly insulated from financial pressures, and how my life as an artist is currently so distant from anything resembling a career, that I’m making things without scrutiny, without goals, without an audience. I should tell him that at this point I am almost a pure amateur, a lover of this medium having daily trysts with it in the dark lounges and vehement streets, but that I am really all alone, a failure in the marketplace, an artist no one really cares about. But I don’t. I say, “Man, it’s not about money.” And he says, “Don’t give me any of this Nancy Pelosi bullshit.”
The barroom sage is a sad alcoholic, middle aged and drinking midday. He doesn’t understand me, so he hates me. He’s sparked awake by the frothing bull in the White House, seeing red on the president’s head. He’s raging at anyone beyond his bathroom mirror, a Chinese peasant under Mao’s Four Pests Campaign, harassing sparrows until they fall dead out of the sky from sheer exhaustion. Here is where I should respond with more vulnerability. I should jiu-jitsu or tae-kwon do this provocation, feel his aggression and try to parlay it into something positive. I should accept the anger and resentment I took for sympathy, the rage at elites and liberals, the media, the informed, the cultured, that is harrying naked through the veins of our great nation, and apologize if I’ve added to it. I should try to reach him with my sincerity. I should beg forgiveness.
Instead I say, “Don’t give me any of this Donald Trump bullshit.” He stands up and says, “I said don’t give me any of this Nancy Pelosi bullshit.” I move up into his face and say, “Don’t give me any of this Donald Trump bullshit.” I’m so hurt and disappointed I can’t help myself. This is for everyone who is filling our airwaves with hate, replacing our discourse with bile, deciding it is patriotic to crash the government into a public school, and laugh while the whole thing burns. All the passion I feel about photography, my work, my vision, is rushing to my fists. I am ready to fight.
Just then the bartender’s beautiful, tender hands grab me around the shoulders, and steer me from the bar. His grip has the resolute firmness of a funeral director. He is saving me from this mess, guiding me to safety like a flight attendant during an evacuation. He whispers in my ear, “Sorry,” and eases me out into the blinding light.
#
Hey. Look at This!
The Medieval Photography of Tim Davis
An Essay By Tim Davis
“Glamour” and “Grammar are the same word. This is not a clever platitude. The two are linguistically indistinguishable.
How you put language together, how you articulate, is how you cast a spell. Glamour is a veil; a new surface that beckons and keeps you engaged. Grammarye, in Middle English, meant, simply, “Magic.” The camera is a machine that sees only surfaces. The world casts its spell, and the camera gobbles up its glamour, uncritically, with pure certainty, assuming there is nothing underneath. For photographers, depth is metaphysical. You can try to see inside a subject, but all you are really seeing are the registrations of the inner on the surface. Edward Weston’s 1930 portrait bust of José Clemente Orozco, the greatest example of how close a photograph can get to describing the inner life of a person, is in no way the inner life of a person. It is a man’s haunted, vivid, resolute face, but the haunting comes from the skin, not the soul. It is articulate as a picture can be about the complexity of the human condition, a good candidate to broadcast out to aliens about what we, as a species are made of, are capable of, but the spell it casts is the glow off glasses and chin onto Weston’s silver film, and the spell is glamorous and profound. Before the big bang, all the atoms in the universe were collapsed into one point. There were no surfaces. Since then, there are more and more, and the camera is among the most powerful tools we have to explore them.
I once had a girlfriend whose grandmother was like Katherine Hepburn. She’d been a model in the 50s and if you opened an old Life magazine she’d be in it, draped in chiffon. She was glowy and glamorous, throwing the windows open on a chilly day and inhaling. On one languorous afternoon drive, she noticed how much I can’t help remarking on everything I see, and started calling me Mister Hey Look at This! Hey Look at That! I felt flirty enough with my girlfriend’s glamorous grandmother that the remark (on my remarks) smarted a bit, but I knew she was right. A light went on like the first shot of the first trailer in a dark theater: my biopic a jumpy, burbling time-lapse of Hey, Look at Thises and Hey, Look at Thats.
So imagine you’re a visual kid who can’t stop remarking, and on a divorce consolation trip to Disneyworld you get a Mickey Mouse camera. Turns out this camera loves everything you love. It sees what you see and feels what you feel. Your camera’s a great listener. You can tell your camera pretty much anything. As long as there’s enough light on, it nods and understands. It hangs around your neck and holds your hand. It loves to do what you love to do. If you feel like skipping school and just walking down the train tracks all day, this camera will want to come. It’s game. It’s on your side. It takes some time to learn to press the buttons it likes, but you want to please your camera so you do. You listen back. You know each other. You’re always together, strutting through town, in cahoots or love, or all of the above. Eventually you to go into a dark room and pour out your insides.
I’d been working on a project called Sunset Strips, pictures of strip malls at sunset, made from an elevated perspective. Long, ozone rich days were spent in the future fossil layers they’ll call the Bigboxoscene, my rented sedan piled with coffee cups and Combos, scouting for hillocks, mesas, and off ramps just east of This Plaza, That Center, hoping to climb up high enough to watch the sun go down on JoAnne Fabrics. When Sunset Strips work, they work well. They’re a cocktail of sincerity and irony, a cordial of bad urban planning and pure celestial revolution. They have an unusual color palette, acidic and shimmery like gasoline, from the lot lights below and the fire in sky. They take you to a familiar place and pour gas on it, and isn’t it pretty watching it burn? But the sunset isn’t always in the west. Sometimes there’s no sunset at all. The damn star just crosses the horizon with no fanfare, no farewell fire, no pink. Many days I made zero pictures. Lots of nights I went to bed in a damnably mediocre hotel unable to really remember my first love. My wife, my real life love, would call me on the phone and say, “You need to do something that will make you happy.”
So, like some Okie fleeing a photographic dust bowl, I went to California. I left a lot behind: the view camera, the film, the consumable project whose artist’s statement writes itself. But I got out of there. I flew through the night and arrived on Christmas. For someone from upstate New York, Christmas in Los Angeles is like waking up in the body of Bruce Lee: salvation where usually there is only suffering. Like a propaganda film shot in a concentration camp, Christmas is a time for enforced cheer, and here, walking with my Jessica Rabbit/Dorothy Parker sister-in-law in the eucalyptus-scented Los Feliz hills, no force is necessary. It turns out living in paradise feels good. All the forest fires, mudslides, drought conditions, inequality tsunamis, body-image issue typhoons, plagues of uncanny ambition, can’t stop your body feeling good when you’re in the air there. The dark hearted Calvinists driving the Thomas E. Dewey Thruway and Mass Pike are certain you can’t enjoy the good times without enduring the bad. Spring, they say, is only spring because we’ve gotten through winter. Those people are lying. Don’t listen to them. Feeling good feels good all the time.
Right now I feel like a panda in a bamboo forest. It’s leafy and spindly sliding along these nautilus spiraled Drives, Ways, Places. The houses wobble up cliffs like Borneo beehunters on heavenly stilts. Most are mere real estate, and have been mercilessly redone. Some are wild and unattended and you expect Joni Mitchell to amble out the door with a dulcimer. My sister-in-law lives in a 1987 gay porn set with mirrored walls and penis themed scrollwork. We stop in front of a tacit ranch house that wouldn’t look out of place on any Oak Street in America. The sense of ceramic cherub and bubbling birdbath tell you it’s inhabited by the elderly: I’m guessing the guy who wrote the Andy Griffith theme song and his lover who whistled on it. This one has big sliding glass front and back doors. The house is a frame for a distant view, blocked only by décor: an endtable and a chandelier. You see the house, you see inside the house, and you see beyond it, as Glendale and bit of Burbank metastasize toward the San Gabriels.
A thing can be interesting, but a picture of a thing isn’t necessarily more interesting than the original thing. Looking through this house makes it mean more, and the more it means, the more photographable it becomes. I raise my camera to my eye without thought, like a sea anemone sensing a clownfish coming. I know there is a picture here. It is waving its glamour and meaning at me, braying, “Hey, Look at this!” Paradise. As Adam named the animals, my sister-in-law was born to give things monikers. She sees me looking through this house, deeply, unashamedly in love with photography again, and, grinning conspiratorially, whispers, “I’m Looking Through You!” I raise up the camera in my hand and say it too.
As I walk under the city’s Dantean underpasses that connect its constellated villages, and across wide, sparkling sidewalks, past each house with its own little imagined ecosystem, I’m having a hard time making these pictures feel realistic. Maybe it’s using a hand camera: squinting dollops of dimension down into that tiny one-eyed viewfinder tightens and fractures the world, coal to crystal, ship in a bottle. If you force a Caravaggio through a keyhole you get a Giotto out the other side. But the more I work, the more I medieval I become. Realism isn’t for lovers. Who needs realism here, where no one’s interested? The big break is just around the corner. Every deal is about to go down. It’s 70 and sunny. Everyone’s a star or an icon.
The vertical frame keeps insisting it’s the only way to paint these icons. It cuts the fabric of reality with more friction and rip than the horizontal. It doesn’t look like looking. And the more I use it, the less concerned I am about how my pictures “represent” anything or anyone. Instead, I pray to St. Veronica, who swiped at Christ’s suffering and wound up with his face on her handkerchief. This face is not a realistic face. Look at Hans Memling’s Veronica. She’s holding a concert t-shirt…from the 1 C.E. Golgotha tour! Photographs are revelations, not representations. They don’t stand for anything. They are autonomous experiences alongside, conjoined with, minted from, real experiences. Photographs are forgeries. When I click the shutter, I am Veronica, reaching out for a handful of the savior’s sweat, but never expecting to tell the story of my savior. The medieval photographer doesn’t represent; she carves what she feels. Perspective is off, space collapsed. People aren’t identities, they’re saints. Realist Caravaggio used prostitutes to pose as virgins. In a medieval icon, the saint is in the painting itself, infused in the poplar panel: not a description, an assertion. I’m Looking Through You means you aren’t you. You are a stiff and awkward pose, eyes rolling to the sky, housing potential miracles. You are holding these assertions in your hands, looking through them. The “You” I am “looking through” is the camera itself, magical carver of worlds, bringer of grammarye and glamour. Maybe this book should’ve been called Lives of the Saints.I never took LSD again. And I’ve never stopped knowing that nothing is what it seems. When the critics start bonking their noggins about whether photographs are real, and what they owe the world for their depictions of the truth, I give my best archaic smile, lift my left eyebrow and wait for the conversation to be over, like at a holiday dinner with vaguely fascist relatives. There is no way that anything is truly true. What you see and what I see are different. What you see by letting the saccadic movements of your eyes off the chain of focusing is different from one millisecond to another. Look at the picture on your passport. Is that you? Is the you that stood there in that photographer’s studio (maybe in the back of a farmacia) the same you who woke up this morning in the arms of your lover, years later? On the other hand, it is in the nature of the camera to entirely believe whatever is right in front of it. The camera is a total convert to whatever religion is being discussed, is totally in love with whatever pretty boy is walking down the street right now, having entirely forgotten about the last gangly 35. Everything the camera sees is a hallucination, overwriting and outhowling whatever came before. And every photographer is looking for that hallucination, for that sense that the flux and flow of the world might leap into a picture frame and announce it means something significant. The photographer suddenly stops on the street, gazing off at something you can’t see. She kneels down on the wet ground and watches a puddle. She can’t stop staring at a distant flutter in the trees. Maybe it’s a magpie.
The third time I visited Sardinia, I hadn’t left my country in two years of pandemic lockdown. I flew across the ocean in a mask so uncomfortable no Ambien could knock me out. After so many months of seeing people only outside I felt like a sardine intentionally leaving its family for a cramped, oily can. I was driven up to Gavoi, to an utterly empty hotel next to the Lago di Gusana, and as I lay down to try and sleep, the room began to rumble. Sardinia, I had read, is an “earthquakeless” place, so I rushed out onto the balcony, only to see an enormous yellow plane lowering toward the lake as delicately as a soap bubble. The plane skimmed the water’s surface, picked up a load of water and flew up again, releasing it in a hazy spray. Apparently Sardinia does have forest fires. I was devastated that I’d missed photographing it, but it circled around for another try, and did it over and over. Sleepless, but certain that I’d have no trouble hallucinating my way through Sardinia, I walked the five winding kilometers to Gavoi and the Photo Solstice, where I met the students I would watch opening their first, second, and third eyes to hallucinatory power of this magical land’s impossible images.
#
I’m Looking Through You is an expansive visual poem celebrating the glamorous surface of Los Angeles and its reach. Animating Tim Davis’s wry observations and the mesmerizing, color-pop geometry of his images is the photographer and writer’s decades long, gimlet-eyed meditation on making pictures. As Davis states, “The camera is a machine that sees only…