OCA preloader logo
Blog (Post) of the Week - The Open College of the Arts

To find out more details about the transfer to The Open University see A New Chapter for OCA.

Blog (Post) of the Week thumb

Blog (Post) of the Week

This is a post from the weareoca.com archive. Information contained within it may now be out of date.
 
OK let’s get the declarations of interest out of the way first. This is a blog post about John Umney’s learning blog and John as many people will know is President of the OCA Student Association.
That said, I have looked at one of John’s blog posts today and know it needs a bigger audience. Sharon Boothroyd’s piece last week on Representing Women has attracted a lot of comment. Which is of course, a good thing. But a danger is that some of the comments might get overlooked. John’s comment links to a post he has made about Chrissie Westgate producing a portfolio for Sophie Weaver. Read this post. Read it now.
Did you look at the link to the full presentation in John’s piece, if not go back and take a look.
Why do I think this is a post about important work? The answer is simple. In a discussion with the photography assessors last week, we were discussing why we thought photography was important, Rob Bloomfield made the succinct point: ‘photography is a language, a means of communication, it can make you appreciate things that words alone cannot…’ That doesn’t mean that images can replace text, as Chrissie Westgate shows, sometimes the most effective images are those which work with text.
And why is it an important post? Because it epitomises what contextualising your work is all about. Identifying and reflecting on work which is both relevant your own interests and can inform it – can inform it because it is sufficiently close to the work that John might go on to produce (or may be producing already).
 
 


Posted by author: Genevieve Sioka

13 thoughts on “Blog (Post) of the Week

  • Well I found the Chrissie Westgate/Sophie Weaver post very interesting on lots of different levels.
    Firstly, this is clearly a joint endeavour – the intended outcomes have been negotiated and collaboration is at the work’s heart. This doesn’t mean any or all of the images are comfy for either party – but the images articulate a truth both both the subject in terms of representing aspects of her life experiences and the photographer in terms of visual narrative (no exploitation here).
    Secondly, the piece is sociological in offering a commentary on disabled women within our society and shows up lots of cultural issues. For example, the images raise questions around current views of beauty, the (exclusive) non disabled friendly design of things like many cars, and trains and for me it also offers a subtle commentary on the sociology of photography. For example, I reckon that 16 of the images are shot from a higher point of view that the subject. That is they are shot for a standing person’s viewpoint. How different would they be if they had been shot from about 3 ft – Ie the wheelchair users viewpoint?
    This point of view has a subtle but important effect as the viewer looks down on the subject. (Just as society does but not recognising our needs fully in its design and organisation).
    Thirdly, as a fellow wheelchair user I see that she uses different wheels on her chair depending on the context. Most of the images show Sophie using power assisted wheels (with big hubs holding the motor) and only four show lightweight wheels.
    Lastly, I found the series interesting because the focus of the subject is the disabled person and it made me think how different the series would be if Chrissie had asked Sophie to choose what to shoot from her own point of view. I think this would have shown up some similar issues such as bathing aids and issues in transport but just wonder what aspects would have been lost from the existing set and what subject matter would have replaced them.
    Much food for thought so thanks for posting.
    Pete

    • Interesting comments Pete, I thought a lot about some of your work when I was writing this. The photographic work was a collaborative venture, including the final edit, which wasn’t without issues and I think, to that last point, that Sophie had a very clear idea of what she wanted from the work, especially as it expanded – that is not to say that Chrissie was without input – far from it

    • It’s good to get such a thoughtful overview from you Peter (like John I had thought of your own work when I first read the blog post and looked at the series). I hadn’t thought about the higher viewpoint that was adopted and think I just accepted that this had been considered by the photographer as a way to show how vulnerable Sophie is. Also Sophie has her own website http://www.sophieweaver.co.uk and I see that she is, in fact, a disability access consultant and trainer. It would certainly be interesting if roles were reversed and Sophie was in charge of the camera – maybe there could be another collaboration.
      What was especially good also was to see how the collaboration worked.

      • I agree Catherine – collaboration was clearly visible in the series. It was interesting you used the word vulnerable in regard of the subject. I didn’t see her that way. I thought more about the way the design of things created her dependency on others such as the car, bath and train not being wholly accessible by Sophie and so making her rely on none wheelchair users to help her. Interesting.

  • Here’s a link to Sharon and Jesse talking about Pete’s work for those of you who missed it the first time round. Well worth investigating and certainly in my mind when I was writing the post above.
    In Chrissie’s work, one of the aspects that made me stop and think is the image ‘Help with Dressing’ and Chrissie’s response to it. (‘Putting on a bra, don’t women do that?’)

  • Hello—I’ve tried to post on John’s blog—but the internet does not want to play nicely with me today—so here are my comments…
    “A really interesting post, John. Your edit of the images—presuming you had total freedom is also interesting. They tended to be those which were taken from the ‘adult’ perspective—where Sophie is consequently represented as the ‘dependent child’—having said that, I felt that many of the images were captured from that perspective.
    The second point is the role of the man as ‘protector’—especially in the last image—where the carer looks at the camera, but Sophie does not. I just have problems with that—it just seems an image which is stereotypical, and which saps her strength, energy and identity. Oh dear, I think I am sounding too negative—maybe it’s just the heat that is getting to me. The image that brought joy to my heart was the mirror-image—there is something special in there. She is not isolated, there is something special in both their smiles—it is a really strong and positive image.”

    • Not sure what was going on with the blog Vicki – your comments are always well received! From the text you will have noticed how conscious I was of perspective and it was something I spoke about to both Chrissie and Sophie about. The images I chose to highlight had this in mind and it was why I left the post with Sophie and her carer at ‘our’ level. And yes, I do like the way the mirror shot brings the viewer into the frame, to be with these two.

  • Well, how on earth to comment? I had looked at John’s blog and the link to Chrissie’s work with Sophie plus the down load.
    I was deeply moved by the work much in the same way as I was moved by Pete’s series. The work triggers emotions at various levels. Maybe at the risk of wrath of others, as a man I felt that I wished I could help. Then of course there is the issue of her having to struggle with so many things that I never think of ‘In The Shower’. And then there were the images of her as a woman ‘My Glamorous look’ and ‘Just Andrew and Me’.
    I missed a a number of things that Pete mentions, presumably because of our different perspectives and his comments provide valuable input. In particular, the viewpoint is informative and I wonder if my reading is not unduly influenced by this. As a general observation, this series is about the hardships she, or others similarly disabled, have to endure. I wonder if it would be possible to make a series from a more positive perspective – maybe disability and being positive are mutual exclusive. By this I do not mean that she or others are not positive but that the images provide a less positive narrative.
    I think I am digging myself into a hole here so better stop this avenue of thought.
    The fact that the series is in B&W is also key as it helps focus on important elements. Colour may well have been a distraction.
    The comments by Sophie and Chrissie I also find informative as they provide two different perspectives which are, at times, quite different.

  • That Pete is, to great extent, an insider and we, to an even greater extent are outsiders or ‘other’ to this world of dependence is part of how this work works. Pete’s view about perspective isn’t one that either I fully understand (how could I) or, currently, agree with. That the work has made anyone consider these issues will, I am sure, feel that the work has fulfilled one of their their joint ambitions for the project.

  • I too thought of you Pete, when looking at John’s blog post and also found your perspective from the ‘inside’ as it were very insightful. Excellent post John. I found the use of text to support the images very interesting. I really like the idea that the subject is allowed to comment on the images. It seems to add balance to the power struggle between photographer and subject…food for thought.

  • Looking at the images make me feel very sad as it seems that Chrissie, the photographer, as not interacted with Sophie. When I look at the The Wheelchair, Late Again and Homeward Bound pictures – the viewer is only allowed to see the back of Sophie’s head and there is no interaction with her. The image In the Pub is particular upsetting as every one has turned away from Sophie; the very high angle view point of the camera position is imposing a feeling of dominance over her and gives the impression that she is being shunned for being disabled.
    I also cannot understand why we have to see Sophie naked in the other images – it seems to me that these images are fulfilling the able bodied person’s curiosity and I think makes her very vulnerable.
    In the last image, Andrew and Me, there is a strong sense of dominance about the carer. Andrew. He has his arms around Sophie, but not in a protective way, as he is looking directly into the camera lens whilst she is looking away (again, appearing very vulnerable)
    I find the images like this very disturbing, maybe that’s what Chrissie wanted us to feel. Images are very powerful things and I hope these images go some way towards making the viewers treat disabled people with more respect.

    • Peter, the first three images you speak of is ‘an edit’ from the series and shown to depict a certain narrative – my narrative. I particularly chose them for the effect I mentioned in the text – “A short story in themselves, these could, edited in this way, all speak of the solitude and the isolation of a disabled person, despite either being surrounded and hemmed in by people or alone and vulnerable on a dark evening.” – So I’m pleased you saw it that way.
      However the overall work was a highly collaborative venture between photographer and subject, all the images of Sophie were discussed and recorded in a determined act of revelation that succeeded, in my view, in both exposing the vulnerability of Sophie’s condition, but also challenging some of the conceptions, if not prejudices that surround disability. The edit for the show at the Menier Gallery again was a joint effort from a much wider body of work, so the series that you saw in the full presentation is as much about Sophie’s vision, as it is Chrissie’s.
      And I’m afraid we may have to agree to disagree about the final photograph Andrew and Me as I thought it a very tender and beautiful image. But thanks for your interesting comments.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to blog listings