« on the edges | Main | how far should one go? »
Sunday
Nov232008

crewdson

click 'er for bigger

Gregory Crewdson's Beneath the Roses has been sitting on the table in it's plastic wrapping for several weeks now. This afternoon I finally opened it up. Since I've already got a copy of his previous book Twilight, there isn't really anything new. It's pretty much more of the same, which I find to be enormously intriguing. He's moved some of his compositions from the outskirts of the small Massachusetts towns to their "downtown" sections, to good effect. But the staging of his "actors" I find to be remarkably wooden. While there isn't a close up anywhere, there is enough detail in these large format photographs to see that the modern malaise that overcomes these people renders them much like zombies. Heads down, they plod across the landscape hoping for some motivation from their director. They're fun pictures, nonetheless. The last section of the book includes production photos, lighting diagrams, and set designs. What would have been more interesting would have been production budgets and financing agreements. But no one wants to air their financial laundry, do they?

These are first impressions. After I've spent some more time with the book, I'll try to write something about Russell Banks' introductory essay. This is a clever pairing, since Banks' early, powerful books are set in the very towns where Crewdson photographs.

Reader Comments (2)

In general, I love looking at photographs in books. With Crewdson, the books make me want to see prints because this work demands a bigger scale. Food for thought.

December 7, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterJoe Reifer

Joe, I absolutely agree. The books are fascinating explorations of Russell Banks territory. The artifice is fabulous. I've never seen the prints, only the books. You've got to have a certain workman respect for what Crewdson does, despite his $50-60K print prices - definitely into your "D" range for print pricing! At least he earns the money he generates, and plows it back into his productions. On the other hand you have jerk-offs like Richard Prince, who take other peoples' photographs, even though they belong to Corporate America, and repackage them as his own, reselling for millions. No effort, minimal vision.

December 7, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterKent

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>