Man Ray shot the first two of the following images and Francesca Woodman, the second two.

I first stumbled upon the work of Man Ray. To me, Man Ray represents almost a Jungian interpretation of the term “surrealism.” The two figures explicitly use symbols, which may be ambiguous but not without purpose (even if the artists themselves cannot articulate a particular “meaning”). In other words, the images clearly symbolize something consistent. In Man Ray, lips converge with the sky, hovering over water, which drowns a woman and a chessboard. Each image within the image meticulously contributes to a larger, objective design.

Other photographers, such as Francesca Woodman, adhere to another definition of surreal. Woodman also includes water in her photographs, but rather than following a symbolic manifestation of the subconscious, it creates an impression. In this sense, Woodman thrives on the logic of the absurd, much like Freud bases his theories on the logic of dreams. Unlike Man Ray, Woodman does not highlight individual symbols, but instead, incorporates what could be interpreted as symbols into a greater landscape, which exists on a level beyond psychology and depends on the viewer’s individual neuroses.

Surrealism, undoubtedly, intertwines with psychology in both concept and practice. Some artists, like Man Ray, opt to underscore the subconscious, bringing it to conscious attention. Others, like Francesca Woodman, allow the subconscious to continue residing on that level, haunting the conscious rather than becoming a presence in it.

I now have a sense of how the camera reacts in my hands, how my hands react to a camera. As my professor noted, I tend to think in layers, in shadows, reflections, disembodied realities, and this knowledge, somehow, seems significant. The way that I think, however, also poses a problem: over-thinking. When in doubt, I rely on logic (which can find connective tissue on a skeleton). Photography requires a combination of logic and instinct, and I have not yet discovered the right proportions.

In my final portfolio, I attempted to portray the process of becoming abstract, but I chose my final images based on conscious thought and in doing so, I concretized necessary ambiguity, paring it down to a two-dimensional version of itself.

If I could re-select images for my portfolio, based solely on personal satisfaction, I would only choose the following six.

The other four (if the assigned ten is still the goal) rest somewhere else in the world, undiscovered.

P.S. As I mentioned in the last post, the portfolio title “Insubstantial” comes from a paragraph that I wrote many months ago. You’ll find it below:

The world passes in front of her eyes, insubstantial. She knows that she is on the edge of something, something she’s not sure that she can return from. She walks, looking for something to hold onto. She recognizes this place, and yet, it passes before her, passes through her, and is gone, as if it hadn’t been there at all, as if it had only flashed before her closed lids in a dream, scattered consciousness that she invented and then mostly forgot, leaving only an itch somewhere behind her left ear.

I selected my subject for his contradictions, his darkness and his vulnerability, which I found compelling. The first two photos (the one with the orbs and the one at the food cart) captured the importance of atmosphere in creating character. I decided to explore this concept further in Part II.

In addition to Boubat, I found myself drawn to a picture of oozing cheese by Irving Penn. Although not a human face, this image suggested something to me about portraiture, about taking the concrete and then capturing an encapsulated essence that seems “true.”

Truth is a concept that this project forced me to contemplate at length. I attempted to understand my subject, but I have the nagging feeling that I only photographed in him what I recognized in myself: a darkness and a vulnerability. The camera, it seems, strips me, leaving me a messy ball of exposed innards.

Photo 2: 21st Century Romance– I saw these two objects sitting next to each other, and I had to laugh. The discarded flowers beside the torn condom box suggested something to me about the nature of romance. I also included my shadow in the frame partially because the sun was too direct to avoid it, but also to complicate the photo through a voyeuristic presence.

Photo 3: Stings and Stems– I like this photo because, unless you look closely, you don’t see that the flowers are laden with bees. I also like that the shapes and colors in the upper right corner suggest the world beyond the frame, but you can’t pick out individual objects or people.

Note (added 10/22/11): Looking back, I like these photos not for their quality, but for their suggestive nature. In the next few assignments, I attempt to integrate the more formal aesthetic concepts, such as color or composition, into this suggestion. At the very least, however, this particular selection of photos taught me where my artistic impulses lie.