Richard Sandler, a New York documentarian, has sent along some photographs from his decade-spanning collection. Sandler will also be screening two of his documentaries about the city later this month. The first, Brave New York (watch online), "is a free form documentary that loosely chronicles the last 12 years of intense change in the East Village. From the reopening of a newly curfewed Tompkins Square Park to the destruction of the cherished Loisaida Community Gardens, to the first yuppie invasions of the dot com years, to the present." The second film, called Sway, goes underground--it's another free-form video in which 14 years of camcorder-recorded subway rides have been edited together.
Catch those for free on August 22nd at the 6B garden. For now, here's a look at a different era of New York through Sandler's lens (he also has photographs on view at the Brooklyn Museum as part of their permanent collection).
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
That's a haunting perspective of the WTC.
What's so haunting about it? The image is a composition of textures and patterns. The only psychological effect I get from it is one of claustrophobia from the tightness of the space between the two walls. I think you are projecting your own WTC feelings into this. It's sad that people can't look at pictures of the WTC without immediately politicizing and/or emoting over them in one way or another, or attributing some sort of imagined prescience to the photographer.
I don't necessarily agree that the WTC photo offers a "haunting perspective," but I must say that readers are well within their right to remark based on a purely emotive or personal level. I don't see anything political about that comment, nor do I feel it was "attributing some sort of imagined prescience to the photographer." The point of having a "Comment" section is so readers may add their personal reaction to articles, not to chide others for expressing themselves...though I guess that's what this post is, huh?
The WTC was an ugly fucking abortion of architecture. That plaza was so souless and harsh. So...devoid.
But whatever, can't say that, people may start crying.
@Ph, SP
My aesthetic reaction to that picture is more inherently valid than yours...
I like that RR Train shot. Momma just slapped all three kids at once.
Nice!
If the WTC hadn't been blown the fuck up, no one would look at that picture and think it was haunting. That's the point. The picture isn't haunting, it's your heads that are haunted. Any reference to the WTC will make you feel that way, even if it was a WTC made of unicorns and lollipops. So yeah, when someone says that picture is haunting, it's not quite valid as an aesthetic reaction. It's a psychological reaction to events that had nothing to do with the photo as a work of art.
Jeez, SP, could you be more of a dick? The photo has no emotional or haunting qualities to me, and I'm not impressed with Sandler's work, but that doesn't negate the fact that other's may find emotional resonance in the photographs.
Haunting or not, all of these pictures have historical significance. History books contain significant moments in the progress of the world, but seldom is mentioned the little things in society--the graffiti on the train, the people on the streets, the window dressing of life for the ordinary human being.
I was just struck by how the one WTC tower was captured in between buildings. And yes, given what's happened, I am projecting those feelings onto that image--it becomes sentimental and carries a different kind of weight.
I also happen to love the Grand Central photograph-- the light in there is can be very beautiful in its diffused way.
The WTC was a brutalist monument to bad taste.
@SP
Whose reactions to art aren't influenced by emotional determinants? Some critiques might be more visceral and psychological projective then others but that's not an indicator of their validity; it's all a matter of degree. More to the point, a purely aesthetic sensibility -- only a theoretical possibility -- would be robotic and uninteresting.
I think it's pretty obvious to most of us here that you're the one politicizing (on however a petty level), and that's why everyone is getting pissed.