spotlight
and religious figures was not well-received by critics at the time. The fight for civil think his portraiture was where he was an artist. “It simply gets confused in a lot of
rights was in full swing and because of the so-called failure of the project; Avedon people’s minds because there’s this assumption, which I think I think is transpar-
stopped his photography work for two years in frustration. Roth recalls the feel- ently ridiculous that ‘you can’t have a day job and a night job.’ The idea is that if he’s
ing and atmosphere of this period in history, “There are a couple of reasons. Part a fashion photographer, he can’t possibly be serious. He can’t possibly have ideas.
of it is just the time and the era. This is the early 1960s civil rights movement. It was He can’t put on one hat and then take it off and put on another hat. That idea truly
a very controversial thing. While he was making pictures, they were debating in prevails. A lot of people, to this day, think that about him. It’s simply not true.”
Congress the voting rights act in 1964. So, this was before it was becoming the Avedon had a philosophy in his work ethic to go after portraits of people in
law of the land that African Americans should have the right to vote or that there some form of transition. Whether it is the ravages of age or someone experiencing
was some federal protection for them against discrimination. The very idea of a change in political climates. Roth adds, “For Avedon, the central idea was that a
an artist taking on a topical subject that was fraught with difficulty in the public portrait session was an encounter. He felt very seriously that he couldn’t take an
eye was something questionable. It was something that a lot of critics, especially image that sums up a person’s life. Which is the general conceit of portraiture,
conservative critics, were going to frown on. that you can take an image and tell the audience that this is the true picture of this
Also it was a very ambitious idea for a photography book. The idea of a narrative person and sums up his life. Avedon felt you could not do that. He felt there was
made out of photographs was in itself a very controversial thing. That was an issue. something fundamentally dishonest about that. Rather, a portraiture session
But finally, and most importantly, I think that he was using caricature or a form of was a momentary encounter and that the portrait, once it was seen, would also
The Chicago Seven: Lee Weiner, John Froines, Abbie Hoffman, Rennie Davis, Jerry Rubin, Tom Hayden, Dave Dellinger, Chicago, September 25, 1969.
© 2009 The Richard Avedon Foundation
visual expressionism by making people look exaggerated… making them look bad. be an encounter between the subject and the viewer. What he wanted to do is
Billy Graham or George Wallace, they are figures that on the TV news, they would give the audience some sense that there was a shared struggle. We are all fighting
never criticize. Even though now, George Wallace is seen as a terrible abhoration of the promise of our own death, our mortality… we are all fighting for our place in
our political history. At the time, he was regarded as a significant political figure of the world, that we all share a struggle. This was the very core idea for his work. No
the establishment and was to be given a level of respect. Avedon was not giving him matter what he was photographing.
that respect. He was completely trashing him. It was really a very serious thing.” When he was making these portraits of these people, he would look for this
You really do experience a whole new side of Richard Avedon in “Portraits of struggle. Sometimes he would find it just in the physical manifestation of
Power.” The exhibit seriously shows Avedon’s intelligence and vision. Where as somebody’s age. Other times, he looked for a sense of conflict in the person. He
most people automatically think, “fashion,” when his name is mentioned. “Por- liked to photograph people who were engaged in struggle. I think this is why
traits of Power” show the intellectual side of Richard Avedon. Roth agrees, “I think he was largely drawn to politics. Like the photo of Rudolph Nureyev, Nureyev
so to. He was a very intelligent guy. He was in many ways, self-educated. He went represented the escape from tyranny for the artist or Marian Anderson when
through high school but never went to college. But, he was a very serious reader she broke the civil rights boundary. She represented the opportunity of African
and a real aficionado of theatre at the most serious level. One of his best friends Americans. He felt that if people looked at these photos, they would sense that.
was theatre director Mike Nichols. He was a very knowledgeable well-read guy. I That was what he was really after.”
50 RAGE monthly | July 2009
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118