 |
'I do
not see poverty in my pictures' Are
Shelby Lee Adams's documentary stills of rural Kentucky insightful
or exploitative? SARAH MILROY talks to the photographer, who is
himself tormented by contradiction
 By SARAH MILROY, The Globe and
Mail September 12, 2002
When it comes to ethics, documentary photography may be the most
vexed of artistic media. By definition, it involves a relationship
between the vulnerable participant in history -- the
starvation-wracked sharecropper's wife with her wind-worn face; the
Spanish revolutionary, reeling from the bullet wound on his lonely
hilltop; the seated, self-immolating monk, engulfed in flames -- and
the photographer, whose fortune is distinct from that of his
subject.
As the acclaimed American documentary photographer Mary Ellen
Mark puts it: "It's a form of voyeurism. . . . I really feel that
the act of taking someone's picture is in a sense exploitative. No
matter what."
|


The True Meaning of Pictures: Shelby Lee Adams'
Appalachia Jennifer Baichwal (Canada) Are Shelby Lee
Adams's photo portraits of Kentucky hillbillies an
exploitative catalogue of horrors (retarded children,
snakehandling Christians, grinning yokels posing with a
slaughtered pig) or a sensitive tribute to a culture forged by
adversity in the place where, after all, he grew up? The
camera follows Adams into the lost hollows where he works,
introducing us to men and women who have been the subjects of
his portraits. These sequences are intercut with art critics
from the big cities who accuse Adams of exploiting his naive
and illiterate subjects. Quite often we then cut to the
subjects themselves, who explain with simple but solid common
sense why they are not ashamed of the way they look or live.
Warning: some scenes hazardous to middle-class assumptions. -
Rick Groen (Sat., Sept. 7, 6 p.m., ROM; Sun., Sept. 8,
12:45 p.m., Varsity 7.) |
For documentary photographers, then, self-scrutiny comes with the
territory, and the better you are, the more lacerating that
self-scrutiny becomes. Take the case of American photographer Shelby
Lee Adams, whose most recent pictures documenting the remote rural
communities of Appalachia are showing this month at Toronto's
Stephen Bulger Gallery. He is also the subject of a sensitive and
probing film by Canadian filmmaker Jennifer Baichwal -- The True
Meaning of Pictures: Shelby Lee Adams' Appalachia, which
premiered on Saturday as part of the Toronto International Film
Festival. "What is it that fascinates us about watching someone
else's misfortune?" Baichwal asks. It is now 2˝ years since she
began the project and she is still puzzling over this fundamental
aspect of human nature.
Over beer and popcorn in a downtown bar in Toronto, Adams
permitted himself a short laugh. "You have to admit, it's pretty
remarkable," he says in his Southern drawl. "I have had people come
up to me and hug me after seeing my work. And I have had people spit
at me. If a photograph can achieve that range of response -- well, I
think that's really something."
But the laughter is short-lived. Adams comes across by a man
hounded by his own demons and bedevilled by the criticism of
exploitation that is often levelled at his now 30-year-long
photographic project in the mountains of eastern Kentucky. The sting
of these criticisms is sharper because Adams -- who has nine years
of university education under his belt and an exhibition résumé as
long as your arm -- is photographing his own roots, a community he
has been accused of betraying.
Typically, his
harshest criticism comes from the South. Julie Ardery, for example,
writing in the Lexington Herald Leader in 1998, quipped that his
second book of photographs, Appalachian Legacy, might better
have been called, "Let Us Now Praise Heinous Men" and slammed it for
pushing "regional stereotypes over the brink of grotesqueness;
greasy guys showing off their snake-handling scars, girls with
vacant stares and a retarded fellow standing at the kitchen table in
a diaper. . . . With their spooky lighting, their fake flowers,
heaps of dolls and open caskets, Adams's photographs come close to
representing Appalachia as one big horror show."
Sorting through his statements about his work, one finds evidence
of a conscience tormented by contradiction, and gripped by
compulsion. "I do not see poverty in my pictures. I don't see
poverty, and neither do they." These are not people to be pitied, he
argues. They have a sense of community and authenticity to their
life that we should envy. But elsewhere -- in Baichwal's film, for
example -- he allows: "My psyche is attracted to people who are
suffering and in pain. I identify with that part of the human
condition."
The contradiction in Adams's position springs from the complex
relationship to his subjects. While he often describes the mountain
dwellers living at the heads of the "hollers" as "his people," it is
only partly true. Yes, Adams, an only child, spent much of his
childhood on his grandparents' farm near Whitesburg, Ky. But his
parents supported his diligence at school and he had many glimpses,
while he was growing up, of the wider world beyond.
Adams's only constants were the summers on the farm, where he
kept owls and crows as pets, spent hours running wild in the woods
and helped his grandfather with the hog killing, once he was old
enough to hold a gun. While his mother condoned his friendships with
the poorer kids from up the valley, his father disapproved. Mother
and son would drive up into the hollers, delivering Shelby's
outgrown clothes to his needier acquaintances, but they did so
behind his father's back.
His mother's side of the family, including his uncle, encouraged
his interest in art, and by his mid-teens, he was goofing around
with the camera, mostly taking pictures of his family. But, with
Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty in the 1960s, the region saw an
influx of photojournalists and reporters from the big cities,
swarming to document a poverty and way of life they saw as
heartbreaking. The young Shelby Lee became the go-between,
delivering the city folk into the harder-to-reach places.
He enjoyed it, he remembers today, but soon a backlash set in.
The mountain dwellers resented the characterization of themselves in
the media as ignorant, God-forsaken hopeless cases, their commmunity
wracked with poverty, genetic abnormality and violent crime. "These
people that I knew, they started saying, 'They really hurt us,
Shelby. Don't you ever bring those people around here again. We
don't like what they say about us,' " he recalls. "I had contributed
to that."
One of the most notorious conflicts between the media and the
locals touched the Adams family personally. In 1967, a Canadian
filmmaker, Hugh O'Connor, was shot by a cousin of Adams, Hobart
Ison. O'Connor had been taking footage of one of Ison's run-down
rental properties when Ison arrived on the scene, packing a loaded
rifle for emphasis. Adams says: "He gave the warning shot. When
someone does that, you listen. That's the culture." It was a vivid
object lesson in the politics of representation.
Adams went off to art school, but he returned each year with the
previous year's crop of pictures, painstaking in his efforts to
involve his subjects in his project, and to insure the authenticity
of their consent. "I was trying to make right what the media has
done wrong", says Adams, who now lives most of the year in
Pittsfield, Mass. It's a process that continues to this day.
One of the most interesting questions surrounding Adams's work is
its status as documentary. While his subjects are as he finds them
-- he doesn't direct wardrobe or grooming -- he is quick to point
out the ways in which his subjectivity imposes itself. As we see in
Baichwal's film, his famous hog-killing photograph, taken of the
Napier family in 1990, was entirely staged, following the
slaughtering practices he remembered from his boyhood. Adams bought
the hog, positioned the players, fiddled with the light and the
composition until he was satisfied with the results. But you
wouldn't necessarily know it to look at it.
Likewise his representation of a home funeral, taken in
Leatherwood, Ky., in 1990, in which the composition is split in half
by a dividing wall, segregating the space of mourning from the
ongoing business of life in the room next door. It is a highly
directed picture that captures both what he saw that day and his
memories of visiting the grieving with his grandparents.
In an image of the Childers family, taken in 1986, Adams
re-imagines one dwarfed and misshapen boy as a Christ figure in his
loincloth, eyes turned heavenward beneath a shaft of light. (The
series documenting this family contains some of the toughest
pictures Adams has made.) As photography critic A. D. Coleman, a
commentator in the film, says: "If this is Shelby Lee Adams's
Southern Gothic poetry of Appalachia, that's one thing. If this is
really documentation of Appalachia, then that's something else
altogether."
It seems clear that it is the former. Adams allows that his
earliest art interests -- in addition to the work of such
photographers as August Sander, Diane Arbus and Walker Evans --
inclined toward "the darker side." Francisco Goya, Hieronymous Bosch
and William Blake were particular favourites. While Adams insists
that he doesn't try to enhance the macabre, the eerie, or the
grotesque in his subjects, the pictures don't bear him out. But what
is it that Adams is probing here? The ensnaring stereotypes through
which the Southern poor are entrapped in the American imagination?
His own fear and fascination with the by turns brutal and
transcendent culture he has been privileged to penetrate? The dark
alleyways of his own psyche?
The answer, of course, is all of the above. Even when he employs
mountain dwellers in a commissioned fashion shoot, as he did in one
notorious and much reviled instance in 1999 for The New York Times
Magazine, one gets the sense of an artist salting his own emotional
wounds. "One of the things that I do believe happens when he takes a
picture," remarks Baichwal, "is there is an exchange of
vulnerability. It's not just him as an omniscient person. He is, in
some way, just as vulnerable. That's what makes me have faith in
him."
These images make us squirm, in part, because they refuse to
advocate. Asked if it is a bad thing that practitioners of the
Holiness Pentecostal Church may drape their children in poisonous
snakes in their mystical serpent-handling rituals, he says, simply:
"I don't know."
Pushed to evaluate whether life in Appalachia is better or worse
than it use to be, Adams again refuses judgment, asserting simply
that there is more education and medical care, better highways, more
computers -- but less of the traditional culture and values now.
"Those traditional Appalachian families, working 12 hours a day,
growing their own food, making their own furniture, singing their
songs in church -- very self-sufficient -- that is gone. Now, very
few of the mountain people have that look; earthy, honest, open.
They would grip your hand with a firmness. They were solid.
Foundation stones. That was my grandparents."
In his most recent pictures, the children have their hair combed.
Their clothes are cleaner. The satellite dish looms. Has Adams
backed off his initial hard-core subjects for lighter fare? No, he
insists. These kids are from the same demographic group as his
earlier subjects. They just don't look it. The families may have no
food to put on the table, he says, but they will have their TV set
and they will devote every last resource to dressing those kids in
the logo shoes and T-shirts that function as magic talismans for
assimilation.
Adams's position -- the suspension of judgment in the act of
looking -- is strangely contagious, and repeated viewing of his work
leaves you more and more unsure of your footing. Baichwal makes
brilliant use of this phenomenon in the film. The first time we see
the pictures, we can hardly bear to watch. By the time the end of
the film rolls around, 72 minutes later, we are smiling back at them
with affection.
Which is the better stance to take toward your fellow man? As
Adams says: "By pushing photography, by pushing all the limits, by
getting in there with the camera, creating some distortions, I'm
hoping to make everyone think -- 'What is our job here as a human
being?' Stop making judgments and experience life. I'm experiencing
this environment. I'm trying to share with you, in an intimate way,
the experience."
Shelby Lee Adams: Appalachia Today
continues at the Stephen Bulger Gallery in Toronto until Oct. 5
(416-504-0575).
|
 |