Yutaka Takanashi, The Beatles, Marunouchi Shochiku Theatre, Chiyoda-ku (Toyko-jin), April 4, 1965. Courtesy the Art Institute of Chicago. This image is John Lennon, and Blogfinger gives it 5 fingers. The artist obtained this photo off a movie screen, as I do with streaming movies. But 1965—-he got there before me! And the result is admired now again–over 50 years later.
By Paul Goldfinger, Art Editor, Blogfinger.net. Ocean Grove, NJ, USA
Takanashi’s work was admired in the 1960’s and is now being reintroduced. The last time it was shown was in a magazine Provoke from the sixties which was important, but only lasted for 3 issues. This is from a write-up now in Photo magazine:
“This work must be viewed as having a deeper and wider meaning than its surface elements: “The ‘rough, blurred, out of focus’ appearance of many (although by no means all) photographs in Provoke should be seen not as a style, nor even as an expression of gestural abstraction in photography, but instead as an attempt to give form to contingency and ephemerality.”
“It is to counter the erasing rush of history that ambitious projects like this one are so necessary.”
PG: I think art writing and criticism are often as blurry at Takanashi’s photographs, but you can see how 3 critics view blurry photos.
I like to use blurriness at times because it seems to convey an energy which might be motion or maybe an energy of perception. It forces the viewer to wonder, “Why?”
But I think I agree with the ideas of “gestural abstraction, contingency and ephemerality.” Or maybe I just pretend I agree. That happens in the world of fine art criticism which can at times read like the Sumerian language of the Babylonians.
Anyhow, I heard from the creative people at Ocean Grove’s “Art on the Porch” which will re-appear this June, 2024.
They contacted me to participate again and to send in a few photos, one of which was a bit blurry, which I liked. But they weren’t sure about the blurry until I explained that I’m happy with that effect. Sometime the blurries are accidental and sometimes intentional, but so what? It is the end result that counts. In photography, accidents sometimes turn out to be innovative, and the photographer gets credit even if the fates have a hand in the result.
Halloween witch streaks across the rooftops of Ocean Grove. Paul Goldfinger photo 2018.
And finally, some of you have noticed that I photograph stills from movies. I thought that was innovative, but I don’t apologize for it. After all, a ballet photographer may obtain wonderful still photos from “shooting” ballerinas in motion—and they certainly are in motion; and maybe blurry
And, Takanashi, an avant garde Japanese photographer took his photo of Lennon off a movie screen. Just look at the photo. So I am in good company. The post-war Japanese art scene contains lots of blurry images. I wonder why.
2024 addendum: Here is an Eve Arnold photograph of Marilyn Monroe. Eve just died, and some more of her Marilyn photos are published now. This one is a bit blurry, but it’s OK.
I will repost my article about the photos from “The Misfits,” Eve Arnold and Marilyn Monroe are part of the back-story of that filming.
Eve Arnold. Submitted by Stephen Goldfinger. 10/1/24.
“I Loved. (J’aimais)” Jacque Brel is Alive and Well and Living in Paris By Elly Stone.
From the Original Off-Broadway recording.