Misty Dawn
Life-Time
Jock Sturges, 2008
It's an election year, so I'd hoped Jock Sturges might have another book
coming out like he did in '00 in '04 — and was jazzed to discover
that he was actually due to release two within a few weeks of each
other. I now have both.
Before I get to them, a quick recap of what Sturges's previous books have
been like. Sturges has made a career taking photographs which, by his own
description, "really are little more than family pictures made with a fine
art technique." Every year he has taken another batch of photos of the
same families — naturally, there are additions and subtractions,
but from year to year there's a lot of continuity — on the beach
at Montalivet, France, and in a tiny community in the wilderness of Siskiyou
County, California. And every few years one publisher or another has
put out a collection of some of the photos he's taken since the release
of the previous book. The organizing principle of these collections has
not always been obvious, as they have tended to skip forward and backward
in time and from one subject to another, like someone wandering around a
museum without looking at the map. But if you gather several of the books
together, and follow one particular model's progress from one year to the
next, you don't just have art — you have sequential art.
The pictures turn into a narrative: you watch chubby toddlers turn into
stick-thin children, who then develop curves and after that develop
confidence... it's really quite a thing. It always struck me as a
shame that the publishers insisted on working against the narrative. If
only one of them would put out a book that selected a single model and
followed her from preschool to adulthood in chronological order!
With Misty Dawn, that book has arrived. If you're going to get
one Jock Sturges book, this is the one to get, without question. It's
as if after releasing a number of poetry collections with a few short
stories included, Sturges has finally put out a novel — one
continuous narrative that takes up the whole volume. Nor is it merely
a reordering of stuff we've seen before: it's split about 50/50 between
the classics and photos that hadn't before appeared in print. What's
especially great is that the previously unpublished material is of the
same caliber as, and often superior to, the stuff that's shown up in
earlier volumes. (Page 75, for instance, is a picture of Misty at about
age 14 out in an overgrown field with the rusting hulk of a giant truck
cab and a battered traffic sign. I've seen several slight variations
on this photo before; I prefer this new one!)
A month later Life-Time came out, and in a sense it's much closer
to the collections of old: turning to a random page, I find that the
chronology goes 2004, '05, '04, '03, '05, and covers four different
subjects within that stretch. Again, this deemphasizes the narrative,
encouraging the reader to take in each photo not as a step in a series
but as a solitary work of art. And, yes, as solitary works of art, some
of them are magnificent — page 51 is itself worth the purchase
price of the volume — but to me no single photo has nearly the
power of the simple fact that the small child on page 37 is the woman on
page 149. We've heard a lot about
change this year, but what could be
a better reminder than these two pictures that
Erin Winters
is right, that things are always changing, that there are no frozen
moments, that everyone you look at is changing before your eyes, that
people aren't nouns but verbs? But this is why presentation is important.
One of the lessons I've had impressed upon me during my brief stint as a
screenwriter has been that the primary tool of film is the cut,
which invites the audience to participate in filling in the gaps in the
narration. That goes for any sort of sequential art: much of the power
of the medium lies in what Scott McCloud has called the "dance of the
seen and the unseen." But the organization of Life-Time and its
predecessors can make these sorts of revelations seem almost accidental.
Where Life-Time differs from Sturges's other books is that it's
a gigantic tome entirely in color. Rich, hypersaturated, eye-popping
color — you really need to see the crazy sapphires these kids
have for eyes, or the impossibly hypnotic green that shows up on page 101.
This is where the "fine art technique" earns equal billing with the "family
portraits": in most of these photos Sturges uses a limited palette, arranging
a handful of strong colors in a manner not entirely unlike — and
with about the same hit rate as — Mondrian, so naturally I love
it. The colors are so gorgeous that they make me wish I could go back and
have all the Misty Dawn photos reshot in color. Which raises the
question: why was Sturges's early oeuvre in black and white in the first
place?
Sturges has said in the past that shooting in monochrome was intended as
a sort of distancing technique, that it allowed the viewer to see not just
a collection of discrete objects, not just this person or that, but abstract
qualities: Innocence, Grace. Similarly, the sumptuous hues of the color
photos signal that this is not photojournalism you're looking at and that
you should therefore fire up the art-viewing centers of your brain. But
I've always been somewhat dubious about this distancing business, and
reading the text piece at the end of Life-Time crystallized why.
Sturges writes:
|
Why are the models nude? [...] Clothed portraits are pinioned by fashion to
specific moments in time and become as much, if not more, about culture
than the people depicted. Those clues are absent here and thus one is left
considering more essential states.
|
I'll buy about half of this: it certainly makes sense to me that if you
care about clothes you take pictures of clothes and if you care about people
you take pictures of people. But I don't agree with the suggestion that
nudes are somehow unpinioned from time and space, nor do I really believe
in the existence of "more essential states." There is no Sein apart
from Dasein, no "being" apart from "being-in-the-moment." Clothes
may be loci of culture... but we are loci of culture as well, clothed
or not! Each of us is a locus of biology and history and sociology and
frickin' geography playing themselves out. What makes Misty Dawn
Johnson so fascinating is not just her Pre-Raphaelite features or any sort
of ineffable spark but the fact that she's a Sawyers Bar Grizzly.
Not just that we get to watch her grow up, but that we watch her grow up
surrounded by this echoing wilderness halfway between Eureka and Yreka.
One of my favorite of the new pictures in the Misty Dawn book shows
her stroking the face of a horse while behind her is an ominous sky and a
hundred miles of mountainous wasteland. It reminded me of driving through
the Canadian Rockies early one morning and seeing, just on the other side
of a fence along the roadside, a pretty, dewy-faced girl of about thirteen,
in a puffy jacket and knit cap, walking a malamute, and thinking, what must
it be like to be her? To grow up here, in a village of maybe
forty people, twenty miles from anywhere else, a sort of modern-day oread,
and yet to be every bit as real as I am, to live on the same planet, to get
the same sitcoms beamed in via satellite, and yet again to look out your
bedroom window and see nothing but uninhabited mountains between you and
the north pole?
The two best things about getting Ready, Okay! published were that
I got to talk to Marie Martin again and that Jock Sturges invited me over
and let me pick out a photo to take home. The photo I picked —
still unpublished, I am secretly pleased to be able to say —
is of Misty Dawn, but it's every bit as much a landscape: she's perched
upon an outcropping of smooth dark rocks, a stretch of whitewater crashing
behind her, a leafy branch dangling into the upper left corner of the
frame. And while she isn't wearing anything, this is still a picture of
culture: the culture of the Salmon River, circa 1988. That's a big part
of what makes it so beautiful.

Return to the Calendar page!
|