Highlighting changes in accessibility, the impact of teaching, and personal artistic development, Stephen Shore reflects on photography's transformation from a non-lucrative craft to a high-demand field since the 1960s.
PHOTOGRAPHY BY STEPHEN SHORE INTERVIEW BY MEHMET EKINCI
Amidst the instant pleasures of the digital age, where the manipulated nature of an image can ignite a thousand words, there lies the enigmatic visual journey of Stephen Shore and his silent whispers of a bygone era in America. Stephen Shore is known as a pioneer for introducing colours to photography as an artistic medium, a daily archivist of the ordinary who has been on a pilgrimage through the American landscape and other parts of the world, in pursuit of the unappreciated truths of ordinary people and places. His lens, a mediator between the modern world as it is and as it is seen, captures not just lively people and inanimate objects, but delves into ‘the form of attention to the act of seeing itself’, as he claims in his 2023 book, Modern Instances: The Craft of Photography: A Memoir.
Wikipedia describes you as ‘an American photographer known for his images of scenes and objects of the banal’. I’m not sure whether or not you agree with this choice of words- it’s something of a contrast. How would you compare this definition with your other work?
Well, I think that it’s one way of talking about the work I did in the Seventies, but it doesn’t really describe what I’ve done over the last 40 years. I didn’t write that Wikipedia entry. I mean, some people, I guess write their own. I’ve come across some that have that kind of promotional language to it – but I’ve just left it and let people write what they want.
Did you not care?
I care, but I don’t know. I don’t want to be in the business of writing my own Wikipedia entry. I will take out something if it’s factually incorrect, like someone wrote that I was on the Guggenheim Foundation board that made selections for grants, when I wasn’t and I have never been. That is problematic, because it changes how people speak to me, so I took that misinformation out, but otherwise, I don’t touch my Wikipedia entry.
But what do you think about this use of the word ‘banal’ then?
I have always been interested in the everyday world. I read people today who talk about their nostalgia for my pictures in the Seventies – it’s because they’re 45-50 years old and so time has passed, as it does. It’s very interesting that, when I was doing those pictures, I was very much inspired by Walker Evans and the work he did in 1935-36.
His book was given to you when you were a child, I believe.
Yes. That work was done about 37 years before I started on Uncommon Places. There is now a greater distance in time between when I did Uncommon Places and the present day than there was between Uncommon Places and Walker Evans’ work, although his work looked like a different world. My point is that, when I took those photographs, there was nothing nostalgic about them. It looked just the way things looked and I’m interested in what the modern experience is. So, ‘banal’ may have the implication that it’s uninteresting, but I would say that it was more ‘everyday’ than ‘banal’. The word ‘banal’ has pejorative connotations. That’s why I was so struck by it. Maybe I should go back and mess with it [laughs]. I agree, ‘banal’ makes it sound boring.
Highlighting changes in accessibility, the impact of teaching, and personal artistic development, Stephen Shore reflects on photography's transformation from a non-lucrative craft to a high-demand field since the 1960s.
PHOTOGRAPHY BY STEPHEN SHORE INTERVIEW BY MEHMET EKINCI
Amidst the instant pleasures of the digital age, where the manipulated nature of an image can ignite a thousand words, there lies the enigmatic visual journey of Stephen Shore and his silent whispers of a bygone era in America. Stephen Shore is known as a pioneer for introducing colours to photography as an artistic medium, a daily archivist of the ordinary who has been on a pilgrimage through the American landscape and other parts of the world, in pursuit of the unappreciated truths of ordinary people and places. His lens, a mediator between the modern world as it is and as it is seen, captures not just lively people and inanimate objects, but delves into ‘the form of attention to the act of seeing itself’, as he claims in his 2023 book, Modern Instances: The Craft of Photography: A Memoir.
Wikipedia describes you as ‘an American photographer known for his images of scenes and objects of the banal’. I’m not sure whether or not you agree with this choice of words- it’s something of a contrast. How would you compare this definition with your other work?
Well, I think that it’s one way of talking about the work I did in the Seventies, but it doesn’t really describe what I’ve done over the last 40 years. I didn’t write that Wikipedia entry. I mean, some people, I guess write their own. I’ve come across some that have that kind of promotional language to it – but I’ve just left it and let people write what they want.
Did you not care?
I care, but I don’t know. I don’t want to be in the business of writing my own Wikipedia entry. I will take out something if it’s factually incorrect, like someone wrote that I was on the Guggenheim Foundation board that made selections for grants, when I wasn’t and I have never been. That is problematic, because it changes how people speak to me, so I took that misinformation out, but otherwise, I don’t touch my Wikipedia entry.
But what do you think about this use of the word ‘banal’ then?
I have always been interested in the everyday world. I read people today who talk about their nostalgia for my pictures in the Seventies – it’s because they’re 45-50 years old and so time has passed, as it does. It’s very interesting that, when I was doing those pictures, I was very much inspired by Walker Evans and the work he did in 1935-36.
His book was given to you when you were a child, I believe.
Yes. That work was done about 37 years before I started on Uncommon Places. There is now a greater distance in time between when I did Uncommon Places and the present day than there was between Uncommon Places and Walker Evans’ work, although his work looked like a different world. My point is that, when I took those photographs, there was nothing nostalgic about them. It looked just the way things looked and I’m interested in what the modern experience is. So, ‘banal’ may have the implication that it’s uninteresting, but I would say that it was more ‘everyday’ than ‘banal’. The word ‘banal’ has pejorative connotations. That’s why I was so struck by it. Maybe I should go back and mess with it [laughs]. I agree, ‘banal’ makes it sound boring.
Highlighting changes in accessibility, the impact of teaching, and personal artistic development, Stephen Shore reflects on photography's transformation from a non-lucrative craft to a high-demand field since the 1960s.
PHOTOGRAPHY BY STEPHEN SHORE INTERVIEW BY MEHMET EKINCI
Amidst the instant pleasures of the digital age, where the manipulated nature of an image can ignite a thousand words, there lies the enigmatic visual journey of Stephen Shore and his silent whispers of a bygone era in America. Stephen Shore is known as a pioneer for introducing colours to photography as an artistic medium, a daily archivist of the ordinary who has been on a pilgrimage through the American landscape and other parts of the world, in pursuit of the unappreciated truths of ordinary people and places. His lens, a mediator between the modern world as it is and as it is seen, captures not just lively people and inanimate objects, but delves into ‘the form of attention to the act of seeing itself’, as he claims in his 2023 book, Modern Instances: The Craft of Photography: A Memoir.
Wikipedia describes you as ‘an American photographer known for his images of scenes and objects of the banal’. I’m not sure whether or not you agree with this choice of words- it’s something of a contrast. How would you compare this definition with your other work?
Well, I think that it’s one way of talking about the work I did in the Seventies, but it doesn’t really describe what I’ve done over the last 40 years. I didn’t write that Wikipedia entry. I mean, some people, I guess write their own. I’ve come across some that have that kind of promotional language to it – but I’ve just left it and let people write what they want.
Did you not care?
I care, but I don’t know. I don’t want to be in the business of writing my own Wikipedia entry. I will take out something if it’s factually incorrect, like someone wrote that I was on the Guggenheim Foundation board that made selections for grants, when I wasn’t and I have never been. That is problematic, because it changes how people speak to me, so I took that misinformation out, but otherwise, I don’t touch my Wikipedia entry.
But what do you think about this use of the word ‘banal’ then?
I have always been interested in the everyday world. I read people today who talk about their nostalgia for my pictures in the Seventies – it’s because they’re 45-50 years old and so time has passed, as it does. It’s very interesting that, when I was doing those pictures, I was very much inspired by Walker Evans and the work he did in 1935-36.
His book was given to you when you were a child, I believe.
Yes. That work was done about 37 years before I started on Uncommon Places. There is now a greater distance in time between when I did Uncommon Places and the present day than there was between Uncommon Places and Walker Evans’ work, although his work looked like a different world. My point is that, when I took those photographs, there was nothing nostalgic about them. It looked just the way things looked and I’m interested in what the modern experience is. So, ‘banal’ may have the implication that it’s uninteresting, but I would say that it was more ‘everyday’ than ‘banal’. The word ‘banal’ has pejorative connotations. That’s why I was so struck by it. Maybe I should go back and mess with it [laughs]. I agree, ‘banal’ makes it sound boring.
POSITOPIA
17
OUT NOW
is a large format international biannual magazine from Istanbul. Focusing on arts, culture and society, each issue tackles various universal subjects within a distinct theme.
Address
Mim Kemal Öke Cad. No.6 D.6 Nişantaşı, Şişli, İstanbul, Turkey
+90 212 232 4288
contact@212magazine.com
POSITOPIA
17
OUT NOW
is a large format international biannual magazine from Istanbul. Focusing on arts, culture and society, each issue tackles various universal subjects within a distinct theme.
Address
Mim Kemal Öke Cad. No.6 D.6 Nişantaşı, Şişli, İstanbul, Turkey
+90 212 232 4288
contact@212magazine.com
POSITOPIA
17
OUT NOW
is a large format international biannual magazine from Istanbul. Focusing on arts, culture and society, each issue tackles various universal subjects within a distinct theme.
Address
Mim Kemal Öke Cad. No.6 D.6 Nişantaşı, Şişli, İstanbul, Turkey
+90 212 232 4288
contact@212magazine.com