T
HE
U
SE OF THE
C
AR IN
A
MERICAN
R
OAD
T
RIP
P
HOTOGRAPHS
Sanne Schim van der Loeff
October 23
rd, 2014
The Use of the Car in American Road Trip
Photographs
MA - Thesis
Student number: S1324292
MA Media Studies: Film and Photographic Studies, Leiden University
Thesis Supervisor: Drs. M.A. (Tineke) de Ruiter
Second Reader: Dr. H.F. (Helen) Westgeest
October 23
rd“The charging restless mute unvoiced road keening in a seizure of tarpaulin
power…”
Abstract
This thesis makes explicit how the viewer’s interpretation of a photograph of the American road trip is affected when the car is used as an explicit impact on the photograph’s frame or blurredness. The thesis focuses on photographs of the American road trip specifically as the road trip carries particular significance in American culture, as do both the car and the road. The research done establishes that the viewer’s relationship with (a) the photographer, and (b) the photograph can be affected by the use of the car. In each case, the photographic styles discussed link the road and the car, as two connecting and connected objects that are important for the American road trip. By using the car to either create an additional frame, or to create two contrasting images within the photograph, the viewer, among others, becomes more aware of the presence of the photographer. By using the car to blur the surface of the photograph, the viewer can no longer look through the photograph, but looks at it before he/she can consider the object photographed, the American road.
Acknowledgements
First of all I would like to thank my thesis supervisor Tineke de Ruiter for her support and advice during the process of writing of my thesis. Thank you for your patience and useful and constructive feedback. It has helped me now, but will continue to do so in the future as you always pushed me to dig deeper and remain critical at every step. I would also like to thank my second reader Helen Westgeest for taking the time to read this thesis. Reading fifty pages takes a while…
I would also like to thank my parents and my sisters Ina, Lily and Wendela for supporting me and my occasional spouts of craziness these past months. Your patience and advice kept me (relatively) sane. Thank you to my parents and Lily specifically for taking the time to read my work. I am also particularly grateful to my grandmother, Omamam, for being the greatest support any grandchild could hope for.
Also thanks to my close friends Emma, Anne Belle and Puck for providing me with coffee breaks, dinner or wine, depending on what I needed. Thanks to my housemate Iris for the moral support and home-cooked dinners. Particular thanks though to Lilian, who knows the sporadic stressful moments that inevitably occur during the process of writing a master thesis, who took the time to proofread my thesis and provided me with insightful advice, support and feedback.
Thanks as well to my friends and colleagues at GUP Magazine and New Dawn, who helped me narrow down the research and photographers for this thesis during my internship. Specifically thanks to Peter Bas and Erik for sending me information about American road photographers on multiple occasions, and May for becoming a very good friend and support mechanism during my time writing for GUP, as well as after.
Lastly I would like to thank my friends and teachers of my MA, Media Studies: Film and Photographic Studies. This challenging master taught me so much and I will be able to benefit from this for a very long time.
Table of Contents
Abstract 5
Acknowledgements 7
Introduction 10
1. The car within the American road trip photograph 15
1.1 Focusing on the American road 15
1.2 The car as a barrier between the viewer and the American road 17
1.3 The viewer and the photograph 19
1.4 The viewer and the photographer 21
2. The frame in photographs of the American road trip 24
2.1 Understanding the frame 24
2.2 A double frame in American road trip photographs 26
2.3 An image within an image (contrasting) in American road trip photographs 31
2.4 Frames and framing in American road trip photographs 34
2.5 Concluding notes 36
3. Blurredness and transparency in photographs of the American road trip 38
3.1 Blurredness in photographs 38
3.2 Blurredness in American road trip photographs 39
3.3 Non-‐transparency in American road trip photographs 43
3.4 Reading a blurred American road trip photograph 46
3.5 Hypermediacy and self-‐reflexivity in American road trip photographs 48
3.6 Concluding notes 50
Conclusion 51
Appendix I 56
Introduction
“The charging restless mute unvoiced road keening in a seizure of tarpaulin power…” - Jack Kerouac’s Introduction for The Americans1
Jack Kerouac’s introduction for Robert Frank’s photo book The Americans was a love letter to the American Road, much like his book On the Road in which a ‘seizure of tarpaulin power’ offers his characters the transport for their adventure onto the ‘restless mute unvoiced road’. Since the invention of the car in the early 20th century and the improvement of
American roads, the American road trip has become an important part of American culture. Within this trip, one can find its populations’ drive for freedom, adventure and pursuit of the American dream. “The notion of slipping behind the wheel and simply taking off is
celebrated to the point where road tripping feels like as close as we might be to a national religion”2, reaffirms that both the car and the road are indispensable within American
everyday life. The relevance of the American road trip has not gone unnoticed to filmmakers, photographers and authors in the 20th century, as some artists have dedicated work to such
adventures.
With this in mind, this thesis aims to bridge the gap between the American road trip and relevant photographic theory by answering the following research question: In what way is
the viewer’s reading of photographs of the American road trip affected when the car is used to frame or blur the road or landscape. This research question requires me to approach the
subject, the American road trip, from a decidedly more theoretic perspective considering two essential aspects of the American road trip, the car and the road.
Relevance
Why, if at all, is this research relevant and should we be concerned with the answer? Its relevance can be established in three parts. I will outline the relevance of the American road trip historically, followed by its continued relevance today, specifically with regard to photographers. Subsequently I will outline the relevance of the American road trip regarding photographic theory.
“All you need to know about American society can be gleaned from an anthropology of its driving behaviour”3, explains Jean Baudrillard of the Americans and their car. Karl Raitz,
professor at the university of the Kentucky, adds that the road is “a window into the soul of
1 Frank R., The Americans, (New York: Steidl, 2008), 2
2 Cosgrove B., “The Road Goes Ever On: Route 66 and the American Dream”, Life, [no page]
3 Raitz K., “American Roads, Roadside America”, Geographical Review, vol. 88, no. 3, American Geographical
[…] America” 4. The American road trip developed importance from the Great Depression
onward, when a car often was a family’s only possession. Since the 1930s and 1940s, photographers pursued their love affair with the American road trip, which has resulted in a rich history and large body of work within the medium. Between 1935-1944, for example, the F.S.A.5 asked a group of influential photographers to travel across America by car in order to
document the country’s rural population during the Great Depression. By the 1950s, the Beat Generation, including Jack Kerouac and Robert Frank had breathed new life into this culture, choosing the open road and car as a companion for adventure. In 1958, Robert Frank
published his now infinitely famous The Americans in which he documented America’s less picturesque side while travelling across the country by car. In the late 1960s more and more road movies appeared, including Bonnie & Clyde (1967) and Easy Rider (1969). In the 1990s road movies such as Thelma and Louise re-emphasised the importance of the road trip within American culture, and in the early 2000s photographers such as Lee Friedlander went out to explore America by car. Over the past century, the American road trip has been documented over and again by authors, directors, photographers and other artists. We continue to see this tradition today. The film version of Kerouac’s On The Road garnered a lot of attention in 2012. Friedlander’s America by Car exhibition has been travelling all over world recently and Ryan McGinley, Ellen Jantzen, Todd Hido and others are among many photographers to pursue an American road trip in order to discover and document its value.
Due to its relevance with regard to American culture, the road trip has been discussed and examined within historical, cultural or sociological studies6. Film theory has discussed and
examined road movies. Literature critics often refer to Jack Kerouac’s cultural phenomenon
On the Road, not ignoring the presence and relevance of other road novels. However, the
American road trip is often neglected in discussions regarding photographic theory.
Regularly, series by photographers, such as Frank’s The Americans, function as case studies within American history or social studies. However, it is uncommon for photography theory to use road trip photographers in order to discuss photographic theories, such as blurredness, or framing.
As mentioned before, the research question primarily focuses on framed and reframed, as well as blurred photographs. These are both topics that feature within media and photographic theory. Mitchell’s Picture Theory and Michael Carter’s Framing Art: Introducing Theory and
4 Raitz, American Roads, 363
5 The Farm Security Administration (F.S.A.) existed during the Great Depression and attempted to fight rural
poverty. Several well-known photographers of that time travelled all over America in order to document the rural population.
6 Note for example some of the books and articles that were used for this thesis, such as Slethaug and Ford’s Hit
the Visual Image address the role of the frame within media, such as photography. Siegfried
Kracauer and Clement Greenberg, both renowned culture and film critics, have extensively discussed the transparent nature of photography, while Westgeest and Gelder’s Photography
Theory in Historical Perspective, provides a comprehensive overview of blurred photography
and its relevance within photographic theory. However, despite the fact that certain photographs of the American road trip can address issues concerning blurredness and the frame (using the car), there is little research regarding this topic. Once again, American road trip photographs are usually discussed from a historical or cultural perspective. Through this thesis, I am able to apply photographic theories to practical examples in order to uncover their relevance within photography.
Photographs of the American road trip vary, emphasising different aspects of the road. For certain photographers, among them some that were mentioned above, the car has carried a particular significance within their work. Resulting photographs have featured the car extensively and in a specific way. This thesis focuses on photographs in which the car, either its window or rear- or side-view mirror, frames the image of the road, or influences the image’s transparency. In other words, this thesis is concerned with photographs that document the American road using the car as a formal attribute to influence the view. By giving the car such a role within the photographs, the viewer must work harder to understand or interpret the photograph at hand. In some cases a car window creates an additional frame within the photograph, while in others a dirty or rainy window clouds the viewer’s view of the American landscape. The resulting photograph influences the viewer’s perception of the road in different ways.
The photographs featured in this thesis that capture the American road all have, in some way, been influenced by the car, either by a particular frame, or by blurring the image. By
discussing these specific images this thesis bridges the gap between photographic theory and documentations of the American road trip. My research will establish how the viewer’s reading of photographs is affected by the use of the car. It will also show that the car, as a part of the photograph, still is of interest for photographers today.
Method and Approach
This thesis is both a visual and a literature study, incorporating photographs by different American photographers, as well as a French one, and books and articles analysing the American road trip and specific photographic theories that I will outline below. Moreover, I will also use interviews with the photographers, which in some cases clarify photographs or
give alternative readings and interpretations of their work. Lastly I refer to exhibition reviews and analyses by critics of the work of the photographers in question in order to sustain my argument.
The photographers that will feature in this thesis are Raymond Depardon, Lee Friedlander, Todd Hido and Ellen Jantzen. In Depardon’s photo book Le Désert Americain, several photographs document the American road, including parts of the car that have framed the image of the landscape. Friedlander’s America by Car consists of photographs in which Friedlander has documented the American landscape, always including the car in the
photograph. Hido’s series A Road Divided includes photographs of the American road, which were taken through the front window of his car. With Hido, the photographs are always blurred because of fog or rain, inhibiting a clear view of the landscape. Jantzen’s series Point
& Shoot @ 70mph documents the American landscape while driving along the highways at
high speed. The resulting photographs are blurred almost beyond recognition.
The literature I use to answer my research question stems from well known and lesser-known photography and culture critics, from 20th century as well more contemporary authors. With
regard to the relevance of the car and the road I rely, among others, on Slethaug and Ford’s
Hit, the Road Jack. This book provides many articles concerned with the relevance of the car
and the road. Emma Enderby, a curator who wrote extensively about Friedlander’s America
by Car, also proves useful in this discussion. Furthermore I will rely on W.J.T. Mitchell and
Michael Carter in order to discuss the frame with regard to abovementioned photographs. With regard to the frame I will also briefly discuss Erving Goffman’s book Framing Analysis, though this should be considered a starting point in this chapter (Chapter Two). In my
discussion of blurredness, I will discuss Siegfried Kracauer and Clement Greenberg, as well as philosopher Kendall Walton and the semiologist Peirce. On a more contemporary note, Richard Bolton’s The Contest of Meaning and Liz Wells’ Photography: A Critical
Introduction, among others, discuss and criticise some out-dated views and aid in my
discussion of the American road trip’s relevance in photographic theory today.
Structure of the Argument
In the first chapter I will address why the car can be considered significant with regard to these particular photographs of the American road trip. I will do this by first outlining the role of the car in such a photograph, followed by two possible ways in which a viewer might be influenced because of the use of the car. This may be concerned with the viewer’s
In the second chapter I will provide a theoretical analysis of what the use of the car can achieve. In that chapter I will discuss why and how the car has been used to create an
additional frame within the photograph. In the third and last chapter I will address how the car has been used, in some cases, to blur the image of the road, which might influence a
photograph’s transparent qualities as well as address issues related to a photograph’s ability to be self-reflexive. In the conclusion I will answer my research question based on this thesis. Moreover I will provide some insight into possible implications of this answer and further research regarding this topic.
Despite its importance with regard to the American road trip, I will not discuss the road itself in a separate chapter, as I will do in chapter one with regard to the car. This is for a particular reason. My research question is concerned with the car’s role in shaping or framing a
particular photograph. The way in which certain photographers have used parts of the car affects the viewer’s interpretation of the photograph in question: it is affected because of the use of the car. In these cases, the car has an impact on the viewer’s reading of the photograph. The road is always a subject in these photographs, yet it is not used to influence the viewer’s interpretation of the photograph itself. In other words, while the road is the object
photographed, the car also functions as an object that shapes, forms or even ‘modifies’ the photograph. As such I felt it was particularly important to clarify my view of the car and the role that it can play. The road, I acknowledge, is a vital subject in these photographs, but does not specifically influence the frame or the blurredness of the photographs.
Outline
In each chapter I will address, and answer relevant sub-questions as outlined below. Following this introduction, I will discuss the car’s relevance regarding certain American road trip photographs, in chapter one. The sub-question thus is what is the added value of the
car in photographs of the American road trip? In the second chapter, I will answer the
sub-question how can the use of the frame affect a photograph and what are the implications for
an interpretation of these photographs. Among others I will distinguish between two ways
the car can frame a photograph, namely creating a double frame, or creating an image within an image. In the last chapter I will answer the sub-question what happens to our reading of a
blurred photograph of the American road, thereby complicating a viewer’s reading of the object photographed. These chapters all discuss different with regard to the research question,
which I will bring together in the conclusion. It will show that a viewer’s reading of an American road photograph can be influenced by the use of the car that frames or blurs the photograph.
1. The car within the American road trip photograph
“There was nowhere to go but everywhere, so just keep on rolling under the stars.”
- Jack Kerouac, On The Road 7
Framing and blurredness found in some photographs of the American road are central in this thesis. In these particular cases, car parts are used to either create an extra frame, or create blurredness. Using car parts in such a way influences how the viewer reads the photograph in question. In this chapter I will focus on the role of the car in detail. As a starting point, I outline why using the car to influence the viewer’s reading of a photograph of the American road, might be relevant for certain photographers. In order to do so, I will first specify why I focus on the American road (trip) specifically, rather than any road. The road’s cultural value is stronger in America than in many other countries, as this chapter will establish. Secondly, in this chapter, I will determine whether or not the car can be considered a layer in the photograph, a layer that exists between the viewer and the object photographed and so changes the viewer’s way of looking at the photograph. If this is, in fact, the case, then I can distinguish between two possible ways in which the viewer’s reading of a photograph might be influenced by parts of the car: (a) influencing the relationship between the viewer and the photograph, (b) changing the relationship between the viewer and the photographer. Having shown that car parts in these photographs do in fact influence the viewer’s reading of such a photograph will be relevant in chapter two and three in which I will discuss particular use of the car.
1.1 Focusing on the American road
The invention of the car and the building of better roads throughout the late 19th and early 20th
century led to a development in America in which the car and the road became an important part of American culture. In a country as vast as America, travelling by car was the most practical way to travel. This is still true to today, so it seems. The Ford Motor Company managed to make the car affordable for almost everyone, focusing especially the middle classes. During the Great Depression most families lost everything, but in many cases managed to hold on to their car. The car is useless without a relatively decent road to travel on. Because of the building of decent roads around the turn of the century, Americans were capable of crossing the entire country by car.
Increasingly, the road became a symbol for those things that American people considered crucial to their cultural identity: freedom, adventure, flexibility, travel and others. The power of the road, according to Gordon Slethaug and Stacilee Ford8, can be found in its links to the
American political, social and cultural landscape in both the past and the present9. They also
explain that the American road has captured “global interest due to enhanced and ever-increasing links in transport, popular culture, and commerce”10. This demonstrates that the American road is linked to many important aspects of daily life, ranging from practical
aspects such as transport, to economic aspects such as commerce and trade, as well as societal aspects such as popular culture and interest in the road from an artistic perspective. Political scientist Skidmore insists that the “call of the road is undeniable”11, while American scholar
Katie Mills explains that “the driving force of road stories is questions about autonomy, mobility, and identity…”12. All in all, cultural critics, historians and theorists often emphasise
the notion that both the mythical and physical road are extremely important within American culture.
This idea seems to be supported by the relative prevalence of the road genre, or road stories, in American literature, film and photography. Mills explains that “the road genre offers a pop cultural forum for imagining a fluid self,”13 i.e. a way of discovering oneself and one’s own
flexibilities. Moreover, Slethaug maintains that road movies, books, photographs and music have created a cultural critique during different times which has continued to highlight the relationship of American social conscience, mobility and rebellion, which are all relevant aspects of the adventure that is the American road trip14.
A similar emphasis on the importance of the road, as well as the car, cannot be found in other cultures, European or other. Whether this is because of its vast size, its historical heritage, its vast development in the early 20th century, or all of these reasons combined, the road is an
important cultural phenomenon in America. This is confirmed through the work of several photographers, both American and foreign. It is for this reason that this thesis is concerned with the American road and landscape specifically, rather than road photography in general.
8 Slethaug is an English professor currently based in Denmark, while Ford is a history professor based in Hong
Kong. Both have done extensive research and work within American Studies. Acknowledging the status of the road within American culture, their book is an exploration across several disciplines of the significance of the road.
9 Slethaug G. and Ford S., eds., Hit The Road, Jack, (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2012), 4 10 Slethaug and Ford, Hit The Road, Jack, 3
11 Skidmore M., “Politics, People Moving and the American Myth of the Road”, in Hit the Road Jack, pp. 39-54,
54
12 Truscello M., “Generically Mobile”, in Hit the Road Jack, pp. 233-252, 235 13 Truscello, “Generically Mobile”, 235
1.2 The car as a barrier between the viewer and the American road
In 2002, American photographer Lee Friedlander commented in an interview, “photographs also show the way that the camera sees. It’s not just me or you or anybody else. The camera does something that is different from our own setting”. Friedlander maintains that a
photographer’s intention is not the only deciding factor in the resulting photograph. In general, the camera’s lens exists between the photographer and the object being
photographed. One approach to the significance of the lens is that it forms a physical barrier between the photographer and the object that will also exist between the viewer and the object photographed. Both the photographer and the capacities and limitations of the camera (lens) will result in the framing and capturing of the object. This will include or limit parts of the object, or its surroundings. The photographer guides the camera, choosing what he wishes to capture. However, one camera’s specific qualities can also in- or exclude something
compared to another camera.
This makes sense for more than one reason. Most importantly, the intersection of the camera lens is technically round, whereas the resulting photograph usually is a rectangle or a square. Just by shaping the form of the photograph, the camera has already in- or excluded part of the captured image. In addition, every lens has its own specificities. Therefore one captured object results in different photographs depending on the type of camera and camera lens that were used by the photographer. A camera and its lens might capture an object slightly differently than intended, which can actually contribute to the uniqueness of the photograph. Taking into account its own specificities and qualities, the lens separates the photographer and the object. The resulting photograph, in turn separates the viewer from that same object, though naturally in a different way. The boundaries of the photograph separate the viewer from the object photographed, similar to the lens that separates the photographer from the object.
In some cases, however, the lens, and thus resulting photograph, is not the only separator between the viewer or photographer, and the photographed object. Take for example Lee Friedlander’s Las Vegas, Nevada15, a photograph in which the car’s windowpane obscures part of the view of the outside landscape, the Las Vegas skyline. Moreover, the side view mirror allows a partial view of what is happening behind the car, limiting the view of the skyline ahead. The car parts featured in this photograph both limit the viewer in what he/she can see, and expand and guide the viewer’s gaze. The fragmented frame in this particular
photograph guides the viewer toward the Las Vegas skyline, yet does not allow for a clear view. The side view mirror guides the viewer toward what is happening behind the car, but it is only a very small portion that the viewer can see. Moreover, in the left part of the
photograph (through the front window), the viewer catches a glimpse of the road ahead, yet he/she might not notice this part of the photograph at first because his/her gaze is directed more toward the skyline itself. Friedlander took the photograph from inside the car and included parts of the car in order to, among other things, limit what the viewer could see. The car takes on a role that might be considered similar to that of the lens, namely limiting as well as guiding the viewer’s gaze as it stands between the viewer and the object it aims to capture. In addition, however, these car parts are also a subject of the photograph itself, despite fulfilling a similar task to that of the camera lens. In this photograph it is not just the camera’s lens that enables a certain reading of the photograph, limiting and framing the object, but also the car that frames the landscape. As such, the distinction that can be made with regard to these specific photographs is that the intersection of the camera lens is an implicit framer, whereas the car is an explicit framer. In other words, the lens frames the photograph regardless of what the photographer might intend, while the photographer consciously chooses to use the car to frame the image.
Something similar happens in American photographer Todd Hido’s photograph 0616 from his series A Road Divided, even though a clear view of the object photographed is limited for a different reason. The object in the photograph seems to be the road ahead. The car window, through which the photograph was taken, is covered in blurred raindrops, obscuring a clear, unblemished view of the road ahead. As such it is difficult to make out details of the road. It is not (only) the camera lens that limits what the viewer can see – as an implicit framer, but also the car window as an explicit framer. Moreover, whereas the camera lens has framed the captured photograph, the car window is also used to frame, as well as blur the image of the road. The car window is thus, not only responsible for framing the image, but also for creating the lack of focus, which makes it difficult for the viewer to make out the details of the photographed object. This blurredness also creates an explicit impact17 as the car window
causes it, and not the camera lens. Though in a different way, namely by means of blurring the object, the car forms a barrier between the viewer and the object photographed, in addition to what the camera lens might have in- or excluded.
In short, the camera lens can be understood as creating a physical separation between the photographer and the object photographed, as the resulting photograph then separates the
16 Appendix I, photo 8
17 The lens and the car can cause and implicit or explicit impact, which refers to the resulting photograph and the
viewer from the object photographed. The lens itself can be understood as an implicit
influence on the viewer, as it focuses and frames the view of the road in order for it to become a photograph in the first place. The car, on the other hand, should be understood as an explicit influence on the viewer as it could both frame and (not) focus the photographed object. The photographer must, in this case, make a conscious decision to do so. If we consider the car as an explicit impact, then the car can be considered as influencing the viewer’s reading of the photograph.
There are more photographs like the ones discussed above that were taken on and off the American road, in which the car is more than an object in the photograph. Like the camera lens, parts of the car influence the way in which the photograph portrays the object, the road. These car parts limit, guide and frame the object in the photograph in different ways. On the one hand it can create a double frame or an extra image within the photograph, which can create a smaller, narrower view of the landscape. On the other hand it can result in a blurred photograph in which there might be a lot to see, but the details become difficult or impossible to make out because of the blurredness. This will be discussed in more detail in chapter two and three. Either way, in these particular cases, parts of the car form a layer or a barrier between the viewer and photographed object in addition to what the camera lens has in- and excluded, or framed and focused.
1.3 The viewer and the photograph
A photograph in which car parts form such a layer as explained above can influence the viewer’s approach to the photograph in different ways. I will distinguish between two possible ways in which the viewer’s perception can be impacted by the use of the car. These two ways relate to the viewer’s relationship with the photograph as well as the photographer. One possible approach is to consider the use of car parts as a way in which the viewer’s relationship with the photograph itself might be affected. Another approach suggests that car parts can impact the viewer’s relationship with the photographer. This distinction does not mean that it is either the viewer’s relationship with the photograph or the relationship with photographer that is affected. Rather, I outline two possible ways the use of the car might impact the viewer’s reading of the photograph.
Assistant curator Emma Enderby discussed Lee Friedlander’s America by Car exhibition in London in 2011 and explained that Friedlander “actively lets the inside of his rental intrude, not only acting as a window to gaze past, but very much the subject of the photograph
itself”18. According to her, Friedlander is not only concerned with the landscape or the road as
the object of the photograph. Rather, the car itself is an equally important object. As such, what is outside of the car is not the only object. The car can be considered a subject of the photograph in its own right as well.
In most cases, the subject of the photograph would be considered the object or person that the photograph documents. In French photographer Raymond Depardon’s photograph USA.
1982. Le Désert Americain19, for example, there are two subjects in the photograph, namely
the road and car ahead. The way in which the photograph is framed and directed, guides the viewer toward the straight, almost empty road while one car drives ahead. Finding the subject in American contemporary photographer Ellen Jantzen’s Missouri 04/24 2010 1:33PM –
Compressed20, is slightly more complicated. Here, one is first drawn to the road ahead, with
several cars, and thus this might be considered the photograph’s subject. It is unsure however how many cars are featured in the photograph. The road, unclearly documented through the rainy window, could also be considered the subject. Moreover, the viewer’s gaze might be drawn more strongly toward the windscreen wiper as it crosses through the blurred window. As such we must consider the possibility that the car window, as a layer, could be considered a subject in its own right as well as a barrier between the viewer and the object photographed. In USA. 1982. Le Désert Americain, both the car ahead and the road itself can be considered equally important subjects. Depardon has used the camera to frame his topic in order to guide the viewer toward the subject(s). Both the white car and the road receive the same amount of attention from the camera’s lens and can thus be considered equally relevant. When, however, one of the objects in the photograph is responsible for the blurring of fragmentation of the other object, as in Missouri, this relationship changes the way in which the viewer looks at either object and their relevance. In Jantzen’s photograph, the car window has caused the blurredness that limits the viewer’s view of the road and cars ahead. For the viewer it becomes questionable if the road and car window are equally relevant, or whether the car window has become more relevant in this photograph than the road.
As the role of the road, as photographed object, changes, this does not mean that it is an object that becomes irrelevant because of the presence of the car. One must consider, however its role changed because of the blurred or fragmented barrier, which also is a subject. For example, in 07 from A Road Divided, the road still is relevant for photographer Hido, as well
18 Enderby E., “Lee Friedlander: America by Car & The New Cars 1964”, Artvehicle58/Review, (2011), [no page]
Enderby wrote about the exhibition for the website artvehicle.com- a website that is dedicated to contemporary art in London.
19 Appendix I, photo 3 20 Appendix I, photo 10
as viewer, despite the blurred window limiting a clear view. This barrier, the car window, distances the viewer from the ‘original’ subject, the road. Because the car is the disorienting, limiting factor, the viewer ends up considering both the car and the road. As they feature in the photograph together, intertwined by the photographer and the camera lens, the viewer will also consider them together when viewing the photograph. In this particular case, the blur creates some distance between the viewer and the landscape, but simultaneously literally blurs together the car window and the road. This might indicate that Hido has used the car to formulate his own views of the road and the car.
If we return to Friedlander’s Las Vegas photograph, a similar situation occurs. This photograph suggests that Friedlander considers the car an equally important subject as the road itself. The car mediates between the road and the viewer, forging a new way of looking at both the car and the road. The car becomes a “vehicle of articulation,”21 telling a story
about the relationship between the car and the road. It also tells a story about the relationship between the viewer and the photograph(er). In these photographs, the car is used to illustrate the relevance of the road, and as such “America retains its myth of the road and its love of the automobile”22.
Naturally, no photograph tells only one story. No photograph can explain everything23. The
objects in these photographs, however, are often difficult to decipher, making a viewer’s subjective interpretation important once again. There is no clear message at all. “The knowledge that the viewer brings to a photograph is essential to its capacity to display the truth about its subject matter”24. In photographs where there is more than one subject matter,
it is up to the viewer to decide for him- or herself what is relevant and what is less relevant. Yet what is inevitable is that the road and the car are linked together in one photograph. Though they are different subjects, they are linked in the story they tell or form they take.
1.4 The viewer and the photographer
In her discussion of Friedlander’s exhibition, Enderby also discussed the photographer’s series as one in which the car’s presence inserts the photographer into the photograph. She suggests that taking a photograph from inside the car can influence not only the way in which the viewer looks at the photograph, but also the way in which the viewer considers the photographer. She states that, specifically in the case of Lee Friedlander, his work is a constant reminder of the “photographer’s presence behind the camera, not only through the
21 Mansoor J., “Ed Ruscha’s One-Way Street”, October, vol. 111, MIT Press, (2005), pp. 127-142 22 Skidmore, “Politics, People Moving”, 54
23 Keilbach J. and Wächter K., “Photographs, Symbolic Images, and the Holocaust: On the (IM)Possibility of
Depicting Historical Truth”, History and Theory, vol. 48, no. 2, Wiley for Wesleyan University, (2009), pp. 54-76, 57
use of reflection, but by having the photographs always taken from the car seat repeatedly reminding us that the photographer is in a very particular physical space, a space that is clearly established by the body of the car allowed within the photograph’s frame”25. By taking
a photograph from inside the car, the viewer is confined to the same space as the
photographer. The car, as small and limiting as it can be, is a representation of the small space in which the photographer took the photograph. Friedlander’s America by Car in 2010 is a book and travelling exhibition consisting of photographs that were all taking from within the car. The extent of his work arguably makes him the most dedicated photographer with regard to the approach discussed in this thesis – namely capturing the American road, among others
through car windows and mirrors. Moreover, in a few images the photographer is also
featured in a side-view mirror. This reiterates the idea that Friedlander considers his own presence within these photographs significant.
Hido has explained his approach in the series A Road Divided similarly: “it has a subjective, diaristic quality and now that I really think about it—it’s the opposite of something like an “authorless” objective view, which is mostly seen from a higher, uncommon viewpoint”26. In A Road Divided, all photographs were taken from within the car. Hido maintains that his
approach aims to create a certain intimacy between the viewer and the road, but more importantly, between the viewer and the photographer. “That’s my breath fogging up the window,”27 he continued in the same interview, thus emphasising the importance for him to
create a relationship between the viewer and the photographer in addition creating a
relationship between the viewer and the object photographed. Similar to Friedlander, though using a different approach, Hido’s photographs are concerned with the photographer’s presence inside the space of the car. While Friedlander in some ways emphasises the limiting and extending capacity that a view from the car may have by framing the image, the
blurredness of Hido’s photographs evokes something else. Hido explains that by taking a photograph of the road from where he is sitting inside the car, the situation becomes more relatable for the viewer, rather than a static overview photograph. The viewer, so he maintains, must be able to associate with the photographer and the object photographed, rather than feel distanced from either.
In the photographs of both Friedlander and Hido, it seems that the aim of taking the photograph from inside the car is to create a feeling of closeness to the photographer. The implication presumed of this is to avoid a static photograph and create photographs that the viewer might be able to relate to. The viewer sits beside the photographer in a small, confined
25 Enderby, Lee Friedlander, [no page]
26 Augschoell D. and Jasbar A., “Interview with: Todd Hido”, Ahorn Magazine, [no page] 27 Augschoell and Jasbar, “Todd Hido”, [no page]
space, the car. This does not allow the viewer to step outside of the metal or blurred frame in a figurative sense. As such it is impossible to consider the photograph from a different perspective. The particular view of, either the Las Vegas skyline by Friedlander, or an abandoned road by Hido, feels inevitably linked to the photographer. Film-maker Douglas Sloan worded this quite nicely by describing Friedlander’s work as follows: “when
[Friedlander] looks through a piece of glass or really through anything, but when it’s a piece of glass with reflections I think he’s understanding that there is a picture there that won’t ever exist unless he makes a photograph of it”28.
Depardon’s USA. 1982. Le Désert Americain is a photograph that feels, to the viewer, as a more neutral overview of the American road. There are no obvious contradictory images in the photograph, and nothing is randomly blurred, limited or difficult to see. The highway and car, framed by the camera lens, could stem from anywhere, as there is nothing particular that needs additional attention in order to understand the photograph. 06 by Hido on the other hand, was taken from inside the car in which the photographer himself was sitting. The blurredness of the photograph emphasises that fact, creating a relationship between the viewer and the photographer in addition to the object photographed. The photographer becomes more than the person who took the photograph. Rather, he becomes a part of the resulting image and might even guide the viewer in understanding the photograph.
In A Road Divided the photographs emphasise the subjective nature of some photographs: a possible reason then for creating this layer, is not simply to add a subject, which the viewer must consider when taking in the photograph, but also to emphasise a subjective
interpretation of the photograph. If we are to understand, among others, Hido and Friedlander, this creates a new kind of intimacy between the viewer and the photographer that asks the viewer to consider more than just the object photographed.
The feeling of being able to relate to the photographer, while having to work harder to understand the photograph, might be considered contradictory. On the one hand the car creates a certain aesthetic within the photograph, while on the other hand the viewer must look beyond only the car, to understand what the photograph, and the object photographed, might be about. One might conclude that this approach to American road trip photographs aims to create a link between the car and the road. While the road is significant as the starting point, or the initial object, the car can be used as a way of affecting the interpretation of this object. The following chapters will elaborate on the way in which parts of the car might impact the photograph, the object it captures, and thus the viewer’s reading of it.
2. The frame in photographs of the American road trip
“He knew the road would get more interesting, especially ahead, always ahead.”29
- Jack Kerouac, On The Road
The concept of the ‘frame’ is subject to different interpretations and understandings. In order to discuss its use within a medium, such as photography, it is necessary to outline an
understanding of it. Some photographers of the American road trip have, in their work, dealt with the complex notion of the ‘frame’ in different ways. In this chapter I will explain how one might distinguish between three types of uses of the frame within photography, namely the general frame (the one that surrounds the photograph itself), double frame and the image
within an image. Relying on this distinction, this chapter attempts to explain different ways of
understanding the use of the frame. Does a frame guide us in reading a photograph, or is it a part of the image? Answering questions such as this, will allow me to explain how the use of the frame influences the way in which the viewer reads a photograph of the American road.
Photographs always have a ‘natural’ frame, namely the intersection of the camera lens. However, photographs by, among others, Lee Friedlander and Raymond Depardon, contain a frame within the photograph in addition to the ‘natural’ frame. From within their car, some photographers such as Friedlander and Depardon have taken photographs of the American landscape. They have included different parts of the car and its interior in these photographs, creating an additional frame within the photograph. They, though often only face in one direction, namely ahead (through the car window). Those photographs I will refer to as photographs containing a double frame. In other cases, photographs capture also a side- or rear-view mirror and its reflection, in addition to, for example, a view of the landscape. These photographs show a glimpse of what the photographer can see through the window, as well as what he can see in the particular mirror. As these photographs contain images that face two directions, I will refer to them as an image within an image.
2.1 Understanding the frame
Considering the complexity of the ‘frame’, I will provide a brief overview of how I understand this term and will apply it in this chapter. A frame can be understood as “an enclosing border,” or “an open case or structure made for admitting, enclosing or supporting something”30. Implied here is that a frame necessarily surrounds something, be it a material or
immaterial entity. Katie Pickett, a researcher for the University of Chicago has written about
29 Kerouac, On the Road, 175
the frame and framing extensively, expands this definition, explaining the frame as “a set of standards, beliefs, or assumptions governing perceptual or logical evaluation or social behaviour”31. These standards or beliefs incorporate the immaterial nature of the frame. She
further states that the frame “is useful in that it comprises elements of infrastructure and mediation”32. The nature of the frame is an infrastructure (be it cultural or physical) that
borders or encloses something (material or immaterial). The key aspect is that a frame is
constructed and that it surrounds. When applying the frame to photographs, these two aspects
will become important once again.
Applying the ‘frame’ to a photograph, allows us understand it as a structure that borders a photograph33. The limits of what a lens can capture creates a frame that surrounds the
photograph, which is square or rectangle. Pickett uses an analogy of a windowpane in order to clarify this, “which reveals the role of a frame as the marker of a place where a medium (and/or a message) can operate”34. Looking through a window, we are limited by the size of
the window as well as its fixed location. What we see is framed by the windowpane and marks the enclosing space within which one can look outside. Similarly, the size and capacity of the camera lens limits what the photograph can capture and through which it can convey its message. In both cases the viewer is dependent on the frame with regard to what he/she can see. Though Pickett’s analogy provides a general understanding of what a frame is, we must take into account one additional aspect with regard to the frame of a photograph. Though the camera lens is the physical entity that frames the image, it is the photographer that ultimately decides what a particular frame will in- and exclude. The relationship between the
composition of the frame (the lens) and the one who must fill in the frame (the photographer)35 creates endless possibilities. It is because of the photographer, that
photographs are created which are interesting, particularly in this chapter. Though the
photographer’s intention will not be of primary concern in this chapter, the choice to create an extra frame within the photograph is a direct result of what the photographer has decided. The additional frame alters the way in which someone looking at a photograph reads a photograph and it is therefore interesting to consider the frame of the photograph as more than a
windowpane through which the viewer can gaze, but rather as a conscious construction that seeks to influence the way in which the viewer looks at the photograph in question.
31 Pickett K., “Frame (1)”, The Chicago School of Media Theory, (2003), [no page] 32 Pickett, “Frame”, [no page]
33 In order to distinguish between the frame of the lens, and camera, and a frame inside the photograph, I will refer
to the former as the natural frame, despite acknowledging that a frame is not natural, but constructed.
34 Pickett, “Frame”, [no page] 35 Pickett, “Frame”, [no page]
2.2 A double frame in American road trip photographs
In 1982, French photographer and photojournalist Raymond Depardon drove across the USA, which resulted in a photo book called Le Désert Américain. Among the photographs of abandoned highways and the American landscape, one photograph titled USA. Utah.
Monument Valley. 198236, portrays the parched road outside the driver’s window. Taken through the window, the landscape consists of a huge rock alongside the road in the middle of a desiccated landscape. The image of the rock is surrounded by the frame of the left front window and includes a silhouette of the driver. In addition to the frame of the camera lens, the window frame and the driver create a frame surrounding the American landscape.
According to the sociologist Erving Goffman, the frame is “the word I use to refer to such of these basic elements as I am able to identify.”37 His book Frame Analysis, published in 1974,
discusses the concept of the frame from a social science perspective. Though, as mentioned in the introduction, his work is concerned with the frame in more abstract terms, he should be considered an important starting point for this discussion, as he provides us with a general understanding of the frame and is a good basis for further discussion. Goffman explains that, “I assume that definitions of a situation are built up in accordance with principals of
organization which govern events […] and our subjective involvement in them”38. In other
words, our involvement in any type of event, or organization is influenced by elements that define or influence the situation, such as culture, education etc. These frames in our lives rely partly on our subjective understanding of the content of our lives and how it is structured. Thus the frame borders around our understanding of the world, and guides us through our own life depending on our own subjective understanding of where the border ought to be. Goffman’s abstract interpretation of the frame gives us the starting point for considering the frame in the first place, though we cannot yet apply it to a particular photograph, such as the one by Depardon mentioned above.
Fredric Jameson aids in this regard, specifying Goffman’s argument. He explains that the “elaborate conceptuality of the ‘frame’ is the result of [his] ambition to evolve abstractions which hold for all social institutions”39. In other words, Jameson explains that Goffman
attempts to create an abstract understanding of the frame so that it can be applied to all aspects of society. Taking into consideration the subjective interpretation of the frame, it can
36 Appendix I, photo 1
37 Goffman E., Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience, (Michigan: Harper & Row, 1986),
10-11
38 Pickett, “Frame”, [no page]
39 Jameson F., “On Goffman’s Frame Analysis”, Theory and Society, vol. 3, no. 1, Springer, (1976), pp. 119-133),
thus be applied to everything, ranging from a group of people, to a photograph. Though a too general understanding cannot guide us to a concrete interpretation of the frame or a particular photograph, we can argue that reading Depardon’s photograph, framed by the lens and the car and driver, is influenced by the viewer’s cultural values and background. We must now specify this in order to be able to apply it to framed photographs of the American road and the way in which a frame can influence a viewer’s reading of one.
Sociologist Thomas Scheff’s interpretation of Frame Analysis gives us more insight into how we might apply an understanding of the frame to a photograph. In his article, Scheff
accumulates different interpretations of and critiques toward Frame Analysis in order to address the frame. He begins with Todd Gitlin, also a sociologist, who paraphrased
Goffman’s work as follows in the early 1980s: “Frames are principles of selection, emphasis and presentation composed of little tacit theories about what exists, what happened, and what matters”40. So, Depardon’s photograph Utah selects, emphasises and presents a certain
photograph of the American road. Selected by the photographer and the camera lens, emphasised by the camera lens and presented by the quality of the camera. Moreover, this photograph portrays what exists (which includes the rock outside the window and the driver), what happens (the drive in the car along a road) and hopefully also, what matters. However as in any photograph one wonders: what matters? Is it the view outside, or is it the car and the driver? Gitlin suggests that a frame reinforces the question of ‘what matters’ and then guides the viewer to answer this question. In the case of Utah the viewer’s eye is guided to the part of the photograph that is in focus. Depardon has constructed an additional frame to surround something specifically, namely the landscape outside of the car. A viable conclusion is then, that which he framed, is what matters, at least to him.
Scheff subsequently moves on to Thomas Koenig, who remarked more recently, in 2004, that, “one response [to Frame Analysis] which seems particularly confusing is the
conceptualization of frames as a metaphor, alluding to a picture frame”41. Koenig argues that
a picture frame, like one surrounding a photograph, is nothing like the frame Goffman alludes to. Goffman’s frames “do not limit, but rather enable”, offering us a way of interpreting our reality42. Koenig suggests, in other words, that Goffman’s interpretation of the frame in Framing Analysis is not concerned with ‘what matters’, because this implies that there are
aspects outside of the frame that do not matter. A picture frame on the other hand, does argue that some things matter more than others, as this type of frame actually limits what the viewer
40 Scheff T., “The Structure of Context: Deciphering ‘Frame Analysis’”, Sociological Theory, vol. 23, no. 4,
American Sociological Association, (2005), pp. 368-385, 369
41 Scheff, “The Structure of Context”, 369 42 Scheff, “The Structure of Context”, 369
can see, or focuses on. Writer and filmmaker Susan Sontag even went so far as to say that, “to photograph is to frame, and to frame is to exclude”43, suggesting that every photograph is
constructed and it will always be surrounded by more than we can see. Looking at Utah, the viewer cannot see beyond the giant rock. Not just lens’ frame, but also the frame within the photograph (created by the car and the driver), ensures that the rock is the only thing we can see outside of the car. As such this additional frame limits us even more strictly, excluding parts of what one might have seen of the landscape. This suggests that the photograph emphasises the importance of the rock in the landscape and wants the viewer to focus on that specifically. The landscape portrayed is emphasised not only by the frame of the camera lens, but also by the car frame. However, the framed image inside a framed photograph, forces us to ask what the added value is of such an extra frame. If a frame guides us in ‘what matters’, then what is it that matters in a photograph that is framed twice over?
Australian art historian Michael Carter argues that the frame facilitates the viewer’s experience, because it clarifies where the edge of the image is, where the image stops44.
Whereas the landscape stops once one enters the car, the photograph stops when one takes the car into consideration. These are two different frames within one photograph. The double frame, as part of the photograph’s content, creates confusion within the viewer. On the one hand the viewer is kept inside the car, as it is impossible to consider the landscape without the presence of the car and the driver. On the other hand, the eye is drawn to the landscape, which seems untouchable, forcing the viewer to remain a witness. In an interview, Depardon said that, “the Americans, whether they’re young or old, always go back to the Grand Canyon to take pictures of it”45. The photographer found it fascinating that Americans remain drawn to
their own landscape, usually by car. Gitlin’s earlier-mentioned suggestion that a frame guides the viewer in ‘what matters’ creates complications when considering Depardon’s photograph
Utah. The photograph emphasises Depardon’s claim that as a photographer he is more of a
witness than a creator46, pushing himself outside of the image and taking the viewer with him.
However, though the viewer is a witness of the landscape, he seems to be in the passenger seat, next to the driver, on the road through the desert. The rock in the desert, which is what we are led to focus on by the photographer, is all that should matter, yet he creates the feeling that the viewer is somehow partaking in the adventure of driving on the American road. This contradiction suggests that Depardon is concerned with the landscape, but will not allow the viewer to take a closer look, as the car drives on. The viewer must consider the landscape as
43 Sontag S., Regarding the Pain of Others, (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2002), 46
44 Carter M., Framing Art: Introducing Theory and the Visual Image, (Sydney: Hale & Iremonger, 1990), 149 45 Agence Saltimbanque, Agence Saltimbanque, “Raymond Depardon: un moment si doux”, Fondation Louis
Roederer, (2014), [no page]
linked to the car. The double frame suggests that there is no specific guidance or answer to ‘what matters’.
A similar situation occurs in Montana47, the 2010 photograph by Friedlander. Here, the additional frame consists of Friedlander’s car, as the photograph was taken through the front window. The metal frame that surrounds the front window cuts off a view of the road. Part of the steering wheel and dashboard of the car are featured in the bottom centre of the
photograph. From inside the car, Montana portrays a straight road with tire skid marks further up ahead. Pine trees surround the road as clouds float by in the sky. The car’s features do not surround the entire image, but questions arise about what this additional frame does to the reading of the photograph.
Published in 1990, Framing Art, Carter offers a different view on how one might address the frame. Carter relates the concept specifically to art. By “enclosing and focusing the viewer’s gaze onto the scene which unfolds within its boundaries,”48 the frame facilitates the viewer’s
experience, he explains. He continues: “one of the fundamental characteristics of a visual image is that it has an edge, that it stops”49. In other words, a frame does not only guide the
viewer, but he also makes the experience of the visual image easier. However, Carter explains, the frame may also be a part of the actual artwork50. In those cases, the frame
“should be foregrounded as content”51, in addition to the fact that it might guide the viewer’s
gaze. This distinction is particularly interesting as it implies that a frame does not only direct the viewer toward ‘what matters’. The frame does not only guide the viewer, but it might have its own story within the photograph as another subject of the photograph. In Montana, the viewer’s eye is first drawn towards the open road, realising after that this only takes up part of the image. The image of the road is interrupted by parts of the car that block the view of the open road ahead: “the steering wheel, the door, the radio […] obstruct a picturesque view”52. Though the viewer’s gaze is directed toward the open road in the first instant,
directed here because of the double frame, the frame in this case is an extensive part of the car. Thus it cannot exist as a mere frame. It must, as Carter suggests, contain its own story. This frame does not only act as “a window to gaze past”53. The car, both “a physical and
mental barrier,”54 forces a distance between the photograph and the viewer arguably to
47 Appendix I, photo 4 48 Carter, Framing Art, 73 49 Carter, Framing Art, 149
50 He argues this with regard to non-photography art, as he writes that the frame can be a physical part of the
artwork. However, I pertain that this goes for photography as well with a double frame or an image within an image, in which the frame is also part of the artwork.
51 Pickett, “Frame”, [no page]
52 Rosenberg K., ‘Landscapes Framed by a Chevy’, The New York Times, (2010), [no page] 53 Enderby, “Lee Friedlander”, [no page]
provide him/her with a refuge, removed from the outside world55. In the privacy of the car,
Friedlander is witness to the road. The viewer can consider himself confined to the same space, and witness to the road. The double frame enables a particular story, a form of communication between the viewer and the photographer56. Similar to Utah, the photograph
suggests that the road is something the viewer is simply passing through, while sitting in the car. The viewer’s gaze is directed toward the road, or landscape, but the car cuts off a proper view. As such, the frame tells a story about the link between the open road and the car, which both are subtle markers that are an important part of the American identity57. According to
Enderby, this adheres “to the long standing tradition of documenting, or attempting to define America”58. The photograph is a reference, either positive or negative, to a part of the
American identity that the photographer, and perhaps the viewer, consider relevant.
In the same book that explains that a frame might be part of a work of art, however, Carter maintains that a frame also provides a form of stability, “a mediatory process that encodes the space in which the object is placed,”59. He considers framing the process in which an object is
placed within a certain, fixed space. He also compares the frame of an artwork to that of a window frame. As such, it seems that he returns to the idea that a frame, most importantly, guides the viewer, creating a safe space to consider the image. Thus the concept of
surrounding, limiting and enclosing is intertwined with the notion of the frame. Nevertheless, it seems that a double frame can build upon this enclosure, and create a different reading outside of the border. What matters in these particular photographs is not only the image inside the frame. More specifically, in this case it is the relationship between the part of the car in the image and the road, as the photograph attempts to explain how they are connected. As discussed extensively in chapter one, the car plays the mediating role, encoding the space in which the photograph exists. It mediates between where our gaze is naturally drawn (the road) and the image we cannot ignore (taking the picture from within the car). The car is present as what exists in between the photographer and the landscape outside. In this respect, the double frame serves as a constant reminder of the photographer’s presence behind the camera60. Friedlander reminds the viewer that he is not entirely part of the photograph.
Depardon reminds the viewer, that he/she is just passing through this particular landscape. The viewer is a witness to the photographer, who in turn is a witness to the landscape. One might say, then, that the viewer is viewing another viewer, namely the photographer, and thus
55 Enderby, “Lee Friedlander”, [no page] 56 Scheff, “The Structure of Context, 369 57 Enderby, “Lee Friedlander”, [no page] 58 Enderby, “Lee Friedlander”, [no page] 59 Pickett, “Frame”, [no page]
