May 2010
Andrew Stark
I've been sitting on this interview I conducted with Andrew Stark for two months now because I was unable to write this simple introduction to his photographs. I've come to the conclusion that the reason why I have been struggling to write an introduction to Stark's work is because I really don't know enough about him. Or know anyone who does. We have never met and there is little information about Stark's online. This conversation came about because unexpectedly one night Stark emailed me a 198 page research paper he had just completed on the psychological study of the contemporary street photographer. What kind of photographer writes a 198 page academic research paper on street photographers? I was intrigued.
I would like to begin by asking you about your photography routine. How often do you go out to take pictures? Are you the type of photographer who carries a camera wherever you go?
No I'm definitely not one of those constant carriers, and I guess it all kind of ebbs and flows. The last few months have seen an abrupt latent period as I've been seated day after day in the Hornsby foodcourt scribbling out the final few chapters of "Escaping Into Life". You could say my flow has hedged somewhat, ebbing toward a code blue mini drought...but probably wouldn't choose to.
When I'm on song however I'll take the camera for a walk four maybe five times a week.
I don't encounter your work much in the media, galleries or in photographic prizes. Would it be fair to describe you as a 'dark horse' amongst the Australian photographic community? Is it important to you to be recognised by your peers?
In the sense that dark horses struggle to hold worthwhile conversations, I mean even the talkative Mr Ed was a pale shade of brindle, then totally, yeah. I'm a lone wolf (dark or otherwise). My ability to mingle is scant and so I don't network...or BBQ. I have had a few exhibitions in recent years; Museum of Sydney, Hazelhurst Gallery, Gosford Gallery and The Fairfield Museum...but yeah...nothing that stopped the world. And I'm not really into photo competitions. I mean when did you last see a blurry; grainy, somewhat muted street photo win the lucky door prize? I kind of feel it's wiser to reinvest the entry fees into future rolls of TRI X. Being recognized is nice, but people either like your stuff or not...popularity isn't my driving force.
There are two types of street photographers of which I'm aware. Those who sit and wait at a location for something to happen and those who are constantly on the search. I would like to ask you what is your street photography methodology?
Definitely "on the search". I walk around in loopy big circles, kind of doing shuffly laps of the city. I could quite possibly be the Cliff Young of Australian photography...sans gum boots.
I read your 'Escaping Into Life: A Psycho Study of the Contemporary Street Photographer' research paper in which you propose street photography to be a type of personality classification. What did you conclude?
The ultimate conclusion galloped wildly from the wide open transcendental plain. Past lives tumbled, liquor flowed freely and suddenly I became aware of my past existence as Weegee's prop pony. So at my last start I was actually the dark horse of American photography...well a shortish dark horse anyway. "Escaping Into Life's" more generic conclusion however, revolved around introversion; intuition, left handedness, depression, the star sign Scorpio, and an inescapable slide towards madness.
In 'Escaping Into Life' you have described popular opinion of street photography as 'fundamentally peculiar, intrinsically futile and even manifestly offensive.' I sense in your writings that you are very passionate about street photography. Tell me what you are seeing in street photography that others, non street photographers, are not seeing?
Let me just say that shoplifting is universally accepted as petty theft yet to the kleptomaniac it's the happenin buzz. I mean if you mention to most people of photographing passers-by in the street without ever asking for permission you'll invariably get, "But oh, that's illegal right."
To me, street photography is a habit, a routine, a purpose. Yet out on the dusty thoroughfares of greater Sydney it's considered, "just a tad dodgy."
I think all good works of art has at some stage been considered 'a tad dodgy.' It has taken me years to conclude that street photography is the type I most enjoy. Do you think examining someone's personality and paring them with a compatible artform can be a quick method of finding a person's creative calling?
No, not really. But I guess I would say that if you weigh in at 200kg and enjoy getting around in a giant nappy then sumo is half a chance. A lot of street photographers are wiry, male introverts...coincidence or prototype? I'm not sure.
And on the issue of dodginess...the mainstream acceptability of art traverses the conveyor belt of progress in a strictly right to left fashion. Art continues to move toward freedom yet the benign act of street photography is tolerated less today than in any past era. In many respects photographing candidly on our streets is becoming a grade 'A' blood sport.
Technology has allowed photography to appear increasing 'easy' to do. What do you think of this statement? Has technology improved overall standards? Do you think photographers half a century ago were better then photographers now?
It is ever evolving, and yeah photography is more accessible today than ever before. Hence there are way more photographs being taken. The constraints, or should I say disciplines, that are involved with film based photography have given way to the never ending whirr of, "If I just keep shooting I'm bound to have a goodun in there somewhere."
'Escaping Into Life' talks quite a bit about monkeys, there is a reason for that. Personally I don't think it ever got better than Frank, Winogrand, Klein, Freidlander etc.
Are you aware of the oversight in your 'Escaping Into Life' paper? You didn't include a control group in your research.
That's true yet there are comparative elements. In relation to typology, the stats showed a marked disparity when lined up against Kroeger & Thuesen's estimation of the US population. Besides, I'm a solitary street photographer, where do I come up with thirty three normal people?
Finally, street photography a blessing or a curse?
Absolutely. You've got it in a nutshell. Blessing? Curse? They're one in the same really. The whole endeavour is a curious paradox.