How important is context in Photography? Referencing the picture “Wrong!” by John Baldessari, can a ‘bad’ picture ever be great? (“Context”)

Intro

Context – why a picture was taken, when or where it was taken and what message you were trying to make (“Context”)

Context and Art in general

In modern conceptual art, I think context becomes extremely important in what makes a picture great and, more broadly, what makes something a piece of art. For example, Marcel Duchamp’s “Fountain”, an art piece consisting of a porcelain urinal signed “R.Mutt” (Wikipedia contributors). Are urinals art? We don’t walk into a bathroom and say, “Wow, look at that amazing art!” but because of the context and intellectual process behind the urinal, it is now a symbol of conceptual art (Wikipedia contributors).

“Fountain” (replica) originally by Marcel Duchamp, 1917

Similarly, context in a photograph can emphasize on the journey behind the photograph. Photography is all about capturing the moments, and that can entail grueling travel and hours crouching in the extreme, waiting for the perfect moment. Context provided can highlight the journey behind the photo, making it of more value. The journey behind a photo also involves the thought process behind the piece, and that can highlight subtle themes and messages embedded in the piece. In some cases, this can make the difference between a simply amateur photo, and a skillfully taken image that was borne out of careful consideration.

Can “bad” art be “great”?

(the photograph attached is “Wrong” taken by John Baldessari in 1967)

Yes, it can.

“WRONG” John Baldessari, 1967

A lot of good art is defined by its context, rather than its aesthetic appearance. Does an acrylic painting of a ubiquitous soup can show more skill than Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa? (“Andy Warhol. Campbell’s”) Maybe not, but the idea behind the photograph and the societal values it challenged made it a great piece of art, and Campbell’s soup cans are as much of a household name as the oil paintings of the old masters (“Andy Warhol. Campbell’s”). In this case, the context offered by John Baldessari, “Wrong!”, shows that he knew his photograph was “Wrong” and that he was breaking the rules of photography (Baldessari). This makes his photograph different from all your botched amateur photography attempts (for example, when you had ISO and exposure in the wrong setting) because he was a skilled photographer who considered the rules of the photography world and intentionally challenged the status quo (Baldessari). In this case, with the context offered, Baldessari knows the rules, and he isn’t a bad photographer; he is breaking the rules with style through careful consideration of composition, camera settings, and presentation. It shows that he knows ideas regarding alignment, balanced compositions, and lighting, but chose to reject them (Baldessari). Considering Baldessari’s vow “I will not make any more boring art”, the context adds value to the artwork (Bonjour Supermarché). Based on this, we can understand that Baldessari was actively challenging the arts scene; perhaps all the people around him were too stringent on following the ‘rules of photography’ that their photographs were not inventive, did not challenge the status quo, and seemed ‘boring’. This makes the photograph so much more captivating, thematically interesting, and impactful.

However, the audience would only be able to appreciate the ingenuity of the thought process with the context in place. Without context, we would easily misunderstand; we would think that Marcel Duchamp was crazy and that we are better at taking photos than John Baldessari.

Works Cited