January 14, 1998

"A Year in the Life"

Much of last week was spent at our newspaper going through clips and tearsheets for the annual New York Press Association contest. As tedious a job as this is, even with the potential of winning a few awards, it's a good way to evaluate a year's worth of work.

In going through tearsheets I was somewhat taken aback by my overall feeling of indifference. I was happy on a weekly basis with what I turned in. And I was thrilled at the time with certain photographs. I had some nice dance photos, some great portraits and features, lots of nice layouts, a few nice sports shots. I had little news. Riverdale(a middle to upper middle class neighborhood in the Bronx) must have the highest car theft rate in the nation and the local precinct has a problem catching the car thieves so it's not exactly a spot news photo opportunity if the local po's can't even catch them. But taken as a whole, the sum total of my work amounted to lots of features.

There's nothing really wrong with feature photography. It's a mainstay of community journalism, along with coverage of local issues. My photo layouts generally amounted to a page of either pictures from a dance performance, or an event that merited multiple pics. There were no in depth picture stories, which shouldn't surprise me because that's not been something the paper has pursued. With the varying perceptions of the meaning of photojournalism v. newspaper photography v. portrait photography v. feature photography, I suppose I fit neatly into the latter two categories, which is bothersome because I would like to think I'm capable of working on an in depth project, not one in which there's only an hour or less to get a picture.

So, the question is: what constitutes good journalism? Is it defined by the needs of the editors and publisher's bottom line or is it defined simply by good images. I was satisfied with my images, but not as a barometer of what is going on beneath the surface. I don't think they adequately reflect the pulse of our community; a moment in a day in the life, perhaps, but as a mirror of what people's lives are about? Probably not.

I have always been a bit defensive about my work. I feel that images such as portraits and features, if they are strong, share an important place in newspaper photography, just as pictures of news and sporting events visually tell what is happening on a different level. The difference is only in subject matter. The perception among photographers seems to be that the only good photography is documentary photography---and sports. Community newspapers rarely spend its resources on long term photographic projects. What's new in News, Sports, Police Beat, Sports and our "Better Living" section have to get covered every week. (Now I'm sounding like the publisher!) There's little room for in depth coverage, or multiple pages of a picture/story package of an AIDS or cancer victim. But there has to be some middle ground where photographers can pursue a meaningful, in depth project while publishers commit time and space for issues not normally dealt with in "one week's work."

Once upon a time, I was the queen of the features, kids on swings, sliding ponds, monkey bars...Cute kids still abound on our front pages, although I've made it a personal mandate to stay away from parks, unless I'm desperate. Until I stopped doing them, I didn't get better at doing anything else.

While I would like to delve into meatier issues than, for example, the annual First baby of the year, Queen Esther and Easter bunny pictures, Christmas tree and Chanukah lightings, our readers, I am told, don't want to go there. I suspect that it's more a question of taking the path of least resistance.

My hope for 1998 is an ability to come to terms with what role photography plays in my life. It's certainly not peripheral. As a mother with two teenagers, I probably spend more time making pictures than I do cooking. Motherhood is a precarious balance between the mundane and the magnificent. So too, I suspect, is photography.

At issue here besides the substantive realities of content and space constraints (editorial still rules!), is a financial concern. I am grateful for the opportunities I've had to hone my photographic skills. What I am unhappy about is the return on my professionalism, my abilities, my willingness to "go the distance" in a profession which I love but consider to be almost a "hobby" in terms of financial remuneration.

Measured solely in terms of emotional satisfaction, there's no question but that photography ranks high and supplies ample opportunities to connect with other human beings, learning about their stories, even if it's only a momentary glimpse into their lives. What is photojournalism, if not a chronicling of events and people that shape our communities in front of and behind the scenes.

For now, though, I must decide how to incorporate my desire to make meaningful pictures with the reality of making money, not as a means to finance more photographic equipment, but as a means to contribute to the financial well being of my family.

Susan B. Markisz

January 14, 1998