Thierry Maindrault’s Monthly Cogitations
Few things annoy me more than that little (often illustrated) business card, which bears the words “artist photographer,” sometimes larger or bolder than the person’s own name. This term has become so overused over the past five decades that many daubers, string-strumming artists, and other smartphone tinkerers arrogate it to themselves, as if by right, to stick it on their foreheads. With the advent of digital design, the tale becomes reality for the ego of every manipulator: “…oh! tell me, mirror, am I still the greatest artist in history…” Close the ban!
Those who can claim the title of Artist, even if they have often become anonymous, have left lasting traces in the evolution of our humanity. A trace is noted by a work (or a set of works) that fixes knowledge, an evolution, a feeling or a thought at a moment that can be transferred in space and time. Concretely, the qualification of Artist is born when the creations of an author fall into the public domain with their appropriation by future generations.
My second, more lighthearted observation is that the term artist was, until the about-face of a few decades ago, more pejorative when associated with a contemporary person. The term artist was rather frowned upon in society; it was the eccentric, the bohemian, the unstable, the acrobat, the unsociable, the marginal, the carefree; in short, nothing very glamorous. I’m not sure all these synonyms have become false, except that for many reasons (some people’s financial motives hold sway) the self-described “artists” all imagine themselves at the pinnacle and indispensable for the survival of others. Most of these self-proclaimed geniuses are incapable of producing any work of interest, any original creative work. This is how all the activities of these “imaginatives” and other artisans are displayed under the label of artists in a discipline of their choice.
But let’s focus on our photographic universe, accompanied by its myriads of new photographic artists. A few cultural do-gooders proclaim them emerging while forgetting to offer the lifelines (normal, you have to ensure rotation in the business). In any case, these new arrivals, often convinced, in their speeches (often more numerous than their photographs), of being stars (that’s the fashionable term) without daring – yet – to mention it under their works. It is true that for the “me”, it is easier to obtain the flattery of blissful ‘followers’ than to wait several years of purgatory, after having left this world, to boast of an improbable public finally in admiration of your images. However, make no mistake, for photography, as for other sensory disciplines, the essential is found in the works that will transmit and not in the behavior, in society, of a creator however gifted he may be.
I do not in any way wish to advocate modesty, neither that which stifles nor that which is false. But, for pity’s sake, a minimum of humility, like that displayed by our predecessors, those who have now become great artists of the image. This is not likely to cause the slightest harm to anyone. The fertility of your imagination, combined with rigorous work and your curious reflections, are the true foundations for obtaining, one distant day, the qualification of artist associated with your name. The sincerity of your images, the understanding of the work of your former colleagues, the subtle play of the permanent evolution of technologies, the futuristic translation of your convictions in the evolution of perceptions, the forgetting of the superficial phenomena of the ephemeral formalism of fashions, the respectful and understanding exchange with your living or static models, are essential in the non-exhaustive list. The latter remains essential to discover the magic of a true communication, outside the time scale.
So, the existential cry of your “self” is imbued in the body of your images, and it doesn’t matter if they are not immediately understandable on the friendly social networks. Never confuse a fleeting flattery with a trace inscribed for evolution. How many of these masters we adore have gone through their lives in the near indifference of their contemporaries.
I am not fooled that all young authors are being roped into a world that some are trying to make turn faster. I note that financial interests are based on quantitative masses while forgetting the foundations of thought. I am amused by these parents eager for recognition who, in exchange for a camera entrusted prematurely, hope in return to see their offspring assimilated to a Vinci of photography. I concede that the daily reality for a talented photographer (especially a young one) is hardly easier than that experienced by many artists from centuries past. I argue that the commonplace (or even encouraged) plundering of photographs that have been lost (sometimes against the will of their creator) to the digital abyss does not motivate dedication to the work.
Never mind this beautiful obstacle course. Photography, like all creative activities, is not dead. Far from it! Provided there is a passion to dare, against all odds, the path is still there to allow the laying of creative milestones that can be transformed into benchmarks in the future. It is one of all those creative paths that lead to the birth of works of art. So, forget (young and old) calling yourselves artists. It’s already noble enough to be recognized as a photographer (if you know how to take pictures, of course). Then, after producing a number of notable (possibly remarkable) works, a little extra credit as a creator, storyteller, fabulist, designer, etc. could position you in the world of photographic imagery. Wouldn’t that be more appealing and less presumptuous?
Thierry Maindrault, March 14, 2025
your comments about this chronicle and its photography are always welcome at [email protected]
