New York is an immense city. It’s the so-called “city that never sleeps” – and that’s my favorite nickname for it. We went there for a 14-days trip, and that still wasn’t enough. Considering that at the beginning I was planning for only 10 days there, I’m happy that Giuditta convinced me to add more days and that we had the chance to spend the most time possible in such a wonderful and multi-faceted city.
“Over the great bridge, with sunlight through the girders making a constant flicker upon the moving cars, with the city rising up across the river in white heaps and sugar lumps all built with a wish out of non-olfactory money. The city seen for the first time, in its first wild promise of all the mystery and the beauty in the world.”
F. Scott Fitzgerald, ‘The Great Gatsby’
Our attempt was to visit what is usually less known of it. And that is what I always tend to do while travelling: enjoying the voyage in a way that befits more the inhabitant than the tourist. And I believe that in New York even those that have lived there for decades can still be amazed and surprised by something new, every now and then – so it was easier than expected. First of all we did not settle to only visit Manhattan, and maybe just briefly set foot into Brooklyn for the sake of claiming to have visited the ‘real New York’: we got deep into almost all of the city’s districts, and decided to find an airbnb in Williamsburg (i.e. Brooklyn).
Our daily schedule was mostly divided in areas, and we tried to explore all of each the day we had planned to fully dedicate to it. Some did cross one another, and few spots did make us fall in love so much that we returned there more than once – yet we are happy to have explored the most out of this city.
Such constant exploration of a place leads to encountering the most different of people, yet the less flashy ones tend to go easily unnoticed. Something I always try to do is to keep looking for people to take pictures of – to spot those that are not as noticeable as the ones all people take pictures of or stare at, but that can still provide an insight on the place one visits. It is a matter of searching for them, as it is a matter of perception and interpretation – even more when taking pictures of people.
I find it more interesting to catch a glimpse of an unusual ‘perspective’ on people – both visually and conceptually – than just portraying an unusual person, whose appearance often is the result of a purposeful set-up. The most amusing situations usually occur in the midst of everyday life, and they seldom shine bright among all the other events happening in that same moment. They do not have an inherent value. They can become the medium for the photographer’s ‘vision’, or attempted such.
Having Giuditta with me during the trip helped me to explore new areas and approach this trip as if it was my first in New York. I’ve been there a couple of times before – once with my parents, twice by myself during summer school abroad and once again for a business trip. Having visited it in a younger age when the involvement-meter is how a thing, a view or a place are new and wonderful, I easily got accostumed to it. That did not happen with cities or places I visited by myself in adulthood: I just slow down and live them more and more as if I were one of their inhabitant, but they tend to always remain interesting. Giuditta helped me get this sensation back for NYC.
As always I tried to ‘get in touch’ with the locals, and it was the easiest there than in other travels – both because of their chilled out attitude, and mostly the fact that it is an english speaking country. It is always fun, for how embarassing it can also be. If I should find a reason to do this other than because it helps taking more involved pictures, it would be that it forces you to exit one’s safe zone – excuse me for the cliché.
Nonetheless, breaking through one’s misconceptions and conceits can be helpful. I once heard a friend saying that he never takes pictures of scenes that he wants to remember: as soon as he takes a picture of it, he won’t remember it and entrust the record to his memory. I do not fully agree with his claim – nor I would ever willingly avoid taking a picture, as I consider that the picture and the memory will have inherent differences – yet I do have the some idea that some pictures will always fail at providing the same level of intensity. Unmemorable pictures of memorable moments. That might be because of the affection over-riding the memory, mixed with the fleble artistic resulting value of specific pictures. However I do not believe that meaningful personal moments cannot become great pictures: many great artists proved they can (e.g. Araki Nobuyoshi’s Sentimental Journey).
While defending the dignity of average/bad pictures that are important because they hold an emotional value, there also are some that hold a chronical value. I do not believe to have any photo that could fully claim the latter, but I always try to aim at such a similar result. A hidden niche that is seldom captured. The end pictures might not be great, but the process always proves to be stimulating – and in the meanwhile I enjoyed exploring the city, and this is most true for Brooklyn: well-known for it low profile and high liveability, it fits the non-flashy-yet-not-boring chart.
None of what I wrote implies that I do not try to find something interesting in the extremely blunt and common examples of daily life. Those that are instagram materials, but I try to avoid preconceptions and judge the value of the picture afterwards.
This is much more true considering that when someone or something is framed into a picture, hardly ever is alone in it. What gives means of interpretation to the viewer also are the surroundings, what the portrait of a person has in the background, what happens in the corners of the image. Therefore, even those subjects that have been captured on a photograph thousands of times the same way, can be different with an unusual or infrequent context. It becomes unexpected. The viewer conceives a relationship between them, far from what would be expected for each of them alone.
Such assumption is true as long as the results is not confusing or messy. In theory that would happen – and testing theories, experimenting is my main motivation in photography. Approaching photography every day as if it is a new hobby makes it fun, and that sure is the easiest and most pleasing way to spend time doing something. And the hope is that, once back at home, I can feel that same joy.
Pictures of everyday life are the ones I feel more heart-warming. They are not unusual, yet usually are overlooked: such photographs are my personal attempt to document something I still fail to fully determine, and to express my own vision over things.
Having a ‘sweet tooth’ for street photography and portraits, I tend to always have people or human-made things at the center of my pictures – and people always hide something. Their actions, their stares can fail them and reveal who they truly are – for better or worse, although being a romantic I believe that most people hide their true kinder selves behind hard shells out of self-protection.
My hope always is to find that inner sentiment peeking out, when back home and printing the pictures in the darkroom. In the red hue, surrounded by darkness and chemical agents, every picture I choose to print is a chance to meet those expectations – and any ‘good’ result is a great source of memories and ceaseless sensations.
Thanks to Giuditta Fullone for reviewing this article.
All the images included in this article were shot on Ilford HP5 film (@400, or pushed @1600) on a Leica M6 or a Nikon AF600, home-developed and home-printed in my bathroom/darkroom, and then scanned.