James Comstock 2 of 3

20 Questions with James Comstock

Philip Stienman: Your 3D show is a like a museum exhibition of macro photography, but I was just wondering if you could have a non-macro image within a macro show? What would it be? What I'm really asking is how do you decide what to edit out of your shows (besides sub-par photos)? And what photo do you hesitatingly leave in, only to find out in front of your audience that it really works?: James Comstock: Well, the 'focus' of this show (Orchids and other Floral Wonders) is to share this particular perspective on flowers. To put them 'in a light' that highlights their beauty on a very intimate level, not to explore their beauty in their natural environment or as an element in a larger landscape. Likewise, if I was trying to show an intimate moment between a mother and child, I would not have them seated 100 yards from me on the top row of a football bleacher. There are so many ways to photograph flowers; as many ways as people view them. Hopefully, this way helps people see them as more than colored blobs in the yard. And hopefully, that might get people to look closer at other things in life. And ultimately, just to look at all, which some people don't do very well. That is one of the uses of photography and art. I've done 3-D flower shows for different groups, and the shots I use change for each group. What I say changes as well. I've done shows for orchid people, for plants-in-general people, for photographers, for 3-D photographers, and just everyday people. They all seem to like it. And they all get something different from it, but something the same. It's fun to hear their responses.
On to Burning Man. Here you can't control these events/experiences in the same way you do your studio work with flowers? Is that why you like that so much?: Sure, spontaneity is one of the most alluring qualities of Burning Man. It's exciting to see what the happenings around you inspire you to do; when they do; when you're both in tune. I love photographing people, especially people being creative and having fun. I can do candid stuff where they're not aware of me. Or I can interact with them and make photography part of the event. And that's just the beginning.
You were able to immerse yourself in the Burning Man experience, yet retain a distant dry witty anti-anthropological tone to your narration of the photographs that seems to bring the common person closer to the humor of the event. How did this come about?: Yes. You have to be part of it to really photograph it. But balanced with an occasional detachment. And like much of the event, there is a strong sense of tongue-in-check. The attitude of the narration was something I wrestled with for a long time. I just couldn't do a 'straight' whatever; I don't know what that would be. It would seem so pretentious. Where would I begin. It's so vast, the event and the experience. And then, as I've said, I was doing all kinds of different photography; photo-journalism, portrait, humorous, political, philosophical, still life, interactive, landscape, documentary, abstract-experimental. All this reflects the event itself. Of course, I'm not thinking this as I'm shooting. I just shoot how I'm moved to shoot at the moment. But then you end up with a wide variety of shots. To give a straight description or explanation or whatever of each shot seemed unimaginable to me. So I did this parody of an anthropological study (I wouldn't call it anti-anthropological) which was obviously ridiculous but also obviously intentionally ridiculous. This had the effect, I hope, of emphasizing some quality in the image by pointing out its opposite. This way, I could make a comment about some aspect of the shot, on something other than an intellectual level. This technique lets the audience realize in his own head what's going on, rather than me telling them directly. It draws them in, hopefully.
I think this was very successful in bringing together that part of the audience that wouldn't go near the Burning Man experience themselves as well as those who now want to go after seeing your work. What is it about Burning Man that repels us and attracts us at the same time?: Repelled, huh? Well, you may be asking the wrong person because I've been attracted to Burning Man from the moment I heard about it ten years ago, driving all by myself 14 hours into the middle of nowhere, when all my friends thought I was crazy. I don't know that I've recognized that people are repelled by it. I have seen people intimidated by it to the point where they have to find all kinds of rationalizations so they can handle it. I don't blame them. It is an intense experience. I think my show paints a very creative, free event. But my show is a real distillation with many things left out. I don't recommend Burning Man to many people. I even hesitate to show the slides because I think it gives just a side of what it is; I show what I like about it. I like the creative abundance and freedom. It is stimulating intellectually, emotionally, sexually, spiritually, artistically, humorously, politically. There is great diversity there. All this is exciting. But many people are intimidated by it. As I've said, I've only recommended a few of my friends to go. I don't think most people would really appreciate it. This kind of release is totally foreign, if not deliberately suppressed in many people.
Have you presented your 3D shows to non-3D crowds? How do they respond (and will they come to SCSC exhibitions)?: Yes, as I've described earlier. I've done two shows at the Huntington Library, one at the L.A. Arboretum, one at the Atoni (sp?) Hotel for an Orchid conference, and one in South Africa at a Clivia (another plant) conference. I'm doing one in June for another orchid group. And I was asked to do one in New York for a World Orchid Conference.

<<<previous

next>>>