I wrote my first biography/artistic statement about a year after taking up photography. It was for my first exhibited work. Anyone who has a website, photography published or exhibited will likely have had to pen one of these. It was a real struggle the first time I wrote mine. Should it be in first or third person? Do I list everything I’ve ever had published or been awarded? Or is that tooting my own horn too loudly? Some people avoid talking about personal achievement altogether, preferring to discuss their inspiration, what moves them or key events that lead them into the world of photography – the words of Patrick di Fruscia and Michael Anderson come to mind.

Why is this on my mind? I’ve had to do three bios over the last couple of months, and I can’t say that it’s my favourite pastime. Just today I’ve uploaded the latest incarnation onto the new Timecatcher blog. My approach is rather vanilla flavoured : a brief statement about how I got into photography, what inspires me and a selected listing of some achievements. I prefer to avoid making flowery descriptions of my own work and style as that should be left to the viewer. Chest-beating biographies also leave me with a negative impression. One of the best examples I’ve seen is : “He is often described as the most important landscape photographer alive—a distinction the artist sidesteps earnestly, detached from such conventions.”

The best thing about getting all this practice, tiptoeing the tightrope between modesty and shameless self-aggrandizing, is that it becomes easier each time. Perhaps that may have something to do with the shrinking length of my biography every time it is re-written. I think Darwin Wiggett has perfected the art of the compact bio to a T. Something that I have observed is that the more accomplished the photographer, the less they say about themselves. Perhaps the ultimate goal would be to be able to leave a bio blank, similar to those movie stars who have uncredited cameos

Tags

See All Tags (2)