Doisneau's "the kiss","kiss by city hall","kiss by hotel de ville" [la

AnCatDubh

Simple question to perhaps consider/discuss: What makes this such a successful photograph?



Photo Credit: Robert Doisneau
Displayed here by: An Ackland Art Museum Exhibit at the University of North Carolina.

Discuss if you will.

Successful. Why?

.Longshanks.

Did I read somewhere that it was staged?
If was, it (IMO) takes away from the supposed magic it has.

AnCatDubh

Longshanks100 wrote: »

Did I read somewhere that it was staged?
If was, it (IMO) takes away from the supposed magic it has.

Yes, I believe there was a court case prior to the death of Doisneau - the two principal subjects were actors and were paid the going rate at the time which meant their case for royalties was struck out. It was staged for a "Life" magazine feature specifically getting couples "kissing" in Paris.

That being said the image has apparently sold more that 2.5million postcards, not to mention every other print including posters, bed linen, shower curtain, coasters, etc..

So albeit staged, it may lose its photographer appeal but the public certainly like it.

Thus why so successful?

ThOnda

"Fell good" factor in the picture. Eroticism and of course there was not such picture before - this one was different at that time and generation learned to see it as a classical picture.

DK32

I like it for everything that is going on in the photo.
Staged or not, the kiss works for me. It's like you get to share a brief moment in time where the kissing couples world pauses while city life continues to unfold around them at it's normal pace.

Covey

Ok I'll lay my cards on the table, I'm a huge Doisneau fan.

Firstly it's an iconic photo, which doesn't necessarily make it good nor bad. It just means it gained great popularity at the time and long thereafter. I suspect if someone posted it today on their blog, people would say it was a good photo, but you wouldn't have Magnum throwing wads of money your way.

The reasons for it becoming such a well know photo are many fold.

Firstly street photography was THE popular genre of the day, where it was a regular feature in newspapers and magazines unlike today where it is rather marginalised and frowned upon, sitting uncomfortably somewhere in a gap between photojournalism and art.

Secondly the subject matter would have been far less common that today, even in Paris,and for that matter alone would have generated more interest than most.

And thirdly of course it's a very uplifting photo in itself in what was a period of great depression after WW2.

Of course the image was staged, though not with models but rather passers by, but I don't think that takes away from it at all. Doisneau apparently saw the image in front of him the day before and didn't have his camera with him. The fact that it's essentially a street photo seems to mitigate against staging such a shot, whereas there were lots of photos before and after that were also staged (probably even Capa's soldier being shot). Don't forget also that Doisneau was on assignment for Life and was probably under pressure to come up with images to get paid. If he could re-enact an image he missed, why not?

I think it's an iconic shot, born of it's time. When a shot gains such popularity and of course Doisneau didn't restrict it to art galleries and the like as others did, it becomes part of the fabric of photography and it's very difficult to unseat such an image as it were.

I don't think it's one of Doisneau's best by any means but it is how most of us came to know him. Maybe something like the Beatles "She Loves You" . It wouldn't get much fame if it were taken yesterday, but then times and context move on.

EDIT : I wasn't aware it was staged with models, sorry about that

thebaz

i like the grain and imperfections that just highlight that moment - the more advanced digital and photoshop become , the more difficult it has become to capture the moment, in my mind - too much technical perfection now

sprinkles

Ah an interesting discussion...... more of these threads please

I do love this photo, staged or not. For me the photo's power is down to a 2 main factors. First is the framing of the shot and secondly is the emotion that is captured and contrasted to the emotionless scene around them. Given that it's staged I would think that he put a lot of thought into the various aspects of the scene so for me it doesn't take away from the photo at all.

The technical aspect;

The subjects are centred, framed by the busy streets, people and cars. Neither facing towards the camera, neither of them apparently aware they are being watched but at the same-time very publicly embracing. The viewpoint is as if he were sitting at a outside a cafe (probably was) amidst the rush of city life - all of which help create a familiarity of the scene to places we know - this for instance could be any cafe in any city.

The movement, albeit slight, of the passers-by reinforce the passion and longevity of the kiss, which is completely frozen.

The emotional aspect;

It's a glimpse of people stopping to take in what is really important in life - not just rushing form A to B. The world around them looks busy and loud yet somehow the photo drowns out all that noise and leaves you with a calm silence, which if anyone has been to Paris will attest, is very rare

The pose also looks as if the man caught the lady off guard, her hand by her side rather than around him and lying almost limp as if she's swept off her feet. Humanity in it's naked form.

As Covey said - add to that it was taken in a time where not much joy was seen on the streets let alone in the media and it's not hard to think why it was embraced by many as a great photo.

magicbastarder

if i remember correctly, an irish chap claimed to be the chap in the background wearing glasses.

NORTH1

My two-pence.

I love the peeking over the shoulder of the person sitting down, spotting a couple kissing. Its like something I would do a couple of times a week, walking down the street and glimps a couple in a intimate moment and smile to myself.
This shot gives that feel good factor imo.

That its staged goes to show the thought that went into the shot.

Ghost Train

Don't think I've seen this before. Do like the way you have this romantic moment, framed by a busy city scene, sort of formal with people going to work. Probably a bit voyeuristic aspect to it, like you shouldn't really be looking

sNarah

Longshanks100 wrote: »

Did I read somewhere that it was staged?
If was, it (IMO) takes away from the supposed magic it has.

Well, it does and it doesn't. Did your mind change just *snap* like that from "Oh that's a magical special moment captured in time" to "staged? fceck that, don't like anymore"?

Well maybe it did, and I fully understand why, alltough it does not make the image less important nor 'pretty'. Most spectators who see the image for the first time will have that iniatial reaction that makes this photo so famous. I heard it was staged as well, though I did believe he actually asked a random couple at that particalur point in time.

ThOnda wrote: »

"Fell good" factor in the picture. Eroticism and of course there was not such picture before - this one was different at that time and generation learned to see it as a classical picture.

Ghost Train wrote: »

Don't think I've seen this before. Do like the way you have this romantic moment, framed by a busy city scene, sort of formal with people going to work. Probably a bit voyeuristic aspect to it, like you shouldn't really be looking

It is a 'pretty' picture. It is recognisable. It portaying an emotion, a moment in time, that people would like to experience themselves.
In a way, it is a snapshot, intruding a special moment between lovers and sharing this moment with the world. Looking in on them, imagining who they are, where they are from, how they feel, ... like Ghost Train said, it is a pure form of voyeurism, but then again - aren't most 'candid snapshots'?

Also, like mentionned above, it was a different era - I strongly believe that , if taken in 2010, the same picture would not have any significance at all.

scr33n

magicbastarder wrote: »

if i remember correctly, an irish chap claimed to be the chap in the background wearing glasses.

true

"The man in the beret striding purposefully behind the couple was Jack Costello, an auctioneer from Dublin, who was on a pilgrimage to Rome when the photograph was taken. It was 1950, a holy year, and he had travelled from his home in Clontarf by motorbike with a neighbour to join in the religious commemorations in Rome – the first and only time he ever travelled abroad. Costello is thought to have been sightseeing alone in Paris when he wandered into Doisneau’s frame. He never lived to enjoy his fame, alas. It wasn’t until the early 1990s that one of his sons spotted his father in a large poster of Le Baiser in a shop window in Dublin."

Irish Times February 13, 2010

Cameraman

scr33n wrote: »

true

"The man in the beret striding purposefully behind the couple was Jack Costello, an auctioneer from Dublin,

Or maybe not

http://colinrandallfrance.blogspot.com/2007_01_01_archive.html

Interesting that there is so much now about the background and context of the picture. Most of it in the last decade or so. When it first appeared, it would have been taken at face value.

charybdis

Calina

I think it's an iconic shot, born of it's time. When a shot gains such popularity and of course Doisneau didn't restrict it to art galleries and the like as others did, it becomes part of the fabric of photography and it's very difficult to unseat such an image as it were.

+1

I don't know if you could take as iconic a photograph now with the ubiquity of cameras to be honest.

scr33n

fitzgooble

The body language.