Loving Moments

Via The Albuquerque Journal

February 23, 2024

By Logan Royce Beitmen Journal Staff Writer 

Monroe Gallery of Photography presents Grey Villet’s tender images of the couple who legalized interracial love

Sixty years ago, Life Magazine photographer Grey Villet photographed Richard and Mildred Loving, an interracial married couple who had been arrested and convicted under Virginia’s anti-miscegenation laws. The Lovings were eventually vindicated in 1967 by the U.S. Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia, a landmark civil rights decision that legalized interracial marriage and paved the way for same-sex marriage decades later. 

But in 1965, when Villet photographed them, the Lovings were still weary from their yearslong legal battle and publicity-shy due to threats of lynching. 

Villet’s photographs of the couple, on view at the Monroe Gallery of Photography in Santa Fe through April 13, show them engaged in everyday domestic activities. As the late photographer’s wife, Barbara Villet, wrote in a New York Times essay, these photographs humanized the Lovings and showed that they were “a quintessentially ordinary couple extraordinarily in love with each other.” 

“Emotional content always mattered most to Grey in his work and pursuit of images ‘as real as real could get.’ It’s what gives his take on the Loving family its intimacy and strength,” she wrote. “Unlike many other celebrated photographers, he avoided posing his subjects, refused to manipulate the action and simply waited patiently for telling moments to emerge, in the belief that reality would supply more truth than any imposition of his own ego.” Villet was famous for his spending many days with his subjects and shooting only with available light and a hand-held long lens, which allowed him to disappear into the background. Even the Lovings, who were quiet, private people, felt comfortable enough in his presence to reveal their intimate lives.

In addition to challenging racist ideas, Villet’s photographs of the Lovings challenged notions of gender and class, as well.

In some of his photographs, including one where Mildred is mending Richard’s shirt button and one where Richard is reclining with his head in her lap, Mildred is positioned higher in the frame than her husband, whereas in most art directed photographs and films of that era, women were traditionally positioned lower. Villet’s authentic slice-of-life images subverted the prevailing gender hierarchy. 

His tender images also challenge stereotypes about working-class masculinity. As Barbara Villet wrote in the Times essay, her husband’s portraits of Richard Loving, in particular, revealed “the face of a laborer who, despite the macho exterior, is a sensitive man.” 

Monroe Gallery’s “Loving” gives viewers the opportunity to reflect on this unlikely, history-making couple 60 years after Villet first photographed them.

‘LOVING’ By Grey Villet 

WHEN: 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. daily; through April 13 

WHERE: Monroe Gallery of Photography, 112 Don Gaspar Ave., Santa Fe 

HOW MUCH: Free, monroegallery.com

“The press and all people in the United States have the right to choose their own words and not be retaliated against by the government”

 Via Associated Press

February 21, 2025

The Associated Press sued three Trump administration officials Friday over access to presidential events, citing freedom of speech in asking a federal judge to stop the 10-day blocking of its journalists.

The lawsuit was filed Friday afternoon in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.

The AP says its case is about an unconstitutional effort by the White House to control speech — in this case refusing to change its style from the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America,” as President Donald Trump did last month with an executive order.

“The press and all people in the United States have the right to choose their own words and not be retaliated against by the government,” the AP said in its lawsuit, which names White House Chief of Staff Susan Wiles, Deputy Chief of Staff Taylor Budowich and Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt.

“This targeted attack on the AP’s editorial independence and ability to gather and report the news strikes at the very core of the First Amendment,” the news agency said. “This court should remedy it immediately.”

In stopping the AP from attending press events at the White House and Mar-a-Lago, or flying on Air Force One in the agency’s customary spot, the Trump team directly cited the AP’s decision not to fully follow the president’s renaming.

“We’re going to keep them out until such time as they agree that it’s the Gulf of America,” Trump said Tuesday.

This week, about 40 news organizations signed onto a letter organized by the White House Correspondents Association, urging the White House to reverse its policy against the AP.

Letter from FIRE, NCAC, and ACLU of Texas to Fort Worth Police Department, February 19, 2025 Regarding Seized Sally Mann Photos

 Via Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression

February 19, 2025

Dear Chief Noakes:

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), the National Coalition Against
Censorship (NCAC), and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Texas are deeply
concerned by the Fort Worth Police Department’s unconstitutional seizure and investigation
of artist Sally Mann’s photographs, which were on view at the Modern Art Museum of Fort
Worth.1 While some may find the images inappropriate, that does not strip them of the First
Amendment protection afforded to artistic expression. We therefore call on the Fort Worth
Police Department to uphold its binding obligations to defend the Constitution by ceasing its
investigation and returning the photographs.

--Click for full letter

AP reporter and photographer barred from Air Force One over ‘Gulf of Mexico’ terminology dispute

 Via Associated Press

February 14, 2025

The White House barred a credentialed Associated Press reporter and photographer from boarding the presidential airplane Friday for a weekend trip with Donald Trump, saying the news agency’s stance on how to refer to the Gulf of Mexico was to blame for the exclusion. It represented a significant escalation by the White House in a four-day dispute with the AP over access to the presidency.

The administration has blocked the AP from covering a handful of events at the White House this week, including a news conference with India’s leader and several times in the Oval Office. It’s all because the news outlet has not followed Trump’s lead in renaming the body of water, which lies partially outside U.S. territory, to the “Gulf of America.”

AP reporters and photographers travel with the president virtually everywhere as part of a press “pool” and have for decades. AP journalism serves millions of readers and thousands of news outlets around the world.

Journalists consider the administration’s move a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment — a governmental attempt to dictate what a news company publishes under threat of retribution. The Trump administration says the AP has no special right of access to events where space is limited, particularly given the news service’s “commitment to misinformation.”

AP calls that assertion entirely untrue.

“Freedom of speech is a pillar of American democracy and a core value of the American people. The White House has said it supports these principles,” AP spokeswoman Lauren Easton said Friday night. “The actions taken to restrict AP’s coverage of presidential events because of how we refer to a geographic location chip away at this important right enshrined in the U.S. Constitution for all Americans.”

The body of water in question has been called the Gulf of Mexico for hundreds of years. AP, whose influential stylebook is used by news outlets as an arbiter of language and usage, advised that because of its broad set of global customers, it would both refer to the body of water as the Gulf of Mexico and also reference Trump’s order changing the name to the Gulf of America within the United States.

At the same time, the AP switched style last month from Denali to Mount McKinley for the mountain in Alaska that Trump ordered renamed. That location lies entirely within U.S. jurisdiction.

Taylor Budowich, White House deputy chief of staff, said in a post to X Friday — one that was later released as a White House statement — that the AP “continues to ignore the lawful geographic name change of the Gulf of America. This decision is not just divisive, but it also exposes The Associated Press’ commitment to misinformation.”

While the First Amendment protects the AP’s “right to irresponsible and dishonest reporting,” it doesn’t ensure unfettered access to limited spaces like the Oval Office and Air Force One, Budowich said. He said AP would retain its credentials to the White House complex overall.

On Friday, an AP reporter and photographer had traveled to Joint Base Andrews for their participation in the traveling press pool to Trump’s Florida residence. But, after clearing security, neither was allowed to board Air Force One, a decision they were told was “outlet-specific.” Meanwhile, reporters in the press pool who were permitted on the plane sent the AP journalists pictures of cards with their names saying “welcome aboard” on their empty seats.

Other news organizations, like The New York Times and Washington Post, have also said they would primarily use Gulf of Mexico. Fox News said that it was switching to Gulf of America.

The White House Correspondents Association has issued statements condemning the action against AP. Although there are talks going on behind the scenes, individual news outlets have been relatively quiet.

The Times, through spokesman Charles Stadtlander, said on Friday that “we stand by The Associated Press in condemning repeated acts of retribution by this administration for editorial decisions it disagrees with. Any move to limit access or impede reporters doing their jobs is at odds with the press freedoms enshrined in the Constitution.”

In a statement, the Washington Post said that the AP’s “access to the administration is central for all journalistic organizations, including The Washington Post, in serving millions of Americans with fact-based, independent journalism each day.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, who on Wednesday used the word “lies” in describing AP content, posted on X Friday afternoon about executive orders Trump had signed before his departure. She ended her post: “The @AP was not invited.”

Update February 15, 2025

As watchdogs, journalists deserve protection

 The Santa Fe New Mexican

February 11, 2025

A bill designed to offer greater protection to journalists — however they do their reporting — will get its first hearing Tuesday in the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee.

Sponsored by Rep. Sarah Silva, D-Las Cruces, House Bill 153, or the Protect Reporters from Exploitative State Spying Act, proposes an update to New Mexico’s current shield law to cover the many ways reporters operate today. House Speaker Javier Martínez and Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth are co-sponsoring the legislation.

A shield law is designed to protect journalists’ sources and communications, important in a world where powerful forces seek to intimidate reporters and stop them from doing their jobs.

The role of journalism — which has been part of The Santa Fe New Mexican’s 175-year legacy — is to be the public’s watchdog, to pay attention to accountability stories on behalf of the public. Shield laws effectively are in the public’s behalf.

Importantly, the legislation expands the definition of what a journalist is, taking into account how reporting takes place today.

A journalist might be a reporter for an established newspaper, a TV or radio station, a podcaster, an online news site, or an independent citizen covering the local school board in small-town New Mexico. These journalists deserve protection, a sentiment approved by the New Mexico Press Association, which voted to support this legislation Monday.

The communications of journalists also deserve to be kept confidential, so Silva’s bill would shield emails, for example, from state snooping. It is a comprehensive piece of legislation, put together after much research and consultation with experts.

Silva’s bill is similar to federal legislation that died in Congress in 2024, the federal PRESS Act. That law was modeled after regulations put in place by the U.S. Department of Justice under former President Joe Biden. Then-President-elect Donald Trump, however, told congressional Republicans to stop the federal PRESS Act. That leaves it to states to offer protections to reporters.

According to attorney Charles K. Purcell, New Mexico has had a law concerning a reporter’s privilege on the books, with an updated statute adopted in 1973. Purcell is an expert on the shield law in New Mexico and worked with Silva on drafting this legislation.

The New Mexico Supreme Court held the current law unconstitutional to the extent it regulated procedures in state court with its own rule of evidence. The current shield law and Silva’s legislation only will apply to proceedings in the legislative and executive branches.

Should there be an impeachment hearing in the House of Representatives, for example, a reporter’s notes naming a source could not become fodder in the proceedings. Similarly, attempts by agencies under the governor’s purview would be stymied if they targeted whistleblowers.

Despite ruling that the shield law does not apply to court proceedings, the New Mexico Supreme Court does have its own press shield rule, adopted in 1982. Journalists’ sources are protected in local and state courts — and Silva is in conversations with the Supreme Court to update that rule.

In a national atmosphere where journalists remain under attack by everyone from the president on down, ensuring reporters can work without fear of reprisal is important.

As Silva pointed out when she announced her legislation: “We see examples at the federal level of government chipping away at journalists’ ability to do their jobs by pursuing the identities of unnamed sources and deterring whistleblowing.

The integrity of unnamed sources is critical to journalists fulfilling their role as watchdogs in our society. I want to ensure New Mexico safeguards the integrity of journalism.”

A Field for Ghosts: American Photography at Rijksmuseum

Via FAD Magazine

February 10, 2025 

"A step through the gallery doors reveals the first of many rooms that archive, dissect, and tinker with the values and experiences of American culture. The themes are immediately apparent. Domestic strife, racial politics, the suppression of queer identities, sexuality, ecology, and individuality; each of these ideas finds its example, its case. Whether considering the dual personalities in Robert Mapplethorpe’s self-portraits, the interweaving of indigenous art practices with modern photography in Sarah Sense’s work Hinushi 18, or the few surviving artefacts of the country’s abandoned towns in Bryan Schutmaat’s landscapes, the overall impression resounds. America is a nation at war with itself. Conflict, reflected in the photography, regarded as an essential component of the modern experience of life in the USA.

The results of these battles are morbid and cruel. One photograph, from Nina Berman’s collection Marine Wedding, depicts the marriage of a disfigured soldier sent to fight in one of the American governments many international warzones. Described simply by the accompanying placard, the viewer is informed that the marriage broke up, and that soldier had died from alcohol and morphine overdose since. Likewise, the piercing work of Nan Goldin chronicles her experiences with domestic violence and the AIDS crisis as it ravaged New York. In Cookie and Vittorio’s wedding, New York City 1986, Cookie Mueller, featured in another depiction of a wedding, walks the aisle with her soon-to-be husband, though anyone who knows the story will understand how tragic this became after the fact, as they both died shortly afterward."

--Full article here

American Photography, 7th February to 9th June 2025, Rijksmuseum

Opening Reception | Reclaiming Red at Northlight Gallery

Via Northlight Gallery/Arizona State University

Colors hold symbolism and meanings already established by Western societies. However, for Native and Indigenous people, the symbolisms are diverse and hold different meanings. The color red carries great significance for Indigenous and Native communities. It is a sacred color used to describe our origin stories, sacred land, and blessings of fire for warmth, cooking, and protection. Reclaiming Red explores the colonial implications of the color red and demonstrates how Indigenous people use it for healing, peace, sacredness, unity, and Hózhó (a Diné Bizaad word for balance and harmony). 

Participating artists: Tedra Begay (Diné), Jaida Grey Eagle (Oglala Lakota), Tailyr Irvine (Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes), Cara Romero (Chemehuevi), Eugene Tapahe (Diné), and Maya Tinhitiyas Attean, (Wabanaki, Penobscot Nation). 

Curated by Erin Tapahe (Diné)

Exhibition Dates: Jan. 24–Feb. 22

Reception: Friday, Feb.7, 6 p.m.–8 p.m. 

Gallery Hours: Thursday–Saturday, noon–5 p.m. and every first and third Friday 6 p.m.–9 p.m. 

more info here

"I Photographed January 6. Trump’s Pardons Can’t Erase What I Saw." --Gallery Photographer Nate Gowdy

Via Columbia Journalism Review

February 4, 2025

Reflections from an independent photojournalist.

5:07:45 PM, January 6, 2021, US Capitol, Washington, DC

America loves to rebrand its sins as myth. In four years, MAGA loyalists have recast the January 6 insurrection as resurrection. (All photos by Nate Gowdy)

February 4, 2025

By Nate Gowdy

"This is why I document: America loves to rebrand its sins as myth. In four years, MAGA loyalists have rewritten January 6 from every angle. Rioters have been framed as leftists in disguise, police as “crisis actors,” the attack an FBI setup—or, more outrageously, citizens on a “normal tourist visit.” By 2025, revisionism is big business. Conservative media churns out books, podcasts, and stump speeches recasting insurrection as resurrection. But my images tell another story: they depict a nation in fracture, where well-meaning neighbors and dutiful relatives cling to their “Big Lie” with an unwavering sincerity that doesn’t just reject facts—it inoculates against them, leaving everyone vulnerable to propaganda and less capable of critical thought." 

Full article here:  I Photographed January 6. Trump’s Pardons Can’t Erase What I Saw. - Columbia Journalism Review

Artists behind Montgomery MAGA Bloody Sunday billboard: Removal a ‘clear act of censorship’

 

Via ARTnews

"We are dismayed but not surprised by the removal of this artwork,” Gottesman said in a statement to ARTnews. “This clear act of censorship underscores the urgency of For Freedoms’ mission to promote free speech and creative expression. One of our missions is to be visionary, not reactionary. This work was created nine years ago, in collaboration with artist Spider Martin, and juxtaposes his historic image with a political slogan that we hope will spark conversation, reflection and deeper thinking.

“We can disagree and dislike what others say but still support their rights to express it,” Gottesman continued. “Part of what makes America great is the freedom to express ourselves, we see this censorship as antithetical to this core freedom and to our mission as an organization.”

The billboard featured a Spider Martin photograph of state troopers staring down Black protestors during a legendary 1965 demonstration in Selma known as Bloody Sunday, during which police officers violently confronted those in attendance. Over that picture, For Freedoms placed text reading MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, a reference to a slogan associated with President Donald Trump."

Via AL.com Alabama

Artists behind Montgomery MAGA Bloody Sunday billboard: Removal a ‘clear act of censorship’

Grieve The Loss Of Local Newspapers During Photojournalism Exhibition At Milwaukee Art Museum

 

Via Forbes

January 30, 2025

Grieve The Loss Of Local Newspapers During Photojournalism Exhibition At Milwaukee Art Museum

"Between 2005 and 2023, more than 2,200 weekly newspapers have shuttered, dropping from nearly 9,000 to roughly 6,000 according to research conducted at Northwestern University. Imagine if the same statistic held true for hospitals. Newspapers care for the health of American democracy as surely as hospitals do its physical health....

Worse still, at the same time, 43,000 newspaper journalist jobs have been eliminated, nearly two-thirds! Imagine any other industry critical to American society, the American way of life, and American democracy losing two thirds of its workers in less than 20 years. There’d be congressional hearings. The president would address the nation with a bold plan to reverse the trend...

Why are politicians and the public not crying over these job losses? Because journalists–the good ones–hold the powerful to account. Politicians, corporations, the wealthy. The powerful benefit when newspapers close or reduce coverage. Citizens lose....

An exhibition on view through March 16, 2025, at the Milwaukee Art Museum demonstrates how photographers have understood and wielded the power of images to convey events. Through more than 100 objects, “True Story: Photography, Journalism, and Media,” offers a window into a bygone past of robust, objective, professional news coverage in America focused on the picture makers...

Photographs previously offered incontrovertible proof of what journalists were telling their readers. Thanks to technology, the public can no longer believe its eyes.

Filling the void left by the evisceration of newspapers has been partisan cable news commentators shrieking talking points 24/7/365, masquerading opinion as news, perspective as information, and, increasingly, social media."

True Story: Photography, Journalism, and Media at the Milwaukee Art Museum