
Sodom Laurel Album. Photographs,
oral
histories, and text by Rob Amberg. 167
pages, 136 photographs, audio CD. Chapel
Hill: University of North Carolina
Press (in association with the Center
for Documentary Studies), 2002. $45.00
cloth.
Rob Amberg came to
the North
Sodom
Laurel Album is
a good book. It succeeds
quite nicely at much of what documentary
photography does well. Amberg’s
photographs tell us a lot, most of
it well worth knowing, about people whose
lives are unlike our own. His pictures
make us privy to many of the facts of
life in Sodom Laurel—the difficult topography
its residents contend with every
day, the houses they live in, the work
they do, and the relationships they form—in
ways that neither threaten, belittle,
nor stereotype those facts. That’s no
small accomplishment. Nor is there reason
to doubt Amberg’s sensitivity and sincerity.
He became deeply involved with
the Sodom Laurel community over the
years, living and working there for various
periods of time, and this involvement
shows in the easy familiarity of
his pictures. None of the images seems intrusive
or stolen, and even though some of
the photographs are posed (portraits for the
most part), none feels artificial. It’s
evident in
his pictures that he has a deep and
abiding regard for many of the people he
came to know in Sodom Laurel.
Amberg’s
photographs didn’t come by this
relaxed, open quality easily. In the preface
to Sodom
Laurel Album,
he shows that
he’s thought long and hard enough about
documentary photography to understand
some of its shortcomings, especially
the dangers posed by stereotypes—both
building upon already-existing stereotypes
and helping to create new
ones—and photography’s inherent superficiality.
The way in which the book’s pictures
and texts (some of the words are Amberg’s,
others are passages from recorded
oral histories he conducted with Sodom
Laurel residents) supplement one another
is proof of intelligent engagement with
these issues. Sodom
Laurel Album avoids
stereotypes by sometimes surprising us
and occasionally even allowing image and
text to contradict one another, and it achieves
greater depth than many photographic
documentaries by allowing words
and pictures to work together in partnership
rather than having one or the other
dominate. Amberg also writes about how
his understanding of the project grew over
the years, making a slow evolution from
"objective" documentary study to
more subjective personal narrative. Here,
too, Sodom
Laurel Album provides
more food
for thought than many documentaries.
All
these nice things said (and meant), there’s
still something that bothers me about
Sodom
Laurel Album.
I had hoped to dismiss
it as a mere quibble, but it seems to
be demanding more attention than that.
Essentially, my complaint is that the book
seems all too much like what it says it
is—an album.
We learn a lot about various
aspects of life in and around Sodom
Laurel, but not much about the community’s
center—whatever it is that holds
the place and its people together. It’s
difficult to say, in any specific sense, what
the book’s about. Parts of it are devoted
to the life of Dellie Norton, her extended
family, and her small mountain farm.
Other segments focus on her adopted
disabled son Junior (actually a much
younger cousin whose parent "gave"
him to Dellie when he was small); area
musicians and their travels to festivals
in "foreign" places (the price of
purchase
includes an audio CD made by musicians
with ties to the community); Sodom
Laurel’s younger generation(s); public
social events (family reunions, cemetery
clean-ups, and the like); and tobacco
agriculture. This last seems only tangentially
related to Sodom Laurel. Although
a few of the tobacco pictures are
from Dellie Norton’s farm (taken in the
mid-1970s, early on in Amberg’s project),
most come from different times and
places, some of them, apparently, not all
that close to Sodom Laurel. My complaint
is not, however, that Amberg casts
his net too wide; instead, it’s that he
hasn’t
made (or allowed) these disparate groups
of very fine pictures to hang together,
to cohere, as well as they should (and
surely could). Perhaps the fact that the
photographs were all made by the same
person in more or less the same place
is focal point enough, but that places
the center of attention on Amberg and
his pictures rather than on their subjects.
Judging from the self-effacing way
he’s photographed and written about the
people of Sodom Laurel, I don’t think that’s
where he would want the focus to be.
In
the final analysis, though, it’s still a
very nice
book. Anyone interested in rural
America, especially the interplay between
traditional lifestyles and encroaching
modernity, should be sure not
to miss it.
DAVID WHARTON