I really enjoyed this Susanne. I hadn't come across Lilo Raymond before - her work is very simple but very beautiful. Thank you for bringing her to my attention.
A beautiful read—thank you for sharing. I love how you phrased it: “She transforms these mundane, everyday objects into visual poetry, imbuing them with an almost spiritual quality.”
Hi Susanne, I'm so happy to see your Lilo Raymond Morning Muse! I received the link via email as I'm not online much lately.
You've captured her spirit and the photos you chose are beautiful - usually when you google her the reproductions aren't very good quality. Great job, she deserved it! You've taken me back to my twenties and my readings of the Popular Photography Annual...
Oh, I am so happy to see you reading this. Today’s edition of my newsletter wouldn’t be without your suggestion. So, thank you! again for recommending her to me. I am so glad, you enjoyed this. I really love her work.
And yes, I have begun to pose myself the same question about my photographs. Who will ever be interested on them, if any? Will all the experiences that I lived along the process of taking and processing them be lost forever? A friend recently told me, "the first thing you have to understand is that no one is interested in your photos. Then do what you want to do". In a world where millions of photos are posted every day, perhaps that's a bitter truth I should start to accept...
Yes, he might have a point there (although, I have seen bit of your work and it is amazing!). The are many, many photograph out there and thousands are being created as I am typing this. But I think it's worth to think about what we want to happen to our photographs after we die. Do we hand them down to our kids and let them decide? During the discussion Vivian Mayer came up and how her work was treated after her death. Of course I am not a Vivian Mayer, but it gives you food for thought.
“I couldn’t find any information about whether she was married or had any children.” I feel like this is information that’s mainly associated with women. Men don’t have as much importance placed on this.
Although, I don't find it always relevant. But because I tried to understand what happened to Raymond's photographic legacy, I wondered whether she had any family who might have inherited her work.
No, I couldn’t find anything about her being in a relationship or having any kids.
It just is surprising to me, that her work is in major collections, but there is so little information on her on the internet. And it’s not like she died 100 years ago. She died in 2009…
What a great, informative read! I am loving these photos that seem mundane but have so much to say. As I imagine being there, or the story behind them, I also wonder how much more she could have accomplished in those years without a camera due to the cruelty of narrow minded classmates.
one thing i really have to watch is when i see beautiful i crave to have it near me, photography books can be an expensive delight, the few i've seen for Lilo Raymond are beyond my budget so Suzanne I'm especially grateful to you for posting
I am absolutely the same way. I have been trying to get my hands on one of her books ever since I learned about her, but it is impossible to find a fairly priced copy…
You mentioned that her photos are in some museum collections. I wonder if those museums might have more info about her that they haven’t put on line. It might be worth asking.
“In fact, it is possible to view Lilo Raymond’s photographs as manifesting a spiritual substitute for our culture of accumulation. By filling space, we diminish it; by letting it be, we support a condition in which we can be free. Lilo Raymond chides our shortsightedness. Her airy rooms suggest that beauty can lead an effortless existence and that a transcending elegance can flourish within the mortal precincts of the home.”
This was a truly enjoyable read, Susanne. I adore the use of light but also the way she treated the shadows. All the photos are so well-balanced and masterful. Thank you for sharing. I had heard about her, but had not explored her. Her work is the kind I'd love to have hanging very large in my home! Have a a great week ahead, Susanne. Thank you.
Thanks for writing this...what a great read..I love finding undiscovered gems and she's definitely one of them. I love that her work is in black and white and that she focuses on, as you said, everyday objects. She brings a simple beauty to the mundane in a way most of us miss in our hurried lives. Great stuff..
Thank you, Ernest. With my little series I try to find female photographers whose work resonate with me and how are not as well known or written about as others. And if it is resonates with my readers it is even better. Thank you for taking the time reading and commenting here!
What an amazing feature Susanne, I wasn't aware of her or her work and I connect with it in so many ways. The meditative stillness reminds me of Sudek's work while the more romantic plays of light and shape remind me of Uta Barth. Great feature, thanks for sharing!
From the same Chronogram article you cite, there is this quote of Lilo’s which echoes the one you begin with but which points to a reversal in the way so many of us process the world into images with both a strong sense of previsualization and an incredible humility:
“At one point in my very early years, I thought I would like to be a painter, but it took too much imagination. I liked seeing things in front of me, things that I could connect with. I couldn’t do it without something concrete. It turned out all right, I guess. I just sort of plugged along, and I didn’t pay much attention to what else was going on in the world. I made my own little world, and I liked that a lot. I look at things in black and white—I say, “Oh, this might be a good picture.” I see things, and it’s absolutely in black and white, like I have some glasses on that change things. It’s awesome, it really is.
I always had that approach. I was always centering in on very simple things, like a vase of flowers. That’s how my still life came about. But I always had that sense of simplifying things [with my photographs]. I think what I do is that I stare at something, and then it invites me to take a picture.”
Lilo’s work sat well with and inspired that of her female peers in the 1970’s and 1980’s, including Eva Rubenstein, Joyce Tennyson Cohen, Ruth Bernhard, and Kate Carter.
I like the spatial eccentricity of her compositions because often the center holds but is rarely the “subject.” There is so much eye movement involved in skating over her images in comprehending the whole, which then becomes something more than what is before the camera. She didn’t focus in, but stood back, encompassing the whole of something else.
As to legacy, I think about the photo archives we already have, the billions of images created daily, and the change of focus of the contemporary culture’s interests. Timothy Sullivan captured the American West in astounding images, showing Americans what country they were a part of. Mark Klett re-photographed Sullivan’s and other’s earlier images of the West (with Polaroid Type 55 film, itself now an anachronism). Perhaps there will be a re-re-photograph project to show the same places with yet another new technology in a changed world. How much resonance will it have?
Lilo Raymond was of her time. She made some great emotional images and impacted others through these and her teaching. I suspect that is more than most of us will accomplish, despite how meaningful our work is to ourselves. That her work is represented in the holdings of major museums is itself a major accomplishment and itself a powerful legacy. Those of us who can understand her language can still appreciate it.
I didn’t mean to suggest you were diminishing Raymond’s accomplishments; quite the opposite in calling our attention to her work.
I was attempting to put the idea of legacy into perspective. I think that the creations of most people, while sometimes important in a larger dialogue, become ephemera buried in the detritus layers of time. Therefore, the focus might not be on the continued existence of all of one’s work, but on its impact in its own time, its impact on us who make it and those who happen to witness it. That a museum purchases prints to preserve them and extend their impact is an accomplishment beyond, albeit one often of chance.
But the vast majority of created objects become refuse outside of their time, and that is appropriate. Perhaps we shouldn’t worry about the unprocessed film, the unscanned negatives, the prints made earlier and filed away. Perhaps we should accept that we make work in the moment, and it serves our needs, and then we go on to produce more work, leaving all but a very few seminal pieces behind for others to love or discard as they see fit.
In that same article, I believe Raymond is quoted on how her students at VSW loved her because she claimed she was lucky if she made one image a year that she really liked. That is both reassuring for understanding the work of creation itself and perhaps a rough guideline for any given New Years resolution: what one image from the previous year warrants my keeping and which others should all be let go of now, laid down in a landfill for some future archeologist to “discover” in the future?
I really enjoyed this Susanne. I hadn't come across Lilo Raymond before - her work is very simple but very beautiful. Thank you for bringing her to my attention.
Thank you for reading, Gill! I am so glad she was recommended to me. I don't think I would have ever stumbled upon her work on my own.
What beautiful photographs! Thank you Susanne for introducing us to yet another amazing photographer
Thank you for reading, Shital! I am so glad, I was able to introduce another woman photographer to you.
A beautiful read—thank you for sharing. I love how you phrased it: “She transforms these mundane, everyday objects into visual poetry, imbuing them with an almost spiritual quality.”
Thank you, Anna! I am glad it resonates.
Hi Susanne, I'm so happy to see your Lilo Raymond Morning Muse! I received the link via email as I'm not online much lately.
You've captured her spirit and the photos you chose are beautiful - usually when you google her the reproductions aren't very good quality. Great job, she deserved it! You've taken me back to my twenties and my readings of the Popular Photography Annual...
Oh, I am so happy to see you reading this. Today’s edition of my newsletter wouldn’t be without your suggestion. So, thank you! again for recommending her to me. I am so glad, you enjoyed this. I really love her work.
And yes, I have begun to pose myself the same question about my photographs. Who will ever be interested on them, if any? Will all the experiences that I lived along the process of taking and processing them be lost forever? A friend recently told me, "the first thing you have to understand is that no one is interested in your photos. Then do what you want to do". In a world where millions of photos are posted every day, perhaps that's a bitter truth I should start to accept...
Yes, he might have a point there (although, I have seen bit of your work and it is amazing!). The are many, many photograph out there and thousands are being created as I am typing this. But I think it's worth to think about what we want to happen to our photographs after we die. Do we hand them down to our kids and let them decide? During the discussion Vivian Mayer came up and how her work was treated after her death. Of course I am not a Vivian Mayer, but it gives you food for thought.
“I couldn’t find any information about whether she was married or had any children.” I feel like this is information that’s mainly associated with women. Men don’t have as much importance placed on this.
Lovely share and read!
You are probably right. I never thought about it.
Although, I don't find it always relevant. But because I tried to understand what happened to Raymond's photographic legacy, I wondered whether she had any family who might have inherited her work.
I’m assuming you didn’t have any luck in finding relatives?
I have a friend who did an art project where every piece was named after a famous woman of her time but that there’s little information about online.
Unfortunately history has been written by men and women haven’t much mention.
No, I couldn’t find anything about her being in a relationship or having any kids.
It just is surprising to me, that her work is in major collections, but there is so little information on her on the internet. And it’s not like she died 100 years ago. She died in 2009…
Oh wow, 2009!!!! And yet she’s so unknown about… Do you think it was intentional?
Well, I could only speculate at this point.
True haha, a more rhetorical question at this point considering you found nothing about her 😆🤭
What a great, informative read! I am loving these photos that seem mundane but have so much to say. As I imagine being there, or the story behind them, I also wonder how much more she could have accomplished in those years without a camera due to the cruelty of narrow minded classmates.
Oh, I didn‘t think about that. Yes, very sad. But I am glad she eventually came back to photography and started over again.
one thing i really have to watch is when i see beautiful i crave to have it near me, photography books can be an expensive delight, the few i've seen for Lilo Raymond are beyond my budget so Suzanne I'm especially grateful to you for posting
I am absolutely the same way. I have been trying to get my hands on one of her books ever since I learned about her, but it is impossible to find a fairly priced copy…
Lilo Raymond’s photographs have such an ethereal quality to them. Thank you for sharing with us.
Thank you for reading, Alicia. So glad to hear they resonate.
Not a photographer I have come across previously. Thank you for showcasing her beautiful images.
Thank you for reading! I think her work is wonderful and I am glad you enjoyed this.
Wonderful images!
You mentioned that her photos are in some museum collections. I wonder if those museums might have more info about her that they haven’t put on line. It might be worth asking.
Yes, I wondered that myself too. Maybe I will do that…
Also, I love this description of her work:
“In fact, it is possible to view Lilo Raymond’s photographs as manifesting a spiritual substitute for our culture of accumulation. By filling space, we diminish it; by letting it be, we support a condition in which we can be free. Lilo Raymond chides our shortsightedness. Her airy rooms suggest that beauty can lead an effortless existence and that a transcending elegance can flourish within the mortal precincts of the home.”
Yes, I do too. Especially the first part.
Wow, I am in awe of her work!
Thank you for sharing her work with us. I love her minimal approach. These are truly masterpieces!
They are quite inspirational. I especially love the minimalism, but also the way she uses light and the tones of her black and white photographs.
This was a truly enjoyable read, Susanne. I adore the use of light but also the way she treated the shadows. All the photos are so well-balanced and masterful. Thank you for sharing. I had heard about her, but had not explored her. Her work is the kind I'd love to have hanging very large in my home! Have a a great week ahead, Susanne. Thank you.
So good to hear, you enjoyed this. I hope you have a great week too!
Thanks for writing this...what a great read..I love finding undiscovered gems and she's definitely one of them. I love that her work is in black and white and that she focuses on, as you said, everyday objects. She brings a simple beauty to the mundane in a way most of us miss in our hurried lives. Great stuff..
Thank you, Ernest. With my little series I try to find female photographers whose work resonate with me and how are not as well known or written about as others. And if it is resonates with my readers it is even better. Thank you for taking the time reading and commenting here!
What an amazing feature Susanne, I wasn't aware of her or her work and I connect with it in so many ways. The meditative stillness reminds me of Sudek's work while the more romantic plays of light and shape remind me of Uta Barth. Great feature, thanks for sharing!
Thank you, Xavi. I see Cunningham in her work as well. But yes, Sudek too. I didn't think of Uta Barth. I guess, I will have to take a look…
From the same Chronogram article you cite, there is this quote of Lilo’s which echoes the one you begin with but which points to a reversal in the way so many of us process the world into images with both a strong sense of previsualization and an incredible humility:
“At one point in my very early years, I thought I would like to be a painter, but it took too much imagination. I liked seeing things in front of me, things that I could connect with. I couldn’t do it without something concrete. It turned out all right, I guess. I just sort of plugged along, and I didn’t pay much attention to what else was going on in the world. I made my own little world, and I liked that a lot. I look at things in black and white—I say, “Oh, this might be a good picture.” I see things, and it’s absolutely in black and white, like I have some glasses on that change things. It’s awesome, it really is.
I always had that approach. I was always centering in on very simple things, like a vase of flowers. That’s how my still life came about. But I always had that sense of simplifying things [with my photographs]. I think what I do is that I stare at something, and then it invites me to take a picture.”
Lilo’s work sat well with and inspired that of her female peers in the 1970’s and 1980’s, including Eva Rubenstein, Joyce Tennyson Cohen, Ruth Bernhard, and Kate Carter.
I like the spatial eccentricity of her compositions because often the center holds but is rarely the “subject.” There is so much eye movement involved in skating over her images in comprehending the whole, which then becomes something more than what is before the camera. She didn’t focus in, but stood back, encompassing the whole of something else.
As to legacy, I think about the photo archives we already have, the billions of images created daily, and the change of focus of the contemporary culture’s interests. Timothy Sullivan captured the American West in astounding images, showing Americans what country they were a part of. Mark Klett re-photographed Sullivan’s and other’s earlier images of the West (with Polaroid Type 55 film, itself now an anachronism). Perhaps there will be a re-re-photograph project to show the same places with yet another new technology in a changed world. How much resonance will it have?
Lilo Raymond was of her time. She made some great emotional images and impacted others through these and her teaching. I suspect that is more than most of us will accomplish, despite how meaningful our work is to ourselves. That her work is represented in the holdings of major museums is itself a major accomplishment and itself a powerful legacy. Those of us who can understand her language can still appreciate it.
Thank you so much for your input and perspective on it. I really appreciate it.
I did not know that she was an inspiration to her colleagues, but of course I have no doubts that she was.
And I totally agree, that her accomplishments are impressive. I did not mean to diminish it in any way.
I didn’t mean to suggest you were diminishing Raymond’s accomplishments; quite the opposite in calling our attention to her work.
I was attempting to put the idea of legacy into perspective. I think that the creations of most people, while sometimes important in a larger dialogue, become ephemera buried in the detritus layers of time. Therefore, the focus might not be on the continued existence of all of one’s work, but on its impact in its own time, its impact on us who make it and those who happen to witness it. That a museum purchases prints to preserve them and extend their impact is an accomplishment beyond, albeit one often of chance.
But the vast majority of created objects become refuse outside of their time, and that is appropriate. Perhaps we shouldn’t worry about the unprocessed film, the unscanned negatives, the prints made earlier and filed away. Perhaps we should accept that we make work in the moment, and it serves our needs, and then we go on to produce more work, leaving all but a very few seminal pieces behind for others to love or discard as they see fit.
In that same article, I believe Raymond is quoted on how her students at VSW loved her because she claimed she was lucky if she made one image a year that she really liked. That is both reassuring for understanding the work of creation itself and perhaps a rough guideline for any given New Years resolution: what one image from the previous year warrants my keeping and which others should all be let go of now, laid down in a landfill for some future archeologist to “discover” in the future?