By Carlos Miller
Perhaps Simon Blint didn’t get the memo.
After all, the Director of Visitor Relations for San Francisco’s Museum of Modern Art refused to acknowledge the museum’s change of photo policy Friday when he ordered two security guards to forcibly throw out a local photographer for taking photos inside the museum.
The photographer is none other than Thomas Hawk, one of the most widely read photo activist bloggers in the country.
Hawk, in fact, was one of the bloggers who not only wrote about my arrest last year, but also contacted the Miami Police Department seeking more information, including obtaining and posting the arrest report which was filled with contradictions.
Hawk obviously is not one to take something at face value. He’d rather get written confirmation before giving it his support.
It was only last June that Hawk posted about an email he received from MOMA confirming that beginning July 14th, non-flash photography would be allowed inside the museum.
This is a tremendous and positive step forward by the SF MOMA and represents a huge victory for photographers. The SF MOMA was one of the few SF fine arts institutions that disallowed photography in their galleries.
But Hawk’s joy was shortlived.
After purchasing a family membership, Hawk and a friend visited the museum only for Hawk to get thrown out after taking a photo.
My crime? Taking a photograph from the second floor stairs in the SFMOMA’s atrium (an area where the SF MOMA’s own website explicitly says photography is allowed).
Blint, pictured above as he orders Hawk to leave, accused him of “spying” on his staff with a telephoto lens. Hawk, who was using a 14mm lens, was actually snapping the photo below before he was confronted.
Hawk, who refers to Blint as a “first rate asshole”, has vowed to do all he can to spread the news about MOMA’s hypocritical policy on photography. Already, his story has received 3,444 recommendations on www.digg.com.
And here I was bragging about my 585 recommendations on www.reddit.com.
It is ironic that the great Cartier-Bresson, who took thousands of photographs of unsuspecting people in his work, hangs in the museum while a photographer practicing the same type of work gets ejected by a power-trippy asshole. It’s hypocritical and disappointing.
And unfortunately, it’s becoming all too common.
Popularity: 4% [?]
6 responses so far ↓
1 genewitch // Aug 10, 2008 at 4:45 AM
the portrait is of the guy who threw him out? that’s a fairly impressive picture… i like it better than the b&w…
It’s stupid that the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing, though. someone needs to have a meeting or something.
2 IM // Aug 11, 2008 at 12:54 AM
How sad, for you Thomas. And, everyone rallying around your opinion. Is there any justice at all to a one-sided rant? This to me is where blogging loses it’s credibility, by the second. I see that you tried to make some grand statement about the rights of photographers, but your method for doing so is selfish, immature, and actually rather cruel. Do you know Simon Blint? Do you have any idea of what it means to be able to safely and securely bring art to the masses? I do, on both accounts. I have worked at SFMOMA. You have used this incident to construct a rather flimsy soap box. It would have been nice if you thought twice about trying to trash the name of someone who works tirelessly to make SFMOMA a place where people can enjoy art. I don’t profess to know anything about photography, outside of enjoying it. So, I would never make blanket statements about your profession. You feel you have the credibility to do so about running the customer service of a Museum or protecting the viewing rights of it. Perhaps if you stood taking tickets and answering the same question hundreds of times with a smile for 8 hours, or patiently dealt with people trying to damage priceless art, or took care of a guest who has fallen ill or been injured while visiting and needed medical help, or tried keeping employees safe from hostile and inappropriate guests, or sat in hours of meetings discussing how to make visiting the Museum a pleasant and enjoyable experience especially during shows like Kahlo where the lines are lengthy, ALL of which Simon Blint has done, then you would be able to better understand why this entire mess that you started is beyond silly. You have done your blog a disservice, and you have done the same for a wonderful institution and a hard working guy trying to do his job. I hope to find every place that you have unfairly written about this and share this perspective to show how small you showed up with this big effort.
3 Joel // Aug 11, 2008 at 1:15 PM
“a place where people can enjoy art”
“safely and securely bring art to the masses”
“protecting the viewing rights of it”
“make visiting the Museum a pleasant and enjoyable experience”
How, exactly, did Mr. Blint’s behavior in this incident accomplish any of the preceding?
And where, specifically, are the inaccuracies in the blog post with what transpired?
Let’s have an exploration of the facts of the incident, instead of your “Blint Booster Pal” contribution.
4 Maz // Aug 11, 2008 at 1:41 PM
@IM:
You need to read the whole account. Apparently the reasoning for the expulsion was a claim, a CLAIM, on Blint’s part that Hawk was trying to use the camera to spy down a woman’s shirt.
Despite Hawk’s attempts to explain the nature of his lens (it was a 14mm, Blint accused it of being a telephoto… not a photography person, but based on the results above, not a telephoto), offer to show the pictures he had taken, Blint refused to… Instead he publicly made a scene and called Hawk a pervert in so many words.
No offense, but a PR person does not make a scene nor disrupt a museum’s atmosphere unless he wants to make a scene of it. Seems like a power trip to me.
5 torgeaux // Aug 11, 2008 at 2:47 PM
I can see the initial reaction of Mr. Blint. I can even see how, if true, the initial suspicion could make Mr. Blint a bit abrupt in his dealings with Thomas Hawk. What I cannot see is, if offered the opportunity, why he wouldn’t examine the photographs in question. That is alone enough for me to conclude that Blint did not act in good faith.
6 pdxSean // Aug 15, 2008 at 5:02 PM
Blints actions would also be a lot more understandable if he was just an everyday, ordinary security guy or something. They shouldn’t be expected to be at the top of their game at all times.
A professional like Blint, at a major institution like the SF MOMA, should always be on his A-Game. Someone who is in charge of public relations gets away with acting this way? And then the museum just poo-poos it?
Honestly, I think they just dismiss this whole thing as an internet issue, and like so many older institutions they have no idea that the internet is actually a powerful tool and can have real effects on life.
Also, is Hawk a jerk? Maybe he is… he’s certainly provocative. But aren’t provocative jerks provided the same constitutional protections as the rest of us? Darn right they are.
Leave a Comment