Timothy Archibald, Photographer, Creates Stunning Photo Series Of His Son With Autism

It isn't supposed to have a message. Photographer Timothy Archibald says the series of photos he took of his son Eli are not built on a topic or story -- there is no beginning, middle and end. He hopes that viewers sense a relationship forming between a father and son, but that's all. And, one thing that the project turned book, “Echolilia: Sometimes I Wonder,” definitely isn’t about, is autism.

Eli's parents always knew he was different, but they couldn't explain how and certainly couldn't answer why. It was his younger brother's development that shone a light on Eli's circumstances. When little brother, Wilson, turned 2 and Eli was 5, the mystery of "What's up with Eli?" seemed to “take over everything,” Archibald told The Huffington Post.

The father and son started doing photo shoots together around that time. But, Archibald says, he wasn’t trying to create a masterpiece -- "Echolilia" happened completely by accident. Taking pictures together was “just something to do,” something to fill the time. None of the shots were planned. Eli would be doing something quirky around the house (for example, blowing into a tube) and dad would shoot in different locations, make lighting adjustments and experiment. Each session only lasted about five to ten minutes before Eli got bored, Archibald said.

Midway through kindergarten, while the shoots were already underway, Eli was diagnosed with autism. His parents were surprised because he’s “so high-functioning,” but they weren’t sad. They already knew and loved their son who Archibald describes as curious, loud, mechanical and larger-than-life –- the diagnosis didn't change who he was. If anything, the autism label “explained some things,” because Eli was different from the other kids, Archibald said.

Letters that Archibald received in response to "Echolilia" showed him that Eli is not alone, not unusual per se. He often receives notes from other parents who say, “That looks like my kid.” The words are surprising and comforting. “I thought it was just us,” Archibald said.

At a recent photo festival called Look3, Eli, now 10, explained what "Echolilia" has meant to him. “It kind of looks into my mind a bit,” he said. “It can kind of show what the autistic brain is like and what autistic kids, or maybe just normal kids in the ages of 5-8 years old, would do.”

Archibald told NPR that Eli’s awareness of his autism is important -– he wants his son to see his individuality as an asset. But as a father, Archibald ignores the diagnosis -– he told The Huffington Post that it doesn't change how he parents Eli. “Building the relationship is your key to everything,” he said.

Article link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/28...de=1141645

To see more photos: http://timothyarchibald.com/#/echolilia/...0project/1


what d'you think?

Hmm.  I thought it somewhat disingenuous to say that the photos are "not about autism".  If that wasn't in the title, I doubt anybody would even look twice at the photos, since they show a kid playing.  Cute, perhaps, but you can see it anywhere.  
Also, I didn't like the sentence: "His parents were surprised because he's so high-functioning, but they weren't sad."  Why on earth should they be sad?  They've got a kid who's healthy and apparently happy.  And he does things just like other kids.  That blowing into a tube thing we used to do in the preschool classes I taught.  All the children enjoyed that, the NTs and the AS kids.  And yes, after about ten minutes or so, they'd all get bored with it and go do something else.  All children do that.  Not just AS children.

Also, VERY  disturbing that he took the photos of the child naked.  That is not normal behaviour and negates the father's assertion that he was just taking photos around the house of his son doing stuff.  Unless they normally have him running around starkers in the house.
Alison

This post was last modified: 06-30-2012 05:01 PM by Alison.

The main thing that bothered me was that he noted when they would receive notes from other parents that "The words are surprising and comforting." and he said “I thought it was just us,".

...I dunno...I think part of the reason I never got a diagnosis till now is because my parents didn't really seem to care if we were doing something 'quirky' (more so my mom than my dad actually). But that may be cultural because my dad is black, and I notice that his side of the family tend to laugh things off more- so if a kid is doing something weird, they acknowledge it and shrug their shoulders and laugh it off... Perhaps because they are a minority with a tough past, and lower SES, its easier to shrug of so called quirky childs play than get your panties in a bunch about it - so to speak...

So, to say “I thought it was just us," seemed somewhat surprising. And THEN he also stated (which is in agreement with you Alison, but a contradiction with what I just quoted there) “It can kind of show what the autistic brain is like and what autistic kids, or maybe just normal kids in the ages of 5-8 years old, would do.”

I did like the fact that the focus on the article wasn't about the "tragedy" of autism.

The naked pics did surprise me- he said that none of shots were planned so perhaps his son is already naked doing things (i know I did that sometimes when I was little- I wet the bed until I was 9 so I would usually wake up in the middle of the night, strip off the wet clothes, go back to sleep, and when I first woke up again I would start straight into some activity (without getting dressed or anything)). When I saw the pics (and since the article implied many people liked them) it seemed to imply that it wasn't strange for a parent to photograph a naked kid. I knew it isn't so strange to photograph a naked baby, but I wasn't sure where the age cut off for "baby" was.

I know there are people who have aspirations of being artistic who paint/photograph little children naked.  But to me it just smacks of paedophilia.
Alison (old preschool teacher looking out for peds under the beds...)

I hope that no pedophiles saw those pictures. Definitely. But considering them being in National Geographic...

Yes, there's art and then there's ... not art.  But the line seems to be quite thin, wavery and undecided.  I once read the writer Terry Pratchett say that you know a nude painting is "art" when the three large pink ladies and the peice of gauze also have an urn painted somewhere.  Then it's classical and therefore it's art!  
I feel it's art if the three large pink ladies had a choice in being painted/photographed and were paid properly for it.  And also be over the age of consent.
Alison

should I remove this thread then?

No, I don't think so.  This way we're at least able to discuss it.  I'm aware there are others who will think this is art in it's purest form.  I just feel uncomfortable and would prefer not to look at it.  But I think you were right to draw it to our attention.
Alison

Okay, I got nervous.

What I thought about when I saw the photo of him with the padded envelope over his head, was that he looks like he is malnourished (big belly)....I'm probably dead wrong...but the only other comparisons I have in my memory bank of half naked children are usually starving kids from africa/asia/south america so that may be influencing my impression.

Sometimes I wonder about taking pics or videos of your kids and making them public (I'm also referring to youtube and putting pics on facebook and what not). It seems like when they get older they are stuck with those images that any of their friends/colleagues/etc can stumble upon.

Especially those kids used in autism speaks commercials...Auspeaks owns those images of them permanently, but what if the kid grows up and decides they don't want their image used like that?

Its seems like child rights/and also disability rights (for those who can't give an opinion) have to catch up with technology.

I don't really know about some of those pictures. The whole thing looks a little like a freak show to me. No idea if there was any pedophilia involved.

On the subject of removing the thread, I agree that it should be left visible so this can be discussed.