On Detachment. Or ‘If You Love Something, Set It Free’ (cit. Sting)

By Andrea Monti

A number of philosophies and religions preach the virtue of detachment from things as a path to enlightenment. When applied to gear, this advice won’t only save your soul —if you believe there’s one— but also your money and, last but not least, your photograph experience. This means avoiding the development of ‘feelings’ towards a camera or a lens that shift from appreciating their value as a tool to some sort of ‘personal engagement’.

As odd as it sounds, such an attitude towards an inanimate object is more frequent than one may imagine. A paradigmatic case is the attachment of AIBO’s owners to their robotic pets: they developed such a strong bond that they requested a funeral service when the toy broke or ceased to function.

It would be a simplistic approach to label this behaviour as an oddity or as one of the many unconventional things people do in (and with) their lives. Humans have been using tools for millennia, and this connection is something we have experienced for a considerable length of time. Tools have played an instrumental role in facilitating survival and meeting our aesthetic needs. As a symbol, they have the capacity to act as a catalyst for both positive and negative endeavours. It is not unexpected that an intangible connection may be established. However, it is important to note that the perceived energy of an object, whether positive or negative, is influenced by our own state of mind and not by the object itself.

The point of all these musings is simple: understanding why we feel ‘attached’ to a specific camera or lens allows us to express ourselves better through photography. If we see a camera as an inanimate tool, we can focus on how to use it and make the most of it. By contrast, if we turn the camera into some sort of relic to be worshipped, it will be the camera that governs us.

 

Share this post:

About The Author

By Andrea Monti
My name is Andrea Monti. I’m an Italian free-lance journalist, photographer and – in my spare time – an hi-tech lawyer. The works I am more proud of are covering live jazz, pop and rock concerts for an Italian online music magazine and Opera and prose for a 200 years-old theatre. I also do sport photography mainly in athletics and fighting disciplines. You may find out more about me on https://andrea.monti.photography
Read More Articles From Andrea Monti

Find more similar content on 35mmc

Use the tags below to search for more posts on related topics:

Donate to the upkeep, or contribute to 35mmc for an ad-free experience.

There are two ways to contribute to 35mmc and experience it without the adverts:

Paid Subscription – £2.99 per month and you’ll never see an advert again! (Free 3-day trial).
If you think £2.99 a month is too little, then please subscribe and I can manually edit the subscription value for you – thank you very much in advance if this is what you would like to do!

Subscribe here.

Content contributor – become a part of the world’s biggest film and alternative photography community blog. All our Contributors have an ad-free experience for life.

Sign up here.

Make a donation – If you would simply like to support Hamish Gill and 35mmc financially, you can also do so via ko-fi

Donate to 35mmc here.

Comments

Sergio Palazzi on On Detachment. Or ‘If You Love Something, Set It Free’ (cit. Sting)

Comment posted: 05/06/2025

Beh, per quanto...
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Greg Hammond on On Detachment. Or ‘If You Love Something, Set It Free’ (cit. Sting)

Comment posted: 05/06/2025

Hmmm. I think this is a bit binary. For me, there is an awful lot of territory, and therefore gray area, in between complete detachment and object worship. Tools are part of what makes us human. They are part of our phenotype. Use of tools by non-humans is sufficiently unusual and generally remarkable, so that it attracts much scientific study. And in those cases, such use is also part of their extended phenotype. How well someone uses their tools can help define “how much” of a carpenter, or an auto mechanic, or pilot they are. Or an artist. And for that person, how well they use their tools can have a huge impact on their sense of self-expression and worth.
When I image with my 8x10, it is a very different feeling from my full frame or MF film or digital. That difference is perceived by me in how I enjoy the process, in how my immersion in time and place is different from other tools, etc. There is a relationship between the device and me, that is distinct from the device itself, but causes me to appreciate (or in rare cases, dislike) the device for what it is. I don’t think that’s “worship.” I think that is appreciation, and the depth of that appreciation might cause me to have feelings of attachment that are not about possession, but are about enjoyment. And even fulfillment.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Gary replied:

Comment posted: 05/06/2025

Amen.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Robert Stammers replied:

Comment posted: 05/06/2025

A beautiful reply which encompasses my feelings totally.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Russ Rosener on On Detachment. Or ‘If You Love Something, Set It Free’ (cit. Sting)

Comment posted: 05/06/2025

I don't know what this has to do with actual photography. If a tool works for us, and it is something we rely on we develop a bond. Actually the bond to automobiles is even stronger than cameras. In fact there are Native American beliefs that any object which moves on its own has a life force of some sort. Naturally we all know that one day, our treasured things will be left behind, and a camera has less value than a human life. We have a saying in English; "You can't take it with you!" meaning when you die. In the meantime I will happily enjoy attachment to the tangible objects I have worked hard to acquire in this life. And perhaps give away significant ones to those people I treasure even more.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Stefan Wilde on On Detachment. Or ‘If You Love Something, Set It Free’ (cit. Sting)

Comment posted: 05/06/2025

On a lighter note, a survey of contemporary governments suggests that you can fare way worse than being governed by a Rolleiflex.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Ibraar Hussain replied:

Comment posted: 05/06/2025

hehe!! Very true

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Mark Ellerby on On Detachment. Or ‘If You Love Something, Set It Free’ (cit. Sting)

Comment posted: 06/06/2025

It seems to be in our human nature to become attached to inanimate objects. If I were to discard my favourite camera gear, which I am emotionally attached to despite my attempts to remain aloof, then my mind would quickly find something else to become attached to. Someone closer to enlightenment might have a different perspective but I'm a long long way from there. In the meantime I have come to accept that if some thing helps to bring some enjoyment to me, I consent to the inevitable affection and consequences thereof.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scott Ferguson on On Detachment. Or ‘If You Love Something, Set It Free’ (cit. Sting)

Comment posted: 06/06/2025

Andrea,
Thank you for the revery. I can appreciate the kind of 'bond' we develop with a camera we love to use. Yes, it's a piece of mechanical or electronic machinery that records the world through either analog photochemical processes or a digital sensor, but there is something intimate about the way using a camera is an extension of your sense of vision and your brain, as well as our body, particularly our hands as we learn to use it in an increasingly unconscious way, knowing what the different controls will do without needing to stop and think about it as we shoot. I'm not sure about the soul, but I do feel like I enter a kind of meditative state sometimes when I'm shooting, especially with my 'primary' camera, a Leica M3. I also love shooting with my Hasselblad 500CM, but I haven't yet reached that intutive stage with the more complex mechanical/optical 'user interface' with lots of moving/detachable parts, especially the dark slide...
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Leon on On Detachment. Or ‘If You Love Something, Set It Free’ (cit. Sting)

Comment posted: 07/06/2025

A craftsperson (artist) knowingly or unknowingly achieves a onesness with thier tools. Be the tool, a camera, sewing machine, paintbrush, woodplane. The tool becomes an extension of the creator's vision. They are at one with each other. Scott describes it perfectly. You may or may not wish to give such a state a metaphysical meaning. Some cultures and tradition do more readily than others.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Christopher Welch on On Detachment. Or ‘If You Love Something, Set It Free’ (cit. Sting)

Comment posted: 12/06/2025

Hey Andrea, thanks for the insights. I agree with you. 20 years ago I bought a Pentax Spotmatic for my first ever SLR. I'd always wanted one and I found it in a pawn shop. I loved it and took it everywhere, and often fought with it and made bad pictures with it. I got so much crap from Camera store guys for using it, telling me it was antiquated crap. I didn't care. Now I hold it in esteem as the "O.G". And I also have a Pentax K1000. We bought it for a family member to use in college and it was given back to me. I didn't like it. It didn't feel like O.G. But I started using it to save wear and tear on my old Spotmatic. And over time something happened- it disappeared in my hands. I cared so little about it that it was just a working camera, nothing more. Now I use it more than any of my others because it's so simple and basic and reliable and I don't think, I just shoot. Now I understand what it means when I read a camera becomes an extension of you.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Robert Stammers on On Detachment. Or ‘If You Love Something, Set It Free’ (cit. Sting)

Comment posted: 06/07/2025

Andrea you have touched upon a philosophy here for the love of objects. Inanimate objects can initiate deep human emotions of attachment, be it a building a painting, a sculpture or even a camera, in a way I'm not sure we truly understand.
For me, as a camera conservationist, a hammer is a tool for a definative purpose, a hammer displays nor demands any aesthetic need for attachment (other than to the handle!). A camera on the other hand has the ability to invoke a mysterious bunch of emotive attachments.
Beauty by design, cameras (and cars) pocess this need and demand for us to express our feelings when we, not just use, but also look at a camera, observe it's surfaces and shape from all angles.
For example, take a look at these Konica Minolta digicams like the Dynax 7i or their Z5/Z6, or the Sony H1/H5. To me they have intrinsic beauty in their design aesthetics.
Of course beauty is subjective. But can we really link the term beauty to a camera.
For me yes you can. To me it feels natural to do so.
Thank you.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Andrea Monti replied:

Comment posted: 06/07/2025

Robert, I am not sure that the hammer example works. A 'proper' hammer is more than just a blunt instrument. It must be a suitable weight for the intended use, the head must be shaped accordingly — think of hammers that can also pull nails out — and its centre of gravity must be placed so that all the energy generated by the swing goes into hitting the nail. Every object has its beauty if its form serves its purpose. To explore this idea in more depth, you may wish to look at the works of Bruno Munari. From the other comments, I understand that I did not succeed in conveying what I wanted to say. But of course, the better the tool, the more we enjoy using it. However, the enjoyment should be related to the outcome produced, not the instruments themselves. To give you an example: I met many professional musicians during my concert assignments, and what struck me was their ability to make music with whatever came to hand, not just guitars, drums or whatever. To sum up, my point is that craving objects instead of results stifles creativity, as it encourages contemplation of objects rather than self-expression. The aesthetics of the outcomes are entirely a personal matter. Thank you for this interesting conversation!

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

David Hume on On Detachment. Or ‘If You Love Something, Set It Free’ (cit. Sting)

Comment posted: 07/07/2025

Hi Andrea — thanks for this piece, which touches on something that’s been close to my own thoughts lately: the way we relate to the tools we use in photography, and what that relationship says about us.

I think you’re absolutely right to point out that attachment to objects can sometimes tip over into something that inhibits rather than supports creativity. I’ve seen that too — cameras that become too precious to use, lenses admired more than employed. And yes, recognising when sentimentality begins to govern our actions is a worthwhile bit of self-reflection.

That said, I found myself pausing at a few points. The idea that a camera is “just a tool” is one way to frame things, but not the only one. Many traditions — including various animist beliefs — would argue that objects can carry presence or spirit, and that our interaction with them is part of a reciprocal relationship. While that may not fit with a more orthodox Christian framing, it’s no less worthy of respect, and for some it provides a richer framework for understanding why a camera might come to feel like more than metal and glass.

On the Sting lyric, I’ve always understood “If you love somebody, set them free” as being quite literally about people — not objects — so applying it to gear feels like a bit of a stretch. The metaphor is still useful, but perhaps in a different direction than intended here.

And finally, the idea that to love something is to become enslaved by it — that feels to me like a misreading of what love might mean in a creative context. Many artists — not just photographers — form deep, even tender relationships with their tools. That’s not necessarily worship or idolatry. Sometimes it’s just care, or a form of attentiveness. A way of saying: I know this tool, and it knows me back — even if that knowledge is really just familiarity and fluency developed over time.

None of this is to diminish your point — that clarity, detachment, and awareness can be valuable. I suppose I’d just want to hold space for the idea that affection and reverence, when not taken too far, can also be part of the richness of the photographic experience.

Thanks again for the provocation — I appreciated the opportunity to think it through.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *