Re: Leicaphilia

[Oddmund Garvik <garvik@i-t.fr>]

At 09:06 30/04/1997 -0800, Jamie Drouin wrote:

>an image sitting quietly on a wall makes someone stop, if only for a
>moment, and admire either an abstract concept or presentation of a familiar
>object in (perhaps) a surprising manner, then has not a 'change' occurred
>as well?

You may call it a 'change' if you want, but it is a rather limited one. I
have a less metaphysic outlook of the world.

>a very positive outlook on the artwork.  Unfortunately, ALL artwork is
>meaningless if the masses are not capable of (or interested in)
>understanding the messages within images.  I believe this is the fault of
>the education system who typically views art as a filler between math class
>and recess.

It is a common problem in all Western societies. The masses are taught to
be nice and obedient citizens, productive workers, profitable consumers.
The masses live and die in an apparent ignorance. Under the surface it
isn't so, of course. We are humans with human feelings and reactions. 

Sometimes an image makes us happy, or makes us shed a tear. Sometimes an
image provokes anger. In a fraction of a second you understand the whole
comedy, you see the lies and you are revolted. Many places in the world
this question is not an item. The image doesn't have the same significance,
or it isn't present.
 
The day humans begin not to see, not to react, not to care about his human
fellow, that day the world is loosing the way. That day there are less
hope. That day the emptiness fills our lives. We may have all the Leicas we
want, all the know how and all the good intentions. We cannot change
anything. 

I am sorry to say that in many of our 'civilized' countries, we are far
into that maelstrom of cynicism, egoism and individual self-satisfaction.
The system teaches us to be like that. 

Fortunately there are resistance, fortunately there are still some people
keeping to a more noble concept, right across the common propaganda and
conformism. I don't expect everybody to 'not only share the same goal for
'universal communication' but to consistently produce 'meaningful' work'.
Stating this would surely be not only ridiculous, but unrealistic. Even
'great' photographers don't produce merely iconic images every day.

Oddmund