Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/11/19

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] I can't believe I'm losing this argument
From: Marc James Small <msmall@roanoke.infi.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 17:45:08 -0500

At 02:08 PM 11/19/1999 -0800, Ted Grant wrote:
>Before you subject yourself to embarrassment and mental harassment save
>your breathe my friend.  It's a complete non issue, as the guy is dead and
>who cares as it was yesterday, last year, the past decade and beyond!


No, it is NOT a "non-issue".  The saga of how we got where we are today is
vitally important to understanding our present position.  On any issue, at
any time.  "Those who ignore the lessons of the past are bound to repeat
the mistakes", or however it goes.

I agree shooting pictures is worth-while, or I'd not do it.  But, and this
is a vital "but", we cannot neglect trying to fix the historic record as
accurately as we might.

Let us suppose Mike Johnston is correct, and Adams rarely, if ever, used
any 35mm camera.  Then, Adams lied in the promos he did for Leica and in
his various writings and Jim Brick hallucinated.  (The last is unlikely,
but not, I guess, beyond the realm of possibility, Jim Brick living on the
Left Coast and all <he grins broadly>)  That paints Adams as being
dishonest.  His present reputation is that he was curt and rude and a bit
nasty, on occasion;  this would make him a liar in addition.

Let us suppose Jim and Eric are correct, and Adams really liked the Contax
RF over the Leica RF and learned to like the Leica R towards the end of his
life.  Then, in that event, Adams becomes someone who would sell his
endorsement, as he certainly DID endorse Leica in the early 1950's.  Which,
ultimately, makes him no more of a prostitute than most of our modern pro
atheletes, but still puts a twist on his reputation.  (Imagine Dr Grace
endorsing, say, Hammersley's Cricket Shoes!  The very thought!  Or, even
worse, Malone standing up, in public, for O'Donnachaidh's Rugby Clothing,
for fine gentlemen, and Purveyor to the Prince of Wales.  Shock!  and
Horror!)  (Though, the last might cause shock and horror more from the
thought of "dear Bertie, as Flashy calls him, in a rugby uniform than for
the sheer commercialism of it all, though Malone WAS a friend of the noted
George Edward Challenger.)

Then, let us suppose we are correct, and Adams did prefer the Contax RF to
the Leica RF, but learned to love the Hasselblad MF SLR and the Leica R4
before his death.  Then, his endorsement of the Leica RF do moulder a bit,
but are explainable, as explainable as Arthur Clarke simultaneously doing
an advert for Questar and writing an essay attacking the practice of
manufacturers for giving away their wares in return for promos -- and both
the advert and the essay were run in the same issue of HOLIDAY, back in the
late '50's or early '60's.)

Any of these three scenarios might be accurate.  No, they do not explain
much about the wonderful work of Adams, any more than does a knowledge of
his oestensible rudeness.  But they complete the picture of the man, make
him whole and entire in our minds, so to say.  And this can be important to
an understanding of his ouevre.  (I am no revisionist, and I am certainly
no deconstructionist, to contend that "art must be judged by art itself" --
the last deconstructionist I discussed this with also claimed that "the
sole purpose of art is to shock and offend, as that is the only way to
produce true thought".  Damn foolishness, the lot of such beliefs.)

And by understanding Adams, we have to view him as the ultimate
perfectionist, proud of his work but also confident in his knowledge of the
gear and emulsions available to him, willing to drive six hours into the
desert in a creaky car to shoot a picture at a certain time of day with
only a single sheet of film, as "I only needed a single exposure to get it
right".  (My father commanded an anti-aircraft battery in Alaska during the
War.  He knew an Aleut widow who would hunt caribou with a .22 rifle and a
single cartridge, as "that is all I need".  She always came back with a
caribou draped over her shoulders, off to feed her kids.)

History is important.  Ted, you have LIVED history, and you should know
this, more than most of us.

Marc




Marc

msmall@roanoke.infi.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!