RE: [Leica] Eggleston: art photography

[Dan Cardish <dcardish@microtec.net>]

You are asking perectly fair questions.  The thing is, you should
appreciate the fact that other people may actually like his work (and
undoubtedly do).   I honestly do not particularly like PJ "street"
photography, but I never question the validity of it as an important
component to photographic art.  There is no law requiring us to admire all
forms of art, or even to appreciate the fact that certain things ARE art,
but we should all at least keep an open mind, and respect the appreciations
of others.

Dan C.

At 02:57 PM 15-02-00 -0500, Lee, Ken wrote:
>John,
>
>Please forgive me if this sounds argumentative, I don't mean it that way.  I
>often wonder about art, because whether painting, sculpture or photography
>most of the time I don't get it. I had never heard of Eggleston before this
>thread, so I checked out the site from the URL. What makes any of these
>photos anything more than very poor snapshots other than a great PR person?
>What makes a figure of a woman clothed in rotting meat art? What makes most
>modern paintings art? For some of the more well know artists, I sort of
>accept that it must be art, and something must be wrong with me because I
>just don't get it. For the rest I just scratch my head.
>
>A very confused Ken
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:	John Collier [SMTP:jbcollier@home.com]
>> Sent:	Tuesday, February 15, 2000 1:37 PM
>> To:	leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>> Subject:	Re: [Leica] Eggleston: art photography
>> 
>> Why indeed. It is a very good question that is difficult to answer. Your
>> work that you have shown us is very socially driven with strong
>> emotionally
>> charged meanings. You cloak your subjects, even though you are trying to
>> illustrate their potential need, with dignity and humanity. I connect to
>> the
>> message because I think you are picturing me, my son , my daughter, or my
>> life I guess. This type of work is at polar opposites to the work that you
>> are having trouble seeing value in. It reminds me of the "relief" or
>> "field"
>> * style of painting that so enrages the public when museums purchase these
>> historically important pieces for millions of dollars. A framed field of
>> blue is not that difficult to bang off in a lazy afternoon with lots of
>> time
>> to spare for catching the early show as well. That, however, is not how
>> they
>> were made. They were made to make statements that can only be interpreted
>> though the filter of that time (which of course is also why it lasted only
>> a
>> short time) and created a sensation when they first came out. I look
>> forward
>> to the time, probably not soon, when your work will be looked at with
>> puzzled expressions as poverty will be unknown and incomprehensible. One
>> can
>> hope. Why not go to your local library and take out a few books on art
>> history and the history of photography, it is very interesting and helps
>> one
>> to at least understand photographers like Eggleston if not appreciate
>> them.
>> 
>> John Collier
>> 
>> *Please note I am not an art historian and my have some of my terms mixed
>> up.
>> 
>> 
>
>