Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/02/17

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] The Grump rides again (on a cow this time)
From: "Eno" <eno22@enter.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2000 14:25:46 -0500

From: Mike Johnston

<<<Why is it that we can discuss the minutiae of finders and serial numbers
interminably, but as soon as we have a decent discussion going about
art--or just about a photograph or two--it deteriorates into a series of
woeful puns about cow udders? I knew this was going to happen. This, or
something like this, always happens, and not just on the LUG. It's the
internet equivalent of a collective nervous fit of the giggles.>>>

I'm not sure that's the case, maybe it is...
I think this is a great thread because everyone has a BIG interest in these
matters.  Not having an interest, for a professional/seasoned shooter -
doesn't exist.  And the majority of it may be a "Disinterest" but it
qualifies because it's most likely a "passionate" disinterest or
opinion/attitude that is the grounds.  I don't think this is ART vs.
TECHNICAL...

(A)-------It's "I THINK ART IS AN EXPRESSION THAT EXPRESSES THE
INEXPRESSIBLE AND REPRESENTS THE CREATIVE VISION OF THE ARTIST AND THE
COMMUNICATIVE ELEMENT THAT IS REFLECTED UPON"------------- vs.    --------

(B)---------"I THINK ART IS GREAT TOO, BUT MOST OF IT IS REALLY NOT SO
GOOD... IT MERELY HIDES BEHIND THE MASK OF THE WORD "CREATIVE" AND IN THIS
GUISE IT FOOLS PEOPLE INTO APPRECIATING SOMETHING THAT THEY, UPON FURTHER
HONEST INTROSPECTION, DO NOT LIKE AT ALL"------------

At this point it then becomes

(A)THIS IS SUBJECTIVE AND YOU COULD BE MISSING THE MESSAGE AND MEANING
(B)TRUE I MIGHT BE, BUT THIS IS SUBJECTIVE AND <THAT> STUFF IS JUST
NONSENSE.

I apologize for the over-simplification and highly incomplete analysis.  It
may appear to be so, but it's not really as simple as I stated or others
have, the meaning behind "B" is NO LESS valuable and meaningful that "A".
I'm personally much more passionate - well falling on the side that that
stuff up there on the wall and the "confused looking" or "pondering people"
or the "suspiciously interested" gazing at it is enough to for one to become
angry, sick or just hilariously objectionable.  Personal taste?  Fine, but
this does NOT mean LOOK MORE CLOSELY it means LOOK AT SOMETHING ELSE -
subjectivity is not 'all is equal'.  That's a common modern day fallacy.

<<<I really am puzzled about why it's so difficult for people to discuss
aesthetics.

It happens in the magazine, too. Every time we make a brief,
responsible, and conservative foray into discussing actual
accomplishment, the 'why' instead of the endless 'how,' we get letters
from people pronouncing it 'fluff' or 'filler' and exhorting us to get
back to 'solid technical information.'>>>

The Why?  I first like to know the "What" (is it) - a rare thing in the
galleries...

<<<Well.

Eggleston uses Leicas, not Hasselblads. He was born rich and continues
to be rich and has many very beautiful and rare antique Leicas. He also,
according to one essay about him, has two wives in two houses and often
answers his doorbell holding a pistol. Another of his passions is
building loudspeakers, and his son, also called William, owns a company
called "Egglestonworks" that builds an extremely expensive speaker
called the "Andra" that won an award from _Stereophile_ magazine a while
back.

Eggleston is a significant photographer. Some people even like his work.
And if you don't, well, _you_ go try to sell your "bad snapshots" for
$4,500 a pop. Better than having to dress toddlers as daisies any day.

One day I'm going to start a newsletter that will discuss _only_
aesthetics and accomplishment, and questions about what one's tripod
legs should be made of will be the ones that elicit the hoots and
raspberries.>>>

- -----You know, this discussion has hoots and raspberries (with jell-O for
afterwards) because it IS of interest, just an oppositional sort which is
fine.----

BUT THE BLAME ON THE REPRESENTATIVES AND CURATORS OF THESE SO-CALLED
'CREATIVES'! THEY ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR SOMETHING AND IN A SNOBBISH WAY
(read their demands regarding 'new' 'fresh' talent ) (personal insert)

<<<End of Eggleston discussion. Let's get back to something vital like
frameline brightness, the durability of camera coverings, whether we
should or should not use filters, or our preferred camera straps--i.e.,
the important things about photography. In the meantime, I can enjoy
these dazzlingly brilliant and creative bovine puns, which I find
delightfully entertaining and so very worth my time.>>>

Right.  "dazzlingly brilliant".  You said it yourself.

<<<- --Mike
..............>>>>>>
ENo