Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/12/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]on 4/12/00 2:12 pm, Mark Rabiner at mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com wrote: > Jeeze!! does " Ansel Adams" and "pornography" belong in the same paragraph? > Let's ask Susan Sontag!! > For me the answer would be… let me see… NO!!!!!!! NON!!! I love your ambiguity, Mark... > I don't catch the repetitiousness and unfeelingfullness of Ansels work. > These qualities elude me. I think there are some really boring photos in, for example (!), the Examples book. The surf from above... boy, that does NOTHING for me. > Some if it is grandiose but it's GOOD grandiose and hell the think what he was > shooting WAS grandiose and what the hell is wrong with grandiose???!!!! > Ansel goes for the big effect. He's not into boring subtlety You WILL look at > his images for more than one second. This does set him up for employment with > Larry Flynt. No, nothing wrong with grandiose at all. I love that operatic stuff. I just don't think he was a great artist. I think he was John Singer Sergeant, not Turner. Wordsworth not Coleridge (that was Weston). This all reflects a personal taste... the landscape photography that moves me is somewhat mystical. Your image of laterelle falls, Mark, that has an edge of the sublime that I don't get in AA. There, can I be forgiven? - -- Johnny Deadman http://www.pinkheadedbug.com