Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/14

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] suprises and disappointment
From: Guy Bennett <gbennett@lainet.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 21:51:27 -0800

>Guy - you are right -


Thanks.


>but the _missing link_ are the supposedly _arty_ photos themselves. So it is
>both difficult - and useless - to discuss some person's work that's not seen
>by anybody!


Of course, you are right here, only I wasn't talking about his work, but
about critical writings on photography in general, which was the subject of
the post I was responding to. (See below.)


[snip]


>And in the meantime sooooo much crap is being presented
>as art today


My feeling is that it was probably never any different, with respect to any
of the arts. We have the luxury of time - we only see the work that has
endured. All of the "chaff" produced at the same time has faded into
obscurity.


- - just because we know we have to be tolerant towards the so
>called _self expression_


I don't believe this is the case either. Weak work is weak work, however
"expressive" it may be.


>Martin


Guy


>>>Speaking about your work is very important in the art world.
>>
>>It's a disease. They take very literally the old adage that a picture is
>>worth a thousand
>>words. Usually the artistic merit is inversely proportional to the amount
>>of words used
>>to describe it. Try reading modern art criticism. I gave up after I
>>misplaced my secret
>>decoder ring.
>>Robert
>
>>Robert, you said it better than I ever could have....the "criticism" you
>>describe
>>is more university-sponsored pseudo-intellectual PC speak....Jeezus, I
>never
>>took Orwell literally 'til the 90s.......
>>Best to U and URS,
>>Walt
>
>
>Are you guys saying that there should not be any critical discourse about
>photography or art, or just not the complicated kind?
>
>Should we just stick to: "I like it." "Boy that's neat." "I don't
>understand it." "That's crap." etc.?
>
>Or should we just not talk about it at all?
>
>While there is a lot of uninspired and overly academic art/photography
>criticism out there, there are also well written, thought provoking studies
>of art and photography that we can learn a lot from, if we're willing to
>make the effort to actually read and understand them, and maybe even
>discuss them with other people.
>
>You guys seem to have a "point and shoot" attitude with respect to talking
>about art/photography: the less we have to think and say about it the
>better. Anything requiring study and thought is too intellectual, academic,
>unnecessarily complex, etc.
>
>Believe me, I am no fan of conventional academic prose styles, having
>slogged through years of it in college. As a photographer, however, I'm
>interested in reading what others - both photographers and critics - have
>to say about this activity. If nothing else, it only broadens my
>appreciation and understanding of photography and gives me something to
>think about, even if I disagree with it. To limit myself to the exchange of
>evaluative opinions is, well, too limiting.
>
>Guy
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html