Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/01/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]...well, B.D. did ask me to jump in, and so... It is a common misconception that surreal means "weird." Generally, that idea derives from the fact that most people know of only one Surrealist, Salvador Dali, who most assuredly painted some weird stuff. To oversimplify, surreal art, be it painting, poetry, photography, music, et alii, is "about" a particular manner of approaching the world without preconceptions of what one will perceive and being able to express a different reality from that taken in by the ordinary citizen. Cartier-Bresson definitely considered himself a surrealist first and a photographer second, with the camera was his medium. B.D. is quite correct that Capa told H.C.-B. to call himself a photojournalist rather than a surrealist photographer because a p.j. would find a much larger audience for his work than a surrealist would. That said, Jim, if you've never seen anything weird in Cartier-Bresson's photographs, it is time to hit the books! H.C.-B. took and published some decidedly weird pictures, albeit no melting clocks or flying horses or portraits of Gala Dali. Buzz Hausner > > From: Jim Hemenway <Jim@hemenway.com> > Date: 2005/01/04 Tue PM 01:31:54 EST > To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] WAS: Intro NOW: HCB. > > Calling Sir "Buzz of Belmont"! :-) > > > > shape, form, shadow, odd juxtaposition of objects..... > > But BD, did you see _incongruous_ juxtaposition when you saw those > large prints? > > And... there isn't any "weird" in HCB's work... at least none that I can > remember. I've always thought that any surreal art needs to be a little > bit weird. > > I don't mean the now common usage of the word surreal to mean almost > anything unexpected and/or different. > > Jim