Master Adams versus frauds?

[Vondauster <Vondauster@aol.com>]

Hi All,

I would not be a photographer today were it not for the inspiration of Mr
Adams' work. That he was a master and an artist is not disputable; whether he
is trendy or not is irrelevant, in my opinion. The list of awards and honors
(at least three honorary doctorates) he garnered in his lifetime is mind-
numbing. People I know who knew him all say he was first and foremost a
consumate professional photographer, who used any tool appropriate for his
work, including Leicas.

However; Harrison wrote:

<<The only reason many of the "artists" who are in vogue today can produce 
 their art is because they have garnered a government grant to produce 
 this trash.  My feelings are that if your work is not good enough to 
 support you, get a day job and do you art on the side. Don't expect me/my 
 tax dollars to pay for your horrible garbage that is only appreciated in 
 the stratosphere of the art world.   >>

Um, I respectfully beg to differ. 

While I agree that, in my opinion, much of what passes for art these days is
either meaningless or ugly, the blanket critique of government arts grants is
unfounded and historically weak. That the marketplace should be the only
arbiter of an artist's works worth is simply unwise. Michaelangelo's greatest
works, for example, were only possible due to government patronage (I believe
the Vatican qualifies as a government and certainly did then). Many artists
now considered great survived on patronage, government or otherwise. Adams
himself received three Guggenheim fellowships.

"Yes, but these were great artists," one might reply.

Of course, the artists we remember today are those whose work withstood the
test of time. To get that wheat, though, how much chaf was also supported? How
many artists in, say, rennaisance Italy received such support and produced
"horrible garbage" and are now forgotten? How many of Michaelangelo's
contemporaries might have condsidered his "nekkid men" horrible garbage? 

Patience is a virtue with artists. Tastes change, and those artists who are
ahead of their time are sometimes hard for us today to distinguish from frauds
and talentless parasites. I, for one, will take the risk.

Will von Dauster