Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Eric; I used to wrangle with teachers all the time about what I thought art might be. You see, I admired (still do!) the work of Norman Rockwell. I was disparaged, "He's just an illustrator!", they'd say. I'd shout back, ' So was Michaelangelo, he illustrated Bible stories!" 'Round and 'round it goes. I still think that 'ART' is any product of some endeavour to capture a moment that evokes some emotion. Of course, if you JUST HATE IT- it's bad art! Your photo of the little girl was art; evidently the emotion was evoked, and as a result good things came of it. Consider it good art. Don't under estimate the value of your work. Sure, if you take a nice competent picture of a fire, and firemen working to put it out, it may just be a good editorial choice to illustrate a news story. If on the other hand, you take a photo of the family dispossessed by this same fire, and the photo evokes an emotional response in the readers, I consider it an artful work. If, in the long run, it becomes a classic image, like Steichen's steerage passengers, or the work of Hines showing the distress of child labor, then it might be great art. True art touches the human spirit and transcends time and country- hence the remarkable value placed on the works of the like of Michaelangelo, Raphael, Steichen, Weston, et al. Nix illegitimi carborundum ( Don't let the bastards grind you down) Dan'l dwpost@msn.com