[Leica] Gary D Whelan

["Rod Fleming" <rodfleming@sol.co.uk>]

Hi

For you, Gary

I went to look at this shocking (?) image- well I had to, didn't I-, but the
page was down. I most sincerely hope that this is not the result of someone
here complaining about Pascal's images.

So I have not seen the particular item that so incensed Gary, but I have
seen Pascal's Glamour page before, and there is nothing, I repeat nothing,
shocking about it. Well, maybe for a Sunday School Yearbook, it's not
appropriate, but it's a Glamour page fer Pete's sake.

Gary is being prudish, and worse, much worse, censorious. He is trying to
prevent someone's perfectly legitimate point of view from being heard- or
seen- and is hiding behind a smokescreen of dubious morality to do so.

Pictures of people with no clothes on are an essential part of
representational art, as much in Photography as in Painting or Sculpture.

Ever heard of Edward Weston, Gary? Robert Mapplethorpe? Harry Callahan?
David Bailey? Bob Carlos Clark? For that matter Rubens, Delacroix or
Michaelangelo?  Hey, what do we do- burn all their images cos they portray
people in the state they were born in?

I agree, it's going to be a while before Pascal's pics are in my collection
alongside those names, but that's not the point here. Have we not moved on
from the point where Edward Weston had to go over his nudes of Charis Wilson
with a magnifying glass to ensure that not one pubic hair was visible-
otherwise he'd be prosecuted for mailing the pictures to his customers?

I'm going to stop there. I just want to say this:-

Pascal, you need to study light
more. There is no area of photography that shows up a
photographer's weakness or strength with light more than nude photography-
that's
right on the front line of pure form pal, and it takes guts to tackle it.
But at least you're doing it- you're taking pictures and you're putting them
up for others to see and comment on.

People who do that are called artists.


Best


Rod