[Leica] sontag, etc.

[Guy Bennett <guybnt@idt.net>]

>[snip]
>
>There does seem to be an anti-intellectual trend to the LUG at times, I
>wonder why? Not that I count myself as an intellectual or artist, whatever.
>Actually, I find Diane Arbus' comment more self-consciously oracular than
>Sontag's.
>Rob.
>Robert Appleby


i think you hit the nail on the head, robert: there is indeed an
anti-intellectual trend here on the lug. it's evident in the strong
resistance to serious discussion about theories of photography, art
photography, art in general, etc. every time one of these subjects come up,
a chorus of voices chime in about how worthless it is, how the public has
been duped by it, and how foolish are those who might actually find some
value in it. i personally find this unfortunate because there is much to be
learned (both about the issue at hand as well as about each other) in the
exchange of ideas generated by such discussions.

imo, the idea of dismissing someone like susan sontag (or roland barthes,
or nobuyoshi araki) with no more than a comment like 'he/she don't know
shit about photography' or 'his/her book/work made me want to puke' is
sophomoric and self-deprecating, and says more about the one making the
comment than the one who is commented on (about whom it actually says
nothing). it reminds me of the high school students who think shakespeare
(or bach, or mondrian) sucks because they personally don't get anything out
of it. they're right, the rest of the world is wrong, and that's that.

guy