Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Chandos, Guy, Robert, others, I apologise for writing something in the style of Sontag, in that I didn't fully communicate myself. I guess I overblew my reaction to this one line that was promoted. I bought her book to read, it's just that I failed to understand it enough to enjoy it. As I put in my tag line, it probably says more about me, but I would like to have learnt from her as I've learnt from others. I am certainly not anti-intellectual, I guess I wish I was an intellectual. In replies I see that you all defend her statement using words other than 'invent' such as 'shaping' or 'interpret'. These are words with which I can concur, why did she not choose them herself? If she chooses words like 'invent' it then becomes a game of writing riddles for deciphering. Which takes us back to writing for those who are within the same circle of understanding as she is. Let me reapproach her book and see if I can get more out of it this time. Jem - -----Original Message----- From: Chandos Michael Brown [SMTP:cmbrow@wm.edu] We do "invent" the past in that it contains no implicit narrative-- (snip) If such a photo were to become emblematic, to appear, for instance, as an illustration in a college history textbook, would we dismiss the photographer's aggressive shaping of the image as inconsequential to its content? I doubt it. Chandos