Re: [Leica] Re: Eggleston the Ungood

[Guy Bennett <guybnt@idt.net>]

>> Eggleston is the darling of the art world, but he has hardly been
>> so revered by the "rest of the world," who have not
>> "misunderstood" at all. It doesn't take long to see that the
>> emperor has no clothes. Nobody finds much meaning in Eggleston's
>> photos unless they have already accepted the philosophy that
>> meaninglessness is somehow laden with meaning.
>
>Right on target, Dave! I really tire of having my opinion belittled
>by those who claim that I don't like something because I don't
>understand it. I understand Eggleston just fine, and I don't like
>his stuff, period!
>
>That said, if someone likes Eggleston, also fine. Far be it from
>me to belittle their judgment -- at least to their face.  ;-)
>
>Roger, List-Owner


roger,

i completely agree with you - everyone is entitled to their opinion about
anybody's work, it's when folks berate you for your opinion that the
discussion turns sour.

before the big eggleston/art photography blow-out a few months ago, i had
never even heard of eggleston. after the first few messages, i went out and
read up on him, looked at books of his work, saw his stuff in museums, etc.
frankly, it's not my cup of tea. i'm not wild about color photography to
begin with, and his work in particular did very little for me. so, i quite
understand the various luggers negative reaction to his photography.

what i find problematic is the attitude of certain luggers who apparently
feel that they alone know the true value of a given person's work - be it
eggleston, sontag, or any of the others who have been insulted here on the
lug. the fact that these persons have been recognized internationally as
having made significant contributions in their fields is of little
importance to the more presumptuous and immodest among us who feel that if
they personally don't like their work, it must be crap and anybody who does
like it is obviously an idiot. i don't particularly like eggleston's work,
but clearly a lot of people do. he must be doing something right since he's
able to reach so many people, or could it be that they are all misguided?

i once remarked about sontag's work - and the same is true of eggleston's -
that we are certainly entitled to our own opinions about what they've done.
but the fact (and it is a fact) that these people have achieved what they
have achieved, that they are renowned and respected by people around the
world for their work should encourage us to make some attempt to come to
terms with what they've done - whether we like it or not - rather than just
dismiss it out of hand, which is what some here seem to prefer to do.

guy