Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/03/21

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Beware HCB Wannabes
From: passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro)
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 12:29:45 -0400
References: <43d2b9bb1003180905j54f232f3ufe932baf6a42f069@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20100318125223.032aa818@med.cornell.edu> <19b6d42d1003181754jc7c3471xa14c2972237bdbcc@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20100319112306.0352fe40@med.cornell.edu> <06855D1CED284CE59443FF58D87C39A4@syneticfeba505> <D848F898-8994-49A4-87CF-487BAB9D1C92@mac.com> <3B9A2883FE274FBD9FB838EC874FF72D@syneticfeba505> <19b6d42d1003192258k2af3971cv9e211768e6c7da0c@mail.gmail.com> <a3f189161003200639j60abe0b8la5616b318776c2cf@mail.gmail.com>

Sonny et al. -- Interesting that my remarks led to memories of the civil
rights movement. It'd be grand to start a gallery of some of those images
from all of you if you have any scanned.

My point was not about photographing the marches, however. I thought Dr. T
had put forward the usual bromide about how nice and decent and well behaved
everyone was 40 years ago but I think THAT idea (which he modified later by
revealing to me he meant CANADA for god's sake, hell, it's always decent
there if you're not French and decent a lot of the time even if you are)
anyway the "everyone was so decent back then" idea I think is, you know, fer
da boids.  Those days were vicious, as many of you got to observe and
document first hand it sounds like. The Chicago convention, someone noted.
They beat delegates on the floor of the convention hall.  Then the nation,
apparently not satisfied with this display of raw power by the authorities,
gave "law and order" candidates (read: put down the blacks and the lefties)
Nixon and Wallace a combined 60 percent of the vote.

Today is a little different.  One of the things I was noticing in the photos
of the Dr. King march in 68 -- that who was it? Jeffery? posted -- was how
much (overall, the general mean) darker skinned the African-American
population looks in those photos than they look now, say, in Harlem, where I
lived for a long time, or even New Orleans or Virginia which I've visited in
the last decade. There's been a lot of racial mixing in the last forty years
in this country. Anyway those were certainly not, socially, between people
and among strangers, our kindest hours. Now is much much better. The New
York City of the Kitty Genovese days is long gone and in fact for many years
now I have sworn to skeptical out-of-towners that I have never been to a
place where people are more likely to go out of their way to help a stranger
than they are in the New York City I have known.

Those old days were not at all nicer than now but they were a helluva lot
smarter*.  We're generally nicer now but uncomplainingly stupider, which is
why it's easy to get some meaningless hysteria stirred up a la Burlington,
and to get the police way over involved, etc. The society has worked very
very hard to make itself as stupid as it now is, and guess what: the
effort's paying off. Note the distribution of wealth (we're back to the
1890s basically) and social mobility (last among OECD nations, so much for
the "American Dream"), then versus now.  Note that Johnson got Medicaid
through Congress in 1965 a lot more easily than Obama can push his
half-assed bill against the interests of money and corporate control.

So, I hope it's clear that my remarks had nothing to do with criticizing or
commenting on the work of great photographers forty years ago or now. It's
about the radically altered milieux in which they work.

* Footnote: Someone left a 1966 copy of Playboy in the lobby of our building
when we were still at 109th street. Most of the nudie pictures had been
clipped out which was sad but the table of contents is a list of many of the
most important and interesting and controversial writers and critics of that
day -- an extraordinary lineup. And they did this 12 months a year. And
people actually did read some of that stuff. They certainly didn't
*resent*it as they would now. They'd have admitted to some guilt, I
suspect, or
shame actually is more correct, if it was revealed that the editorial copy
was too hard for them or over their heads. There isn't an American magazine
now, including The New Yorker, that is doing even a tenth of what that one
was doing in a single issue.

On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Sonny Carter <sonc.hegr at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 12:58 AM, Vince Passaro <passaro.vince at gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Whadda load of horse crap.
> >
>
> Vince, I wasn't there for the firehoses, but I was for the marches. I think
> you owe all of us who made it possible for you to get out there and shoot a
> little break.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Sonny
> http://www.sonc.com
> http://sonc.stumbleupon.com/
> Natchitoches, Louisiana
> (+31.754164,-093.099080)
>
> USA
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


Replies: Reply from jsmith342 at gmail.com (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] Beware HCB Wannabes)
In reply to: Message from wanderjan at gmail.com (Jan Decher) ([Leica] Beware HCB Wannabes)
Message from chs2018 at med.cornell.edu (Chris Saganich) ([Leica] Beware HCB Wannabes)
Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] Beware HCB Wannabes)
Message from chs2018 at med.cornell.edu (Chris Saganich) ([Leica] Beware HCB Wannabes)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (tedgrant at shaw.ca) ([Leica] Beware HCB Wannabes)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Beware HCB Wannabes)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (tedgrant at shaw.ca) ([Leica] Beware HCB Wannabes)
Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] Beware HCB Wannabes)
Message from sonc.hegr at gmail.com (Sonny Carter) ([Leica] Beware HCB Wannabes)