[alt-photo] Re: DESICCATE! DESICCATE! DANCE TO THE MUSIC!

[Diana Bloomfield]

Hi Mark,

Just to clarify-- my comment wasn't really about the "creativity of  
[my] marital relationship" (or, perhaps that comment was an attempt at  
being amusing?-- I honestly can never tell); it was, rather, a comment  
that once one gets to a certain level, those who are at that level  
consider mathematics to also be highly creative (as creative, in its  
own way, as-- say-- the visual arts).  I suspect that's true for those  
in the sciences as well.  I remember when our daughter was in high  
school, and one of only 3 females in her advanced physics class-- she  
was good, but I remember her saying that she would never go into that  
field, because-- although she was good at it-- she didn't nearly have  
the vision and imagination that a few of her classmates (who did go on  
to be physics majors in college and on into graduate school) had, and  
she felt that would always hold her back-- in that particular field.   
That's just a little aside.  The follow-up post I made to my original  
post was really just an explanation that, since I might have implied  
math and science aren't creative, too, I do know they are and can be--  
and didn't want anybody jumping on me about that comment.  Of course,  
it never dawned on me I'd have to explain that little explanation as  
well-- but, what  do you know, here I am having to do just that.

On to the topic at hand-- I am in complete agreement with what you  
write here.  I have no idea why you felt the need to write that to me,  
specifically in response to what I just wrote.  Perhaps this is just  
the nature of emails/posts, which are so different from dialogue when  
people are in an actual room, talking to each other.

While I absolutely do appreciate, like to understand, and value the  
chemistry involved in alt processes-- I will, once again, say that had  
anyone ever talked about molarity, or attempted to teach a beginning  
alt process class in that way to me (yikes-- all those equations?!)--  
again, I would have most certainly bolted for the nearest exit, and  
never ventured further.  I would have (wrongly) assumed that alt  
processes required more math and chemistry than I was willing to  
contemplate.  The key word here, Mark, is "beginning."  I also suspect  
that Loris's students are quite different from the ones I find myself  
teaching.

I agree that there is a "need for tolerance" on topics, and I was  
stunned by the quality of the discourse on this particular topic.  I  
often wonder if people would have a real dialogue with others in the  
same way, were they speaking to each other in "real life."

But . . . nothing I said in my earlier post suggested that I think  
topics should be shut down, that topics on science or chemistry are  
inappropriate or "silly," or that whatever anybody might write is  
pointless, stupid, or "off-bounds."   I choose not to talk about step  
wedges and equations, but that's just me.  I read most every post  
here, regardless--even detailed comments on processes about which I  
know nothing-- hell, I didn't even use the delete key when we got to  
pink thongs-- or was it a thong?  Hmm . . .

But I digress.  My point is-- I agree with you.  What made you think I  
didn't?   Just because I said I would have been turned off by all that  
chemistry in a beginning alt photo class/photography class?  Well, I  
would have been.  And I personally wouldn't teach a beginning printing  
class that way, either.  That's not to say that anything anyone has  
written about all this is wrong, or how someone else might teach is  
wrong, or what they've said is "inappropriate."   Frankly, I don't  
think what I've said is, either.   And if I ever thought I had the  
ability, in a post no-less, to shut down a conversation-- then, wow--  
I'm a better writer than I ever knew possible.

I will say that I've taken all kinds of classes over the decades with  
some really excellent teachers-- amazing artists, some of whom are  
actually "famous" and some of whom aren't-- but all really good at  
what they do, and how they teach in a classroom.  I'm thankful that  
I've always learned something in every art class I've ever taken, and  
that not one of those teachers has ever sent me running for the exit.

One last point-- I'm a pretty direct person, Mark-- in emails, posts,  
and in real life.  Whatever I post here, I'd also say the same thing  
in person.  No double meanings, no "inside" jokes, and no reading  
between the lines with me.  What I say is usually what I mean, and  
mostly it's just my opinion.

To answer your last question, though, I suspect the reason so many  
list members don't post and only lurk-- is because they're terrified  
of expressing an opinion, and then having someone else post, and  
first, of course, mention how long they themselves have been a list  
member, and then go on to "attack" the poster and post they're  
commenting on, based on ideas and opinions that the poster never  
actually expressed or thought.  Yep, that's what I think.  Again, just  
my opinion.

Oh wait.  I forgot.  :)   Carry on.

~Diana


On Jul 28, 2010, at 1:52 PM, ender100 at aol.com wrote:

> Hi Diana,
>
>
> I won't venture to comment on the creativity of your marital  
> relationship, but I would like to comment about posting on the list  
> and what is "appropriate."
>
>
> When I first came on the list I enjoyed lurking and gleefully read  
> all the posts until one day the topic of Pyro came up and there were  
> seemingly endless posts on the topic.  Since I did not use Pyro, it  
> wasn't all that interesting and eventually I thought I would have to  
> shoot myself if I read another post on the topic.  Later it was gum  
> stain tests that tested my ability to maintain concentration.   
> However, since that time I've totally reversed my views on this issue.
>
>
> I feel at this point that there is a real need for tolerance on  
> topics and even the quantity of posts on topics.  I am not saying  
> that pissing matches on topics are appropriate, unless they are  
> truly entertaining and witty.  True, every list has a few compulsive  
> responders, but that is the nature of the human condition.
>
>
> Through the benevolence of people like Kees, Gord before him, and  
> others, we have an alt photo list.  Beyond that, the list, in a  
> sense, belongs to "the people"  and members should be able to post  
> and discuss whatever they feel is relevant, as long as it is  
> reasonably on topic.  Though, I do find that little anecdotes that  
> people share about their personal lives, such as Chris's pink  
> thongs, makes them more "real" and helps to fill in the blanks  
> regarding who the list members are.
>
>
> I think posts about the art, the craft, and the science of alt photo  
> should all be welcomed—I don't see that any one category should be  
> considered less appropriate.  The recent molarity polarity  
> discussions have been interesting to some and not so to others, but  
> then what difference does that make.  Is there a topic that Everyone  
> is passionate about and wants to discuss?  I doubt it.
>
>
> Perhaps I am a bit sensitive to the issue of the "science" of alt  
> photo being considered a silly topic in light of the Sarah Palin/Tea  
> Party movement "ignorance of science and facts" is to be applauded— 
> but then that is venturing off-topic.  As they always say, you have  
> a Delete Key if you don't want to read a thread on the list.  We use  
> our personal "delete key" all the time (without thinking about it  
> twice) when we read the news, choose a book, watch television, and  
> surf the web.
>
>
> I think that placing topics off bounds or silly does more to hurt  
> the list than help the list.  It inhibits people.  The list had, I  
> believe over 500 members, of which only perhaps 10% posted  
> regularly.  Why don't the rest of the members post?  Do they fear  
> they will be laughed at or made fun of or branded wackos for  
> venturing to post a thought or question that someone who posts  
> frequently might criticize?
>
>
> I say give peace a chance...ooops, wrong topic... I say give people  
> a chance to express themselves freely on the list as long as they do  
> it in a respectful fashion.  If they don't, the list owner can  
> easily bounce them off, as Gord did in the past when "unnamed"  
> persons pushed the rhetoric beyond the limits of respectful  
> discourse.  Clearly a small percentage of people have an adolescent  
> need either be the center of attention and will foment arguments  
> just to remain there, or have past grudges that cause them to return  
> to the list for revenge and to destroy the list—but they are easily  
> deleted too by the list owners Big Delete Key in the Sky.  ;)
>
>
> OK, back to my closet.
>
>
> Best Wishes,
>
>
> Mark Nelson
> www.PrecisionDigitalNegatives.com
> www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com
> PDNPrint Forum @ Yahoo Groups
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Diana Bloomfield <dhbloomfield at bellsouth.net>
> To: The alternative photographic processes mailing list <alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org 
> >
> Sent: Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:45 am
> Subject: [alt-photo] Re: DESICCATE! DESICCATE! DANCE TO THE MUSIC!
>
>
> Oh, and before anybody tells me that math and chemistry are  
> creative, too-- I've been married for 24 years to a mathematician/ 
> statistician, so yeah--  I hear you.
> Just covering all my bases here.
>
> Diana
>
> On Jul 28, 2010, at 12:31 PM, Diana Bloomfield wrote:
>
>> Haha.  Yeah, forgetting that smiley face will get you every time, >  
>> Paul.
>>
>> I've been avoiding the more recent brouhaha, though I did write a >  
>> related too-long post that I never posted.  I was out of town at  
>> the > time, and my computer wouldn't send it, which was probably  
>> for the > best.  The short version, however, was that if anybody  
>> had ever > uttered the word "molarity" or talked about "moles" (and  
>> not the > kind my cat periodically finds in our basement)  in any  
>> beginning > photography or alt processes class I'd ever taken, I  
>> probably would > have bolted for the nearest exit and assumed alt  
>> processes required > too much chemistry and math, and searched for  
>> something more creative.
>>
>> And, yeah, I think it's probably global warming.  It's hotter than  
>> > Hades down here at the beach today. :)
>>
>> Diana
>> On Jul 28, 2010, at 10:21 AM, Paul Viapiano wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, forgot the smiley face...
>>>
>>> But two sentences vs 150 or so posts...lighten up and relax. It's  
>>> >> only photography.
>>>
>>> Why is everyone so touchy here...global warming?
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo