On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Risa S. Horowitz wrote:
[quoting Terry]
> > I feel sorry for those poor souls whose vision has been blinkered by critcal
> >theorists.
Terry, I think you do not at all feel *sorry* for them, but rather feel
*superior* to them.
1 Sorrow is a complicated emotion. It may include an element of schadenfreude
but more, in my case, of there but for the grace of God go I.
2. I know of people who have been through degree and masters courses in
photography where critical theory has taken a high proportion of the course.
At the end of three,four,five,six years of photographic higher education they
still do not know how to develop a film so that they can communicate their
thoughts photographically, but they have a brainful of non productive theory.
I feel sorry for them that so much of their lives, at such a critical time, has
been wasted.
Terry King
Risa says:
> I'm angry at all the people who encourage mediocre photographers, because
> they prefer to gasp rather than to communicate.
Risa, Angry? And what do you mean "encourage"? Give them A's? Shows? Buy
their work?
What is not "mediocre"? Something more ascetic? Politically correct? But
mediocre photographers, if encouraged (or forced) to "communicate" would
surely communicate mediocre ideas. Sum total of mediocrity in the world
would remain the same. For which you should be glad -- there's room at the
top of whatever genre.
> I'm still waiting for alternatives from you Terry. Do you suggest we speak
> of photography only in terms of the zone system, ooh ahh in the gallery, and
> move on to the next picture?
> >
How about photographies? It is understood that "art" occurs on multiple
levels with multiple meanings & intentions. Is photography so much punier?
> CLASS: put your hands up if you're tired of seeing the same old shit day
> after day, even when the new superbookstore opens, has 15 square feet of
> photo books, and they're all ansel adams or freeman paterson. put your hands
> up if to say "what a nice picture" just doesn't cut it.
Risa, the superbookstore is exactly masscult. What could you expect else?
But who is Freeman Paterson?
Meanwhile, most of what is produced in all media is regurgitated pap. Look
at the magazines in the supermarket checkout line. "10 ways to please a
man in bed," "How to lose 10 pounds by Tuesday." "Perfect Hair in 10
Minutes." Masscult, too.
You really prefer so-called "conceptual photography" in all its
mind-blowing simple-mindedness? I'd say the true appeal of the genre is
that while making no demands on the viewer, who need know nothing except a
mindset, it permits him/ her to see him/herself as avant garde. Also a new
form of superiority -- moral superiority -- for the photographer, who no
longer has to go into war zones or climb mountains, can now claim any
clunky old thing is high -- and morally superior -- art... (And the best
"idea" is the best photograph? Feh!)
> I'll walk away from anyone from now on, who says to me of my work :what a
> nice picture.
Risa, depends on the sophistication level of the person making the remark.
If you've just discovered that *the standard* pretty pictures have been
made & should now be forbidden, fair enough and high time. But that
doesn't mean that literary & psychological "meanings" should get to put
their arms in the sleeves of photography and run it. Photography is still
a visual medium; it should well be *about* things, but one of the most
exciting, thrilling things for it to be about is indeed itself -- but
seen, conceived, operated, in exploratory, not imitative, mode.
Judy