Liam Lawless (lawless@vignette.freeserve.co.uk)
Wed, 24 Feb 1999 20:51:17 +0000
Hi,
Just a thought triggered by Andrei's message. The credits to Hollywood
movies, TV films, etc., seem to list everyone who has had anything to do
with a production, right down to who made the tea. Maybe it's Equity
insists on this, but how much notice do we take of the credits rolling at
the end of a film? Speaking for myself, hardly any - I'm at the front of
the scramble for the exit. It's the "stars" that we remember, the ones who
are always in the public eye. In my opinion, the writers, not the actors,
are the creative ones, but how much notice do we take of them?
Liam
-----Original Message-----
From: aharwell@hhpa.com <aharwell@hhpa.com>
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Date: 24 February 1999 17:20
Subject: RE: A modest proposal -- the imp. signature
>The concept of the "authenticity" of art is something that has vexed
critics
>and artsits alike throughout the latter part of the twentieth century. As
>an architect, I have a slightly different perspective on what creates an
>"authentic" work. Architectural offices still act like the ateliers of the
>historical masters in that the vision of one person (be he the designer of
a
>project or simply the proprieter of an architectural office) is given the
>credit for the work of the many architects, draftsmen, consultants,
>constructors, and craftsmen who participate in the creation of an
>architectural work. In some cases, new work from an office (like Skidmore,
>Owings, and Merrill) is still attributed to founding partners (now
deceased)
>in a firm. Perhaps unethically, the vast majority of contributors to a
>project are never recognized.
>
>A similar condition exists in photography, although on a smaller scale.
The
>photographer is recognized as a sole creator, while in fact it is possible
>that there are many that cotribute to a final image including the lighting
>assistants, paper designers, lab employees, printers, etc. It is the role
>of the photographer to synthesize these elements with his vision into a
>final product, an artifact which derives greatly from the visions of many.
>
>In this sense, it is irrelevent who prints an image, or even who clicks the
>shutter. What is important is who the purveyor of the final artifact is;
>who directs the synthesis of the elements of light, chemestry, paper, and
>vision.
>
> Andrei S. Harwell
> HHPA
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:54