Kalimompro@aol.com
Sun, 25 Jul 1999 10:48:25 -0400 (EDT)
I appreciate what Stieglitz said, and what you are saying.
I, for one, went to grad school in the early '90s when conceptual, post
modern, art ruled. Process often took precident over product. I love this
kind of method. However, some of my professors sacrificed the teaching of
formal technique for the teaching of content/politics/polemics. Often,
professors expected us to be able to write about our work and explain it to
death, instead of allowing the work to speak for itself -- as a visual means
of communication. Some of my collegues ended up making work that might as
well have been advertising, because it practically bludgeoned one with its
message.
There's no reason why there should be such a division between art and craft.
I love both, although, because of my background, I often have had to find the
craft elsewhere than in academia -- like on this list.
I feel that someone has yet to beat the master-apprentice model of education.
In this way, I think a student can learn the most about the head, heart, and
soul of art.
Regards,
kali
In a message dated 7/25/99 12:07:24 AM, hamish.stewart@wanadoo.fr writes:
<<>You sound like Stieglitz, "I will not sell my print to you, because you
>cannot appreciate my Art"
Thats why I like his work - an arrogant obtuse character but with the
determination to make his work as he wanted. No comprise. Without him,
photography as a means of creative expression would not have progressed
as much as it has - we owe this man a great deal...
Yes he is celebrated for saying harsh and unreasonable comments about how
people saw his work, but perhaps a realistic reflection that often,
people by art because it matches the sofa :-)
And I agree with Jeffrey that we can sometimes become so caught up in the
process that we forget the reasons for doing in the first place. I have a
feeling - based on some of the shows I've seen in the last few years that
we are becoming - generally - more focused on the process that the work.
Of course on this list technical issues are important for discussion -
one of the reasons the list exists - yet maybe we do need to ask more the
whys than the hows occassionally. I feel this is relevant for discussion
because I am frankly sick of seeing mind bogglingly boring platinium
prints - just because of the way we make the print is no justification
for its value. I do see a lot more emphaiss in marketing literature these
days on HOW the print is made rather than the reason for making it. And
Jeffrey's comment about only one question about WHY print on fabric does
speak a great deal about our priorities...
Technical questions are of course important and I am always happy to
discuss them, and I run workshops too, but often other photographers will
ask how you made it, rather than why did you make that choice rather than
another. And all this for me begs another question which is why do we
choose to work in alt processes and why the process(s) that we work with.
Whats the relationship between the image and the method we make the
print? Yes I think we need to ask these questions more often.
My 2 cents
Cheers
Hamish>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:40:38