From: Rod Fleming (rodfleming@sol.co.uk)
Date: 09/19/00-03:31:15 AM Z
Hi
----- Original Message -----
From: "Judy Seigel" <jseigel@panix.com>
> I did a critique of a Sturges seen in the first volume of 21st,
.................... Trust me, the work is lousy.
Er, no, it's not, but that's the most telling statement I've heard from you
on this. And isn't trust the underlying thrust of your argument here? You
simply don't trust other people to make their own decisions, so you want to
make them for them. From sweeping attacks on nude photography in general,
which you analogised to public execution of religious minorities, you are
now reduced to saying that you disapprove of a narrower spectrum of
tit-and-bum, advertising and fashion photography, which we know is shallow
nonsense. But of course, you don't trust _us_ to make that judgement, do
you? This is the central timber of Political Correctness- remove the
possibility of others to disagree by ruling the means of disagreement out of
bounds, and it _is_ the one bankrupt issue in this whole debate.
Trust me, this time- I may not have been at this as long as you, but I first
seriously studied art (as a mature student) in the '70's and immediately
found that my favourite medium- figuration, of the nude, was roundly
condemned as a vehicle for finished work. Curiously, though, colleges were
happy to have us study figure drawing. (I should perhaps explain that for my
degree (which I took with Honours) I studied both photography and sculpture,
just for information.)
I found myself attacked on two fronts- from the academic establishment which
sought to inculcate their philosophy that abstraction was the only
acceptable mode of expression for a modern visual artist, and the feminists,
who wheeled out exactly the same tired mantra that you have been reciting
from this last week. (Often these two came wrapped up in the same person,
funnily enough.)
(I cannot tell you what a wonderful relief it was to find the work of Edward
Weston, buried away in the college library- here was a man who proved all
the wagging tongues wrong, whose images, resplendent in their beauty and
grandeur, leapt off the page.)
Yet again these last few days have I heard the same old, debunked claptrap-
the attempt to suggest that someone who argues in favour of the nude must
obviously also be a racist, the suggestion that photography of the nude is
on a par with "Coon" (your word) photography. "High falutin soft-porn," I
think you said. In fact this smokescreen of non-sequitur is the surest
telltale of the failure of your argument- by using unproved association with
things which most thinking people would condemn, you attempt to condemn your
present target, photography of the nude. The merest semantics.
Yet- presumably to lend your point of view some gravitas- you claim to
support certain artists of the nude, including Helmut Newton (boy there's a
visionary for you!)... So what are your criteria? Is it not just that as
long as _you_ are allowed to decide who and what is or is not acceptable,
that's fine- but no-one else, and surely not any man, is allowed to make
that decision? As long as a photographer fits into the straitjacket of what
is Politically Correct enough for you, he or she gets the "Officially
approved by J Siegel" stamp on their upturned botty? Don't you descry
something a little unreasonable in your platform?
The real evidence is in the work. Just look at the numbers of figurative
artists working today- no, in fact just look at the numbers of highly
creative, exciting photographers working with the nude today, by no means
all of them male, and recognise that the tide has turned.
As for your opinion of Sturges, and your somewhat uppity suggestion that I
need to hear your final words on the man's work in order to have a valid
opinion of it, I am afraid that I must assure you that I am perfectly
capable of making up my own mind about an artist's work, and don't need to
have my opinions made for me by others, and particularly not others who
clearly bend to the fading breeze of Political Correctness. I have my
excellent training to thank for this, at least in part.
_You_ may not trust me to have a valid point of view, but _I_ trust myself.
As a matter of fact I got out my Sturges books last night, and if anything
was inclined to rate him more highly afterwards than before.
There are always those who prefer to criticise than to appreciate, but I
prefer the latter approach myself. I think I get more out of life by
remaining open. I certainly get more out of art.
Oh, and by the way, I did not "praise humanism". I referred to Humanism,
which was a recognised socio-political influence at the time of the
Renaissance in Italy, and without an understanding of which, a deep
appreciation of the Renaissance will escape you. I still think Burckhardt's
"Civilisation of the Renaissance" is the best tome on the subject- Amazon
have it.
Rod
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 10/01/00-12:09:00 PM Z CDT