From: shannon stoney (sstoney@pdq.net)
Date: 02/11/01-08:11:55 PM Z
Judy wrote:
>It's hard to believe even tenured professors don't know "modernism" is so
>totally over, dead, buried, with a stake through its heart by end of the
>'70s -- after years of passion and agitation to legalize "pluralism" or
>post-modernism or whatever you like to call it.
In fairness to the teachers at my university, I think they do know that
modernism is dead, but Pictorialism is even deader. Although I remember
somebody showing some prints last semester, and our grad assistant teacher
thought it looked like Pictorialism and recommended that she look at some
old issues of Camera Work. He seemed to be saying it was ok to look
Pictorial.
>
>I've read a lot of Stieglitz & don't remember him saying "perfectly
>focussed, perfectly sharp." He did certainly prefer *straight* photography
>(and crooked painting) by 1915 or so, but I think that perfect sharpness
>stuff may well have been a corruption by disciples/epigones grinding their
>own axes.
Yeah, I was sort of mixed up about that. A little review of my photo
history book straightened me out.
>
>> > silver print was the apotheosis of photography may take a long time
>> to go > away. (let's just be glad we weren't married to him, like
>> O'Keefe!)
>
>Oh lordy, which of those fellows would we want to be married to?
Hmmm...I'll have to think about that and get back to you. :-)
--shannon
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/06/01-04:55:39 PM Z CST