Re: Definition- landscape arguement continued

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Clay (wcharmon@wt.net)
Date: 12/22/02-12:46:01 PM Z


Its really not a landscape without a white styrofoam cup somewhere in
it.
A kind of post-industrial grace note. Sort of like 'Where's Waldo?'
meets Ansel Adams

Clay
On Sunday, December 22, 2002, at 04:17 AM, Katharine Thayer wrote:

> Shannon Stoney wrote:
>
>> Of course just trees and rocks by themselves without
>>> a gas station or garbage pail, or trailer park or wrecked auto parts
>>> are
>>> same old same old. Sure, trees are pretty, but IMO all the good
>>> trees have
>>> been taken -- so what else is new?
>>
>> I'm having a sense of deja vu all over again.
>>
>
>
> The idea that only trailer parks, junkyards, garbage pails, nuclear
> power plants and the like are elements of the "landscape" worth
> photographing, and that only the inclusion of some such ironic
> contradiction can raise a landscape photograph to the level of art, is
> in itself getting to be very same old same old; the contradiction has
> been done to death til it's frankly not very interesting any more. My
> ideas on this and related questions are presented at more length in an
> article I've written on the new pictorial landscape photograph; in the
> event that it may be published this year, which I've been led to
> believe
> is a distinct possibility, I probably shouldn't repeat what I said
> there, so I'll just say for now that the times they are a changing, and
> that whole conventional wisdom cited above belongs to 25 years ago, in
> my opinion.
> Katharine Thayer
>


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 01/31/03-09:31:26 AM Z CST