From: Jack Fulton (jefulton1@attbi.com)
Date: 12/30/02-09:47:43 AM Z
I'm not going to get into the:
1 debate on takin a whiz in a barn or street
2. great Art moments of ought two
but
here in San Francisco we had:
a) Richard Misrach's views of the Golden Gate Bridge
b) Gerhard Richter's work
c) Lewis Carrol's ouevre
d) terrific problems regarding homeless people using the city as a bathroom
We've now installed those French/Parisian toilets in certain areas of people
massing. It is free. Elsewhere it costs 25¢. It seems to help . . otherwise,
many folks of both sexes whiz into one of the more popular fountains. I was
in the Haight Ashbury the other day w/my students walking to the AIDS
memeorial and a young (close to 40) woman staggered along obviously totally
stoned on something and took a whiz right there on the lawn next to the bus
stop.
Emmit Gowin has obviously loved his wife for decades (& still does) and when
he took the photograph probably thought it was sexy or even kinky. His
mentor was Harry Callahan who photographed Edith (same name) in all manners
fit for the morality of his time. Emmit's work fit the changing mores of
that crazed era and therefore is interesting. In fact, if I remember
correctly, it was a circular photograph. That relates to his lovely imagery
from the air of farming areas. You folks are very interested in prurient
behaviour. Good for Emmit. Good for Edith.
The work from the above three artists was impressive. They were all good
exhibits and I appreciated the long time and continued interest they held in
subject matter. It was all competent. However, I left each exhibit wondering
whether I was impressed in a truly meaningful manner. Perhaps being older I
could well be a bit jaded. Richter virtually did not move me at all.
Extremely competent, overladen with politics and a brain that employs clever
methodology and hard work. It was like a clock tick ticking along.
Lewis Carrol photographed the same pose so many times it was most tedious to
peruse the exhibit. Now and then a particular photograph stood out and
generally it was one which has been published prior . . and easy to see why
it stood out. So this exhibit was informative in the long run. Yet, it was
'sold' as perhaps being prurient what with the long held notion of his
pedophilia. I didn't feel any of that to be the case both in knowing his
history and in looking at all the works.
Richard Misrach made more beautiful images of light and daily color.
Impressive too but I asked whether it was the scale and large format camera
that held my attention.
Sorry . . that was more than 2¢ worth.
happy happy New Year . . . may 2003 see us continuing in our fascinating and
meandering vein of loquacity.
Jack
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 01/31/03-09:31:26 AM Z CST