Re: What is "Good Photography"?

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: illovich (illovich@home.com)
Date: 02/19/02-03:36:27 PM Z


>At 08:34 PM 18/02/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>He can do whatever he wants, and the critics will declare that it's art,
>especially if it
>>annoys normal people".
>>
>>Link to Barry's column:
>>http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/living/columnists/dave_barry/2679614.ht
>
>It's the Emperor's new clothes!
>
>The trouble that the misinformed and ignorant public (like me and you) has
>is that when we dare to speak up and say that these so-called "art works"
>are preposterous and outrageous, then the defenders of art suddenly crawl
>out from the crevices to chastise us for missing the point of the work and
>of art itself. There seems to be no point in even trying to debate the
>matter, because if the almighty curator has pontificated that the work is
>art, then why would we even dare suggest that it is not! The appeal to
>authority is stronger than common sense, even though the janitor correctly
>recognized the trash installation for what it was and tried to dispose of it.

All very well and good...when you saw the piece in question, what did
you think of it?


Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/08/02-09:45:22 AM Z CST