RE: What is "Good Photography"?

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Christopher Lovenguth (chrisml@pacbell.net)
Date: 02/19/02-08:05:14 PM Z


I find it interesting that of all groups of people us photographers would
not see the significant statement being made in having a room transform
itself from light to dark at calculated intervals. Ironic to me that whom
criticizes this wouldn't think about this idea but focus more on effort made
in an object (or lack there of). But then again being so focused in
alternative process is all about a precious object. Not that I'm personally
attacking any of you I just find this interesting. I also find it
interesting that people really believe that curators have that much power.
Also the fact that some artists seem the need to attack the validity of
someone else's work. There is already such little support of artists in this
world and now in this post-modern era artist also have to look out for other
artist questioning validity. Not questioning style, composition and form,
mind you, but rather if it is altogether is worth looking at as art. I call
this the "I can do that so it isn't art" syndrome.

-----Original Message-----
From: illovich [mailto:illovich@home.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 1:36 PM
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Re: What is "Good Photography"?

>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