RE: Bellocq images

From: Christopher Lovenguth ^lt;chrisml@pacbell.net>
Date: 12/11/03-11:05:00 AM Z
Message-id: <NGEDKLBDLINGALMFKOICAEHPCFAA.chrisml@pacbell.net>

Interesting version of the story of Bellocq. I have always loved his work
and have seen many prints of his. Someday, when I become a millionaire, his
work is one I plan to collect. In fact, at the Diane Arbus exhibit at
SFMOMA, there is a room with a bunch of her odds and ends she lived with
including images she had collected. I know of at least one Bellocq in that
room that she had collected.

What I find interesting is the attempt at justification of Bellocq as an
artist in that article by trying to demystify the man. Ironically at the
same time covering up the fact Bellocq did this work as advertisement for
the women he took images of. Instead this article makes is sound like he
planned a "private photographic project" and even called is Storyville
himself. So the author on one hand is demystifying the folklore of the
disfigured Bellocq and creating a myth of Bellocq as artist. Don't get me
wrong, his prints are wonderful. For one reason or another, faces were
scratched and negatives broken. He probably did scratch the faces because he
was making prints for advertisements and when one didn't come out the way he
wanted, he kept the anonymity of the woman but (now I'm personally guessing
here) kept the figure for himself. Or the faces were intentionally scratched
because these images were probably "handed" out secretly as advertisement
and didn't want to show the identities of the woman. Again this is my
speculation. Of course if that is true, you would think at least one
original print would have survived, so who knows.

For me it's refreshing for once to see work that impacts me personally that
wasn't the intention of the one who made it. I prefer the broken glass
negative images and the scratched faces myself, but lets remember that it
wasn't the intention for those to be presented to the public like that. His
undamaged images prove to me his ability to create as well and I do believe
that it merits praise of his abilities, whether or not it labels him an
artist is entirely another debate (what makes and artist? Preconceived
ideas, etc?.....I DO NOT want to go in to that in this email so please don't
start a whole debate on just "what is an artist" just because I noted this
here in brackets).

-Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: John Cremati [mailto:johnjohnc@core.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 5:45 AM
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Bellocq images

 The Friends of Photography at Cleveland Museum of Art just purchased two
Bellocq images printed by Friendlander. Until recently no prints made by
Bellocq were known to exist. This site has a brief description about
Bellocq and his life (The images purchased are not on this site).

http://www.corpse.org/issue_10/gallery/bellocq/index.htm

Just thought someone may find it interesting..

John Cremati
Received on Thu Dec 11 11:05:56 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 01/02/04-09:36:33 AM Z CST