Hello again,
> --but I don't buy the responses about the garb or the backdrop
> (although I do admire and respect the responders, mind you). The garb
> looks very utilitarian and purposeful. And the backdrop is a backdrop.
> It looks very studio to me. I mean, look at the set of the shadow.
> Right?
It looks like a plain old shirt to me, at best i'd say it's a smock, such a
fun word to say, SMOCK. The backdrop looks like a wall to me, a plain
ordinary wall.
> It's a very compelling image--somewhere between portrait and
> industrial. And very studio. Marxist, even.
It looks like a portrait taken of a guy practicing his trade to me. As far
as being Marxist or Socialist, that could be because he actually quite
resembles the atypical "commie" as printed on anti-communism posters here in
the US during the 50's and 60's. Pointy chinned beard, mustache, sort of
devilish looking.
> . . . or maybe I'm just reading too much in to it. . . . what do I know
> . . .?
Personally I think you are. To be quite honest I find this picture rather
dull and boring and the only thing of interest (to me) is that I now know
what A. L. Coburn looks like...But that's just me.... :)
-David-
*****
Life is nothing but a competition to be
the criminal rather than the victim.
-Bertrand Russell
Received on Sat Nov 29 08:50:42 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 12/04/03-05:18:03 PM Z CST