Why post a title the subject is obvious.

<p>My fly rods are for catching fish. Once I've caught the fish (and released it), it's going to be very difficult to catch the next fish if I forget the rod & reel. Although I get Tzu's point (and Julie's), it's a weak analog. Trappers forgetting their traps? It doesn't happen.</p>

<p>Brains are for catching words (and other things). Once you've caught the words, can you forget yourself?</p>

<p>Time for coffee...</p>

<p><strong>Glen - "</strong>Sorry guys, but I'm having trouble taking the whole discussion too seriously. Titles are a convenience for the rest of the world. Something an artist does FOR people who aren't him"</p>

<p>I disagree. It's another creative decision that has an influence on the finished work. Many artists use titles as a kind of brief parallel narrative (or caption). Some titles can expand on the range of potential meanings of an image, others can crystallize it into <em>one, </em>or serve as perfunctory tags, though it is hard to imagine a title (outside of a catalog number) that doesn't affect an image in one way or another.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Another thing is that text and titles in still photography can function as a dialogue, an unfolding story, and where the text doesn't necessarily and literally has to describe what's visually there. Like in cinema. Still photography too is about a certain movement, about a direction. Doesn't have to include the use of text / titles / paint / whatever, but if it works it might just as well.</p>

<p>I think Glen's right about doing-for, and maybe "doing-for" is what he, and some others may be doing photographically. As a matter of fact, his idea of art-as-generosity is the only serious attempt I can recall of anybody attempting to clarify what he means by "art." He's commenting on the generosity of the artist (as opposed to the stinginess of the wanker).</p>

<p>However, I think "art" only earns the term if it's a fisherman's dry fly, floated into the stream in hopes that perhaps a trout is in there and prepared to bite. In other words, if there are too many bites (high ratings on P.N) it's unlikely to be "art"...because the bites may be coming mostly from suckers (a type of bottom-feeding fish).</p>

<p>...I should credit Luis G for that fly fishing metaphor...I think he's used it before. </p>

<p>I disagree with the fishing metaphor. Art is communication, real communication between equals, not the fake communication a predator has with prey. <br>

Hah! As far as 'nibbles' go, as an artsy fisherman, I would starve!</p>

<p>Duane Michals has an ability to instil a level of emotion and power into a photograph by writing captions below his photos. Whilst some might have been redundant, the very best were incredibly poignant.</p>