Thomas Struth

"The average man seeks agreement in the eyes of others and calls it perfection."

 

"The man of knowledge seeks impeccability in works and calls it humility." Don Juan from Carlos Castaneda's books

 

Since I am neither, I will be reduced to farting words or, "It is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

 

Is money (and the collective wisdom which accompaines it) the measure of success, of art, of self-worth? People with too much time and money have to spend it on something, why not pictures? Is the value of a work ruined by the application of money or enhanced by it?

 

Tim, AKA Quido Fartori, noseoil maker

Nigel,<P>Here are some other photographers to avoid: Richard Misrach, Robert

Adams, & Nicholas Nixon. <P>This wholething is sort of like jazz: if someone hs to

explainn it to you, you'll never get it. But I do advise you to try and see the real prints

sometime. Beyond the art world hype (andsome of the art that gets hyped by the

"Painted word" types, actually has intrinisic value beyond the hype.

Having spent months being saturated by Thomas Struth's work

(my wife to be is the graphic designer who does the ads for the

Met in NYC) I have several observations.

 

I (and I put an emphasis on "I") don't feel that Struth is a "bad"

photographer, I just don't feel that he is a great photographer.

 

As for everyone getting their respective panties in a bunch over

Struth, calm the f*ck down!!! If you get this bent of shape over

this, I would hate to see what would happen in a real crisis!!!

 

Struth does his thing, and so do you. As for the art world going

ga ga over him, remember that on thursday Victoria Gotti had an

opening in a Chelsea Gallery and sold poop loads of paintings

for $10,000 a piece. We are talking here about sixth grade level

painting of Rosie O' Donnel clad in leather, with a JOHN GOTTI

tatoo on a motercylcle vaulting over leather clad lesbians.

 

A fight nearly broke out over that painting over who shall own it!!!

 

For those of you who will yell that $10,000 is not a lot of money

for art- spent some time comparing how much you can buy

weston prints for, and how much a 16x20 Link will cost you.

 

What I do find utterly un-believable about Struth are his 30

minute videos of people just staring at the camera. It reminds of

those boring boring boring Warhol films (eat, sleep, and b*ow

job).

 

As for Struth being the current state of LFP, is like calling the it

the current state of 1/2" drive ratchets. When you look at work,

you don't care about what format it was shot in as much as when

you admire a car you don't care about what size ratchet was

used to put it together.

 

As for the remark on people not having lives on Friday Nite, we

fell asleep at 11:30 last nite. I guess we are losers........

"Did you see his newest book project where he is taking very unsharp pictures of

porno scenes from videos on his TV!"

 

That's Thomas Ruff

Nigel, what's your take on Hiroshi Sugimoto?

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/gallery/0,8542,770712,00.html

I couldn't find a decent sized reporduction on line, but this is one of my current favourites:

 

http://www.photoeye.com/OpenSearchEmail.cfm?Catalog=sm159

 

I like what it says about the "wilderness" and american icons - sort of the anti-ansel.

 

An immediate question that comes to mind for me is, why has every picture I've ever seen of El Cap missed out the road and the stream of tourists? Has there been an unspoken conspiracy among photogrpahers to deceive those who have never visited Yosemite (that among other things a road as wide and as smooth as a major trunk road in the UK passes through this "pristine wilderness". or that everyone lined up along the road with their point and shoots will all be comoing hoime with the same iconic picture).

I couldn't wait to see the discussions around contemporary photography getting restarted. Does anyone remember the illuminating debates around the citibank price?<p>

<a href="http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m0268/9_40/86647178/p1/article.jhtml?term=%2Bstruth+%2Bparadise">Here </a>Mr. Struth himself gives some insights on his "Paradise" series mentioned above. <p>

 

I am really embarassed but for me this series is amoung the best he made. He called some of these pics "membranes for meditation"- thats it.

martin, I'm glad you mentioned this series - a big favourite of mine too. limiting yourself to a very limited tonal pallette like this is a challenge, yet struth does it and produces mesmirising photos. Like all artists, I like some of his work and dislike others, but he works hard and often produces very in-depth work.

 

Julian

Martin, I find this quote interesting:

 

"At this point, "Paradise" consists of twenty-five photographs I'm just beginning to understand. intuition is an old word, but many things sprout from inner processes and needs and then take on a form. My approach to the jungle pictures might be said to be new, in that my initial impulses were pictorial and emotional, rather than theoretical. They are "unconscious places" and thus seem to follow my early city pictures."

 

I think the artist's own words regarding his working methodology, at least pertaining to the jungle series, sums it all up.

 

I wouldn't put much stock in over-analysing his images after the fact. Intuition in art-making is an interesting subject, which reminds me of the surrealists and their auto-writing and group-poem methods of creating written works.

 

Intuition in the photographic process is less well understood or appreciated, I suppose; although that is where many pinhole photographers are coming from, too.

He appears to be an extremely competent commercial photographer. There's a lot of sour grapes in this thread.

Ermm, Tim , wasn't it you that posted this link:

 

http://www.artnet.com/ag/fineartdetail.asp?aid=16228&wid=165283&page=5&group=&max_tn_page=

 

 

I'm not sure if he is saying "Wilderness, what wilderness?" or "Look what you did to the wilderness!".... I suspect, whichever it is, it will have delighted the East Coast art establishment.... I like it. Having been bought up on the Adams-esque images of El Capitan, it certainly supplies a jolt.

 

.

 

 

On a more general note, as for if it is "art" - dunno - don't care. If the creator of a work says it is art, I am willing to go along with that - I've never heard any other definition that holds water. Whole books, indeed, whole degree courses, have been set up to answer that question and still no one can agree so that definition will do as a working hypothesis for me....

 

Asking if a work is "good" art gets things even more complicated. Taking the view that art is about communication (after all, we are Human - communicating is what we do - it is, to a large degree, what we are) then by definition it is a subjective matter so my definition of "good" art is different to someone else�s.

 

This is why it is important to distinguish between the art establishment (the aforementioned clique of self-supporting artists, galleries, auction houses and patrons, each spiralling around one another in a perpetual motion machine greased with money) and the work itself. Some such work is good, some is bad. Which is good? Which is bad? Well, the stuff I like is good - the other stuff isn't... Contrary to some other people's opinions, the well worn phrase: "I don't know anything about art, but I know what I like" is a perfectly valid position to me: if only because the speaker *does* know about art, we *all* do - we are human.

 

If a work communicates to you in a way you find fulfilling then it is good art for you, if it doesn't, it isn't. Any other definition of "good" and "bad" art is to abdicate control of your own emotional responses to some self-justifying, elite committee of experts who have all the training and professional qualifications (and the money) to decide for you.

 

Well, stuff that!

Nigel: As many others recommended, see more of Struth's work. His recent exhibition in Los Angeles was excellent (or did you pick this one as a straw man, easy to attack??) Brian: You clearly know little of the "art world" you so unfortunately attempt to describe. A "literal" "handful" of artists and critics? Count up the artists who have been shown at major US museums alone in the past decade, add in all the other working artists in the country, including art department faculty at US colleges... that's only a fraction, yet far more than a "handful." Please actually have something to say before wasting space here.

Hi All,

When I saw the article about Struth in View Camera, I thought it was a joke. When I realized it wasn't, I became angry that such trash was wasting magazine space. If a photograph needs paragraphs of verbal filler to be understood, I consider it meaningless as photography. His work, to me, is boring and amaturish. The fact that it sells for what it does is regretable.

Peter

Paul, What's wrong, do you have a reading comprehension problem or something? I was talking about what I called "high end art," which I arbitrarily defined as art selling for $100,000 and up. And you tell me I wasted space because I ignored college art department faculty members and "artists all around the country?" I apparently shocked you by pointing out the obvious, i.e. that artists' reputations and prices are often based on things other than pure artistic merit. So I'm sorry to do this to you but get ready for another shock - college faculty members and 99.9% of the "artists all around the country" don't produce work that commands $100,000 and up prices and so they weren't the subject of my message.

Part of what made the "Paradise" series hard for me at first was the limited color palette. They're not images that I would immediately identify as beautiful. They're full of life, but they're not conveying a romantic vision of Paradise. I see the photographs and realize that Paradise may in fact be hot, humid, and full of mosquitoes. It is not necessarily pretty, well organized, or germ-free.

 

Tim Atherton raises a good issue, why do so many pictures of El Capitan happen to omit the road and the hordes of tourists? Well, many people, both photographers and people who buy photographs, demand their nature in all its grandeur. If they're going to hang a landscape on their wall, it damn well better be pristine and pretty - preferably with majestic mountains and some dramatic thunderclouds - gentle meadows containing delicate flowers are also acceptable. Struth doesn't give them that. (No knock on the aforementioned subjects, but if you think that romantic images are all that's worth looking at, you're missing out on a lot).

 

I don't think Struth's nature landscapes are his best work. (BTW, if the jpeg referenced in the original post is of the print I think it is, it bears only the slightest resemblance to the actual item.) As I noted in my earlier post, I think his portraits are great. I also think his urban landscapes are quite good. Anyone else with a take on those?

 

Chris

Nigel

 

I could not get through to the site, BUT, I did spend several hours looking at the Met's exhibit of his stuff last April.

 

WHAT A TOTAL WASTE OF TIME!!

 

I came with an open mind and am glad for that, as none of it stuck to pollute my senses. For all I could see, it was just a LF camera pointed at random and the shutter clicked at random.

 

I can understand photos of urban desloation, but please have something in the images rather than just empty buildings. I know some will say it is art even if it invokes a negative emotion in me, but that stuff did not even do that.

 

Not to mention the videos he did where some people just stared blankly at a video camera for an hour. There was a lot of twaddle about getting intouch with the inner "self" of the subject- FFEHHH.

 

My respect for for the photo dept of the Met has diminished greatly.

 

Thanks for letting me rant.

 

Cheers

I think Struth is intermittently interesting, though not as interesting as Andreas Gursky or Rut Blaes Luxembourg (who hasn't been mentioned yet). What is also interesting is that this kind of Large Format photography is currently fashionable in the gallery world, most of it in a 'cold' documentary manner influenced by the Bechers. This is possibly a reaction to the ubiquity of disposable 35mm and hand-held digital cameras. No doubt the fad will pass, and then we'll all be in a better position to assess the work of those involved (as well as those passed over).

Struth did a series of church interiors, in effect photos of people looking at paintings. Someone once said that Atget mattered because of where he placed the camera. Looking at Struth's pictures of Italian churches, I constantly find myself thinking the opposite: what a stupid place to put the camera. (I have shot interiors in the same churches that he used, and possibly tried to answer some of the same compositional questions that interested him.) On the other hand, there are other series where the placement is very intelligent. I feel quite entitled to pick and mix, and be discriminatory. It's not necessary to accept or reject an entire body of work wholesale.

"I think Struth is intermittently interesting, though not as interesting as

Andreas Gursky or Rut Blaes Luxembourg (who hasn't been mentioned yet)"

 

To which I would add Candids Hoefer and Lynn Cohen

 

"I feel

quite entitled to pick and mix, and be discriminatory. It's not necessary to

accept or reject an entire body of work wholesale."

 

Absolutley (though some hit the mark more consistently than others perhaps). To me, what is interesting, is the overall thrust of this movement in photogprahy/art - in many different parts of the globe, coming at this views from slightly different directions, and yet with certain common threads

Candida Hoefer

Tim mentioned Candida Hoefer. Her last book was a tour deforce in technique IMO. Her lighting is wonderful, as is her composition which I can only describe as 'ruthless' - and, unusually she shoots square - anyone know how?? Not a good edit or webe friendly but you can see ehr stuff here http://www.renabranstengallery.com/hofer.html

<p>This guy is quite interesting: <a

href="http://www.staleywise.com/collection/krisar/krisar.html">

Anders Krisar</a>. He's not been photographing long, but is

already selling prints at prices these discussions on photo.net

usually regard as ridiculous.</p>

 

<p>He's had a mixed press here in his homeland, Sweden. Our

version of Pop Photo ("Foto - better than Pop, but still aimed at

camera users as much as photographers) couldn't get over how

much he was selling prints for, and kept banging on about

money instead of photography. The pro photographers'

association rag, knowing that the look is old hat in interior and

cosmetics advertising, panned him for having that same old

uncharted wilderness nostalgia.</p>

 

<p>Since he's not a big name, it's fun to make your own mind up

and see what happens later. I found his approach refreshing

amoung landscape photography, and particularly liked some of

the cows, but wouldn't stump up the required money if

asked.</p>

Stru,

 

thanks so much for that link to Krisar. his landscapes reminded me very much of another photographer of similar talents, whom, if the artworld deemed fit, would very much like the attention and subsequent monies.

 

my mom,

 

me

 

p.s. she's got some lovely shots of cozumel, puerto vallarta and hawaii with the horizon centered just so. i'll start the bidding at $100,000. anyone? anyone?

<p>Perhaps <a

href="http://www.thegreatillusion.com/mother.html">this</a> is

more your style?</p>

 

<p>I have Found Art in my mother's photography. Not often now

she uses APS admittedly, but she has a good eye.</p>

aaw stru,

 

it's so nice of you to remember my tatoo. makes me blush. also makes me remember that jug of uzo we shared on knossos. the night i showed you that tatoo?

 

meeeeemo-reeeeez,

 

me

 

p.s. i find art in my nieces'(3, 8 y-o) photos... not mom's. they break every compositional rule but backwards and upside down. mom's rule-breaking looks too much like krisar's. i'm thinking maybe she's a big fan of his and this streak of emulation is just a passing phase. the next item up for bid by this magnificent 'naive' artist is called 'lenscap', we'll start bidding at $300,000.

 

p.p.s. let's hook up again real soon shoog. i'll let you eat omelettes off my latest tatoo just like that wild night on knossos. the new one fairly sprawls across my entire back. it's a wizard, with scepter in one hand, levitating an orb in the other while a unicorn flits past a crescent moon in the background. very tasteful... and tasty. hint hint. giggle giggle.

Heart of a heartless world, I am touched, but truly. However, I

think you are confusing me with some other Struan Gray. It's a

very common name.

 

I'm glad you have some friends to play with though.