HCB Exhibit

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by yeffe, Jan 26, 2006.

  1. Interesting article in today's NY Times on the first solo HCB show since his death in '04.
    Featured are some juicy quotes from the sainted father of street photography:
    HCB called photography a 'duel without rules." The subtitle of the show (they seem to have
    omitted the main title from the article) is, "The Inner Silence of the Consenting Victim",
    borrowed from one of HCB's phrases. This begs the question, "how natural can a portrait
    ever be?"

    Of course his portraiture, especially after HCB became world-famous, was completely
    different from his street work. Contrivance was common in his portraiture ("Thus a large
    cross appears above the head of painter Charles Roualt"), etc.

    At the HCB Foundation in Paris.
     
  2. jtk

    jtk

    "Street photography" often seems the ultimate "contrivance."

    The street photographer's contrivance is that of an adolescent peeping-tom, arranging for subjects to be unaware, ignoring them as individuals, shy or literally afraid of personal contact.

    Portraits can by contrast be a reciprocal breaking through of (for example) the photographer's adolescence or the subject's rigid adult poses by photographer and subject ... HCB's adolescent pose is blatant in the quotations Jeff Cosley cited.

    The superior portrait photographer (eg. Avedon or Arnold Newman or Weston) aspires to openness or insight, is unconcerned with theatrical coincidences (arguably HCB's moments), yearns to establish relationship with his subject rather than lowering himself to victimization or duel. HCB was bolder, more the man, in his portraits than in his wonderful street work. But adolescence gives us a lot, after all: think about our own.
     
  3. Photographic processes are essentially contrivances, an artifactual bundle of supposed
    auto-writing born out of a fascination with 'realism,' whatever that meant to the
    nineteenth-century.

    Hattersley wrote about the arrested emotional development of those who photograph
    because they don't have the courage to, "approach the object of their desire and offer their
    manhood," thus placing themselves in a vulnerable spot.

    I don't necessarily see street work an exercise in adolescent pining and avoidance of actual
    contact with the world. It can, at its best, be a brief conversation between adults or
    between the visible world and the artist, but it's true the person with the camera is a
    predator, thus giving him or her cover and a potentially frightening upper hand.
     
  4. jtk

    jtk

    The camera doesn't make a predator of an adult human and no photographer dealing respectfully with his subject has a "frighteningly potential upper hand".

    That's precisely the adolescent contrivance to which I was referring. Adolescents are commonly proud of "predatory" or "outsider" identity (think about punk imagery), which is their immature self-deception.

    Predators feed on the weak. Watch an eagle in a marsh. Street photographers prefer the homeless, old, and unfashionable: they're predators. In adulthood we stop being predators if we continue to develop. HCB, who claimed he was a predator, stopped.
     
  5. I see the 'frightening potential...... " as exactly that, a potential that, pretty much anyone
    immersed in a culture of self-conscious social and economic status, is going to have at
    least a flash of concern ranging to outright dread when the camera swings his way.
    The entire 19th century enterprise of striving to 'fix nature's image permanently on a plate'
    seems quaintly vain to say the least if not downright narcissistic. Now, in the video age
    with print stills relegated to the tabloids, we have a mainstream culture consisting of
    narcissism blended with irony.

    The best of the lot, Newman, Avedon, Lange, etc. excelled mainly because of their human
    qualities. Besides bashing the girl-watchers, Hattersley also maintained that if your aims
    were well self-understood, there would be a tendency for people to open up and accept
    your presence. His prime example was Ken Heyman, a huge guy who knew how to get the
    attention off himself by behaving in a totally unassuming way.
     
  6. Street photographers prefer the homeless, old, and unfashionable: they're predators.
    Yikes!!!
    Hooey Alert... Please share a few names that went into your survey rather than broadbrush with only an opinion. Do you even know any serious "street photographers?"
     
  7. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Street photographers prefer the homeless, old, and unfashionable: they're predators.
    Why don't you give some examples of this, so we can be enlightened.
     
  8. John can speak for himself on this if he wants, but as I am in some agreement with the idea that there's an immature, and perhaps purile aspect to this, I'll say that the fault lies mostly in the wider culture of modernism. Post-modernism has allowed for an explosion of norm-justified narcissism. Maybe I can come at it another way: Jacob Riis photographed the destitute in order to effect changes in public and private attitudes about poverty. Same applies to Walker Evans, Dorothea Lange, etc. Lissette Model worked more for art but always, even when portraying the grotesque, showed respect for humanity. The preditors: Ron Galella and his spawn, and, unfortunately, most beginners who can't help but take certain cues from our common media obsession: shaping an alternate but cannily similar version of real life and encouraging us to choose it over the evidence of our senses.
    00F37K-27829784.jpg
     
  9. Huh? Ron Galella photographed the homeless, old, and unfashionable? Have no idea about his "spawn"...
     
  10. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Ron Galella is a paparazzi. What does that have to do with street photogoraphy? And the others you name were not street photographers. Where are you coming up with these names? Try to answer the question, use some street photographers as examples.
     
  11. but as I am in some agreement with the idea that there's an immature, and perhaps purile aspect to this, I'll say that the fault lies mostly in the wider culture of modernism.

    Classic effete Arty gobbly kook nonsense often heard among polite company and raised small fingers.
     
  12. As opposed to raised middle fingers :)
     
  13. Allen knows this but....

    The two fingered 'salute' of Winston Churchill fame (V for victory etc) was supposed to have originated with the English Longbow archers (of Agincourt era) as a sign defiantly demonstrating to the enemy that their drawing fingers were still intact. (The enemy hacked them off imprisoned longbow archers.)

    The raised 'pinkie' of middle class English ladies when drinking tea originated in Agincourt also when the Womens Institute Reserve Expeditionary Detachment (W.I.R.E.D) were called up to make up the numbers. The two fingered salute was too 'vulgar' for these ladies so they used the crooked pinkie and 'nice cuppa tea' salute instead.

    Those taken prisoner were forced to learn how to make decent coffee or tortured by being made to drink tea where the pot had not been warmed first!
     
  14. gobbly.....
    00F39B-27830484.jpg
     
  15. Nothing personal here, just illustrating my point.

    ;)
     
  16. Ouch!!

    What aspect of street photography are we discussing. Waiting for some glossed-out celeb
    to emerge from a restaurant is a more active and influential form of it than the
    (impressive) efforts of Bruce Davidson, Andre Kertesz, etc.

    As for the more up-scale predators, HCB has already been mentioned. Brassai is a good
    fit. Eric Saloman, Bill Brandt, Robert Doisneau for some classics. Check out Jeffrey Ladd's
    portfolio at http://www.in-public.com/site/index.php

    Some of his stuff shows subjects at their unconscious worst. Other shots are icons of quiet
    or heroic humanity.
     
  17. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Until you, nobody has ever confused paparazzi and street photography. I'd say that's quite an accomplishment.
     
  18. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    What about those photographers makes them "predators"? Most of them were/are humanists of some sort.
     
  19. Going into bars in Paris and photographing a man's anxiety at just at the point of his hearing the woman's answer (Brassai) Surreptitiously shooting couples in their private-in public amours (Doisneau) (OK, the subjects really can't complain as they're not in private, but did they bargain for being in coffee table books?) Brandt made his share of observational snapshots that exposed his subjects' environment as seedy to say the least.
    00F3DU-27832584.jpg
     
  20. but did they bargain for being in coffee table books?)

    Lot of wicked folk in the world dude doing lots of wicked things.
     
  21. Going into bars in Paris and photographing a man's anxiety at just at the point of his hearing the woman's answer (Brassai) Surreptitiously shooting couples in their private-in public amours (Doisneau) (OK, the subjects really can't complain as they're not in private, but did they bargain for being in coffee table books?) Brandt made his share of observational snapshots that exposed his subjects' environment as seedy to say the least.
    What is your point? You are writing as if you believed that there is some inherent value the subject possesses, and the photographer is literally sucking it out. Well, I'll be the first to tell you then that you are blatantly wrong on this, and either are pursuing your own private post-artistic agenda by ridiculing respected artists, or are just one of those busybodies who have too many loose axes to grind.
     
  22. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    How are any of these people the homeless, old, and unfashionable? That's what you said they were. Don't look it to me.
     
  23. The subtitle of the show (they seem to have omitted the main title from the article) is, "The Inner Silence of the Consenting Victim",

    HCB used to scratch his arse due to uncensored consenting by his mentor and soul mate Capa of course not in the literal sense.. Obviously this had a serious conjectual understanding of his subjects mentality at the time of exposure.We can only presume his victums were type casted into a resonate compelling cast upon them due to lateral actions of this type. As Harden a little known friend of HCB used to conjure the soul movements were part of the aura of the missing parts of the total conjecture of the victims.
     
  24. Even if they were homeless, unfashionable, or old, why not?
     
  25. 'fix nature's image permanently on a plate' seems quaintly vain to say the least if not downright narcissistic

    It is often claimed the narcissistic complex was atributed to the lack of individual foresight when the subject was removed from form and shape. This led to a inner perspective which led to a lack of perception from the view of the individual conjecture and penal conjecture. The penal conjecture was often considered a total lack of conjecture. A debated of figurative complexity.
     
  26. With respect Dan you do not following a scholars education.

    You're education is lacking.

    Time to put your finger on your lips.
     
  27. Jeff,John shall we continue? lets move on from the very basics so far expounded.

    Your call.
     
  28. With respect Dan you do not following a scholars education. You're education is lacking.
    heh...
     
  29. Brad - , jan 28, 2006; 08:55 p.m.
    With respect Dan you do not following a scholars education. You're education is lacking.
    heh...


    Brad sometimes it's time to move aside and let those with greater insight and education debate.
     
  30. I do not wish to sound rude but sometimes you have to cut to the fat.

    Let us continue and perhaps you will benefit from the exchange.
     
  31. Brad sometimes it's time to move aside and let those with greater insight and education debate.
    I knew one guy named Michael, and, though he was a good guy, he completely lacked the sense of humor. Now comes Mr. Bridges...
     
  32. OK Michael, I'm all ears. Let 'er rip!
    Looking forward to benefiting from you're superior education and insight...
     
  33. Looking forward to benefiting from you're superior education and insight...

    Thank you i will take that statement at face value. Do you mind if i call you Bradley i so dislike the cut down colloquial version. It so lacks value to the individual.

    Unfortunately we are at an impasse as i wait for my colleagues input.
     
  34. Okay, Micky -- you sure won't mind if I call you Micky -- what
    school did you get your degree at, and what was the name of your
    writing instructor?
     
  35. Unfortunately we are at an impasse as i wait for my colleagues input.

    They seem a bit shy.

    Could it be something to do with a formal repeat as a parrot education? i wonder where their minds have gone.

    Could it be they have been sent to a simple place.
     
  36. Eugene would understand.

    I suppose you have to talk to a child in the language it understands.
     
  37. the site and has been known to refuse invitations to become a member of the site's picture jury. He also stubbornly refuses to upload any real photographs to the site's server

    Baby talk
     
  38. You didn't answer my question, Michael.
     
  39. You didn't answer my question, Michael.

    Well,we a trying to be a bit of an adult,E.

    Does it matter? or, are you impressed with fame. Suspect you are! better kiss my arse.
     
  40. Pss. English is not my first language. Talk about those who think they are superior beings,Eugene. Eugene is part of the superior English speaking race.

    Ugly.
     
  41. what was the name of your writing instructor?

    Eugene a superior life form. Born in----
     
  42. Her first name was Michaela.
     
  43. "...Brad sometimes it's time to move aside and let those with greater insight and education debate...".....and sometimes it is better for the self appointed scholars to get off the pedastal and respond in a civil manner.
     
  44. Eugene

    A message from the non English speaking world.

    We find it insulting when a fat burger coke swilling guzzling person questions us about our ability in the use of the English language.

    Can any of you speak our languages? Very few.
     
  45. Thomas Sullivan , jan 28, 2006; 10:54 p.m.
    "...Brad sometimes it's time to move aside and let those with greater insight and education debate

    Sally the wise has insight.
     
  46. i meant you, michael....in case that didnt translate well
     
  47. Michael, what is your native language? (In case I happen to speak
    it...) In case you don't know this site has a long history of
    non-Anglo-Saxon-born Michaels
    (nothing to do with racism, sorry) who
    acquired Anglo-Saxon names and kept trolling the water of the Leica
    (and other) forums with pseudo-intellectual speak that abounded in
    grammar and spelling errors.
     
  48. i meant you, michael....in case that didnt translate well

    I understand Sally don't get your knickers in a twist.

    We do understand despite our lack of an English education.

    We seek your ways and greater understanding. We believe or else.
     
  49. who acquired Anglo-Saxon names and kept trolling the water of the Leica (and other) forums with pseudo-intellectual speak that abounded in grammar and spelling errors.

    Wicked foriegn people who should be boiled in oil.It's just not our way.

    Trying hard to be just like you Eugene please help me with your wisdom.
     
  50. Eugene can you get me a burger and coke and one of those floral tea shirt tops and shorts? how do you do the big red angry face thing?

    Want to be called Eugene and be clever like you.Please help me Eugene to rise from my sorry state.

    Love you Eugene.
     
  51. I don't drink soda. And you again didn't answer my question.
     
  52. "..I understand Sally don't get your knickers in a twist.."...there goes that pompous arse attitude again. And the name is Tom....understand that. You really have a holier than thou attitude, dont you? You should learn to curb that...maybe some of us might actually take you seriously.
     
  53. Shut your yaps children, I'm trying to sleep for Fsake!
     
  54. Y'know, for a minority devoted to a tiny, and soon to be anachronistic, pursuit, (I'm using,
    for now, with what I assume is Jeff S's defintion of street photography) you are an awfully
    contentious lot. That's all on that subject except for the following: We may have proven
    one thing so far in the thread: we're all full of some kind of crap or other. Let's have a poll
    on that one.

    "You are writing as if you believed that there is some inherent value the subject possesses,
    and the photographer is literally sucking it out."

    The inherent value is that of humanity, a romantic notion in chronological sync with the
    development of the technology. The wish to fix and tame 'nature's pencil' ties in to the
    wishes and fears we entertain about our own natures.

    The photographer does not suck it out but exploits it, manipulates it.

    " Obviously this had a serious conjectual understanding of his subjects mentality at the
    time of exposure.We can only presume his victums were type casted into a resonate
    compelling cast upon them due to lateral actions of this type. As Harden a little known
    friend of HCB used to conjure the soul movements were part of the aura of the missing
    parts of the total conjecture of the victims."

    That's all I sayin, folks. We live in Plato's cave, melding data we get through our senses
    with our assumptions about what we're experiencing. Those assumptions are heavily
    influenced by environment (as understood by the observer). Michael's use of the verbs
    'conjecture and 'conjure,' seem all of a piece with the age of phrenology, morphology, (to
    which photography contributed mightily) and even eugenics. The first two in fashion back
    in 1839.
     
  55. The inherent value is that of humanity, a romantic notion in chronological sync with the development of the technology.
    You do not understand artistic process. You presume (a) that humanity presents a clearly definable value, and (b) that artistic process, at least some forms of it, can reduce it. Both of these presumptions are wrong. And how is technology in a chronological sync with humanity as a romantic notion? This is plain BS, tell it to anyone who's taken a few years of philosophy/art history, and he/she will squirm his/her eyes and say "Yea, go on..."
    The wish to fix and tame 'nature's pencil' ties in to the wishes and fears we entertain about our own natures.
    Perhaps, but what does this have to do with the subject we are discussing?
    The photographer does not suck it out but exploits it, manipulates it.
    You did not understand me, so you are only repeating yourself. You cannot exploit or manipulate something without taking something away, which is what I referred to by "sucking." You are talking of humanity as if it were an intangible asset. It is not an asset. It has no monetary equivalent. Humanity cannot be granted or taken away, it can only be affirmed or denied. The verbs "exploited" and "manipulated" are emotionally charged but meaningless in this context, because the actions they refer to do not operate on humanity. I repeat: you cannot exploit or manipulate humanity, because humanity is not an asset, you can only grant or deny humanity by directly treating the subject. If treatment is absent, nothing is done with respect to humanity; the action is taking place at a different plane.
     
  56. ...you are an awfully contentious lot.
    No, I don't think so. But when someone broadbrushes with an abosulute statement like: Street photographers prefer the homeless, old, and unfashionable: they're predators. , those that regularly do SP will of course react to that ignorance.
    It only got better (and pretty funny) when Ron Galella, who shot people like Jackie-O, was offered as an example of the above statement.
    I know maybe a dozen photographers who shoot regularly on the street. And I suspect none of them, including myself, would have any respect for someone who regularly shoots the homeless, old, and unfashionable simply because those people are more reachable.
    Do you now understand what all of the above was about?
     
  57. I find it funny that he put "the unfashionable" into the list. I
    guess, only one who exclusively prefers to shoot "the fashionable"
    would do that. Talk about hypocrisy.
     
  58. No, humanity is not an asset, but a term of art used commonly in social intercourse and
    understood in profoundly varying ways. Those who agree on one definition or another
    form concensus. I never said otherwise. The fact that the voting and consuming masses
    are willing to read whatever makes them feel comfortable into value-freighted concepts
    like 'humanity,' or, "decency,' demonstrates that these terms catalyze immediate,
    compelling and often, catastrophic behaviors. But I guess there's no value inherent in that.

    Gene and Brad: I never wrote the line about the homeless...etc. Nor do I only photograph
    the fashionable. You're both out of line if you were talking about me.
     
  59. You did not understand me, so you are only repeating yourself. You cannot exploit or manipulate something without taking something away, which is what I referred to by "sucking." You are talking of humanity as if it were an intangible asset. It is not an asset. It has no monetary equivalent. Humanity cannot be granted or taken away, it can only be affirmed or denied. The verbs "exploited" and "manipulated" are emotionally charged but meaningless in this context, because the actions they refer to do not operate on humanity. I repeat: you cannot exploit or manipulate humanity, because humanity is not an asset, you can only grant or deny humanity by directly treating the subject. If treatment is absent, nothing is done with respect to humanity; the action is taking place at a different plane.
    Eugene,
    Was it necessary to learn English to talk that much twaddle or does your native Ukranian support such nonsense. I ask merely as a scholar of linguistics.
     
  60. Hardly out of line, JeffC. You offered up the notion that we're an "awfully contentious lot," and, Ron Galella as an example of a predator street photographer, in response to the "Street photographers prefer the homeless, old, and unfashionable: they're predators." comment from John.
    Do you now understand where that contentiousness comes from?
     
  61. Okay, Stuart, what is your take on it? I would like to hear what you
    have to say on this subject, especially in what particular ways my
    response is nonsensical. Please elaborate, I am all ears. I ask this
    honestly, no offense intended.
     
  62. Eugene, I have no take on it whatsoever. I doubt I've ever used the words 'asset' and
    'humanity' in the same day let alone in the same sentence. You had a go at Jeff C, I had a go
    at you - what goes around, comes around.
     
  63. So does that make you feel better now, Stuart?
     
  64. Contentious? I woke up this morning to a smorgasbord of playground nah-nah, and so's
    your old man. I guess some of the posters around here have been at it for a while. Or
    please tell me that that was goofing around. Even with M. Bridge's contribution, I had to
    consider that he was pulling my leg (the bad syntax might have been intentional).

    Obviously, some avoided ad-hominim attacks. I don't mean to apply my famed broad
    brush.

    On missing your point, Brad, The Gallelas perform a purely mechanical function: to feed
    the fantasy lives of the masses. Now, as for the linkage between hardware and software in
    image making, for what demand did Barnack seek to develop a miniature camera? How
    'bout improve photo-reportage? Miniaturized press photography made the whole street
    aesthetic possible. Maybe I'd be thinking about hand-held, low light shooting if I were in
    the Speed Graphic era, but I doubt it.

    Finally, you seem outraged at my smear of honest, decent people who shoot in the certain
    genre of SP. Forgetting that such notions as respect, etc. are, as you've pointed out, airy
    myths like money, (an agreed-upon measure of value and backed by the full faith and
    credit...blah, blah.) It's no smear to simply point out that some see wider or
    different considerations involved in the evolution of art, if art is what we're talking about.

    Did you see that site I referenced?

    http://www.in-public.com/site/index.php

    Some of his stuff shows subjects at their unconscious worst. Other shots are a shot at
    portraying icons of quiet or heroic humanity. I'm not saying this guy and what he does are
    rotten. Maybe I'm saying he's got a bit more to work on.
     
  65. Some of his stuff shows subjects at their unconscious worst.
    Depends on one's definition of worst, but, yes, I would agree that some street shots are not very flattering. But, wait. Are Picasso's portraits of women flattering? Did he instill Humanity with a capital H in each and every one of them? Does art have to be flattering or respectful? Can I have bad art, please? While we are on this, what do you think of Disfarmer's work? Does it matter what was his stance on humanity?
    I guess, your problem with SP is that, unlike in cubism, in SP faces are recognizable, so that individuals are not always flattered. You see SP as an attack on individuality, not as an attack on humanity in general (but you don't know how to express this more precisely, so you use the charged word "humanity"). Yes, I would agree to that, but that would be then a completely different discussion.
     
  66. Finally, you seem outraged at my smear of honest, decent people...
    Outraged? Yes, I'm seething and foaming at the mouth as I type. And that artery on my forehead is going to burst any second.
    Just having some yucks at the keyboard when Ron Galella is served up as a street phtographer shooting the homeless, old, and unfashionable. Like Jackie-O, Andy Warhol, Cher, Henry Kissinger, and Twiggy - right?
     
  67. Stuart, I am quite surprised that you call yourself a linguistics scholar. Based on your persistent ad hominem attacks against some of the members of these forums, one would rather conclude that you are a sociopath.
     
  68. Watch it Eugene. You used the words persistent and sociopath in the same sentence...
     
  69. Eugene,

    I am quite surprised that you can't get your head around the fact that a linguistics scholar
    can also be a sociopath. What kind of mental disorder do you imagine linguistic scholars
    suffer from? Delusions of grandeur?

    I am also amazed how quickly you lose your cool once removed from a 'debating-society'
    environment. To complain of an ad hominem attacck whilst accusing your attacker of
    being a sociopath is decidedly bad form - at least in a civilised society.

    But fear not. You, at least, have El Brad on your side.

    Respectively yours
     
  70. What kind of mental disorder do you imagine linguistic scholars suffer from? Delusions of grandeur?
    Who are you talking about here?
    I am also amazed how quickly you lose your cool once removed from a 'debating-society' environment.
    Well, I gave you a chance to support your address to me. Since you explicitly said that you don't have a stance, and that your address was indeed an eye for an eye in support of Jeff C (I don't bother to cite you here, but you can just scroll up to see what you said), I concluded only that what anyone else would have concluded, and stopped treating you as a dutiful participant of the debate.
    To complain of an ad hominem attacck whilst accusing your attacker of being a sociopath is decidedly bad form - at least in a civilised society.
    Hehe, I did not accuse you of ad hominem attacks, I accused you of persistent ad hominem attacks. I, too, insult somebody from time to time on this site. I just don't bother to do it on a persistent basis against the same people. And I can support my statement with names if you'd like.
     
  71. "Just having some yucks at the keyboard when Ron Galella is served up as a street
    phtographer shooting the homeless, old, and unfashionable. Like Jackie-O, Andy Warhol,
    Cher, Henry Kissinger, and Twiggy - right?"

    Does the tabloid rack at the supermarket not fascinate you even a little? Not pruriently, but
    in terms of what use can be put to trees and ink. And what about the heartbreak of celebs
    in or past their prime who're portrayed as fat, badly dressed, all the way to sneak shots of
    the sick and old ones being ushered from ambulance to ER, etc. Just try to marry an
    ordinary Joe, like Elizabeth Taylor. Not only didn't it work, but it played out in public.
    Where's your sympathy for group of professionals who compete against bad odds to
    scrape together a career. And when they do...

    Where's your pity, man?
     
  72. Jeff, once again, you are deeply confusing something. Ron Galella
    has nothing to do with SP. Get yourself a cool drink, man.
     
  73. Ron Galella has nothing to do with SP.
    Prove it.
     
  74. "Ron Galella has nothing to do with SP".
    "Prove it".

    Well I did call him three times today and he still hasn't called back.
    Happy now?
     
  75. well, just google Ron Galella and nowhere on the first page of hits (I didn't bother going any further) do any of the galleries or art sites consider him a street photographer. As a matter of fact they ALL refer to him as a paparazzo. At least they seem to know the difference, unlike some people on this site.
     
  76. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    http://www.artbook.com/0972778810.html
     
  77. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    http://www.paulkasmingallery.com/pastexhi/Jun27Aug202/currentexhi.htm
     
  78. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    not street in my terms either.

    http://images.google.com/images?lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Ron%20Galella&sa=N&tab=wi
     
  79. Thomas, Eric,

    Thanks for the links but they only seem to confirm that Galella is a member of the paparazzi.
    Which is a step forward. Now all anyone need prove is that a member of the pz can not be a
    street shooter. Although I'm sure other avenues are there to be explored
     
  80. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    I think just a link or two on his street photography would suffice? I do two or three weddings a year but none of my peers call me a wedding photographer. Maybe he's a landscape photographer? Who knows?
     
  81. Jeez, Stuart, scholar of linguistics (but apparently not a scholar of logic), is really getting desperate. Too funny. Yuck yuck...
    While on the subject, can somebody prove Ron Galella was was also not a landscape or forensic photographer? Please, it really is important...
     
  82. I've got just one word to say to all you scoffers: Weegee.

    Not above re-arranging corpses before the police arrive for a better shot. Hanging around
    a gay nightclub having been tipped off about a raid, etc... I believe you can pay good
    money in galleries for prints.

    To blithley maintain that the genre of street photography has no link or common heritage
    to the business of predatory celeb-hunting because galleries don't sell the work of
    papparazzi...well, I guess if you're going to accept terms, boundaries and definitions from
    elsewhere, you're pretty much going to be reduced to parroting received wisdom. Such an
    attitude toward inquiry is bound to get in the way of the possibility of insight.

    Now, I flame off, and will respond in this thread no more. I invite whatever cackles and
    jeers anyone chooses to offer, with full assurance that you'll be attacking "a reflection of a
    person with a reflection of a knife."*

    *Hermann Hesse
     
  83. Blah blah blah. How a picture is taken and what the subject is has little to do with the outcome. Having ethical dilemmas when taking pictures means not being able to take great pictures. Means not showing the world what it could benefit from. Pictures have power to change people, politics, etc.

    I just saw the Weegee exhibit not too long ago. Great pictures. They say a lot about _humanity_ and where it was/is going. Wegee was a misanthrope. He in fact was homeless for a while and had to survive on his street smarts alone to in a big, violent, crazy city of that time. This view is apparent in his chaotic pictures that effectively show the mess most people aren't aware of, or don't want to even hear about. The dark side of humanity. His pictures are powerful in many ways. Few people have the guts or even ability (for many reasons) to photograph and live how he did. We need many Wegees right now, in this f-up sociopolitical situation we're in. Take a look around you. Think about the changes that occured in a few recent years. How your neighbors have changed. How ignorant and scared, and brainwashed we've become. We need photography that will wake people up. Wegee's photography was doing just that.
     
  84. Sory about spelling. It's late.
     
  85. " Pictures have power to change people, politics, etc."

    You wish.
     
  86. Even with M. Bridge's contribution, I had to consider that he was pulling my leg (the bad syntax might have been intentional).

    Changing structural elements is a method of adding potency to general applied language structure.

    Interesting debate unfortunately spoilt by the shouting floral face brigade

    Hope to hear from you again.

    Take care

    Michael Bridges
     
  87. jtk

    jtk

    Amusing.
     
  88. OK, I'm back. I doubt that Arthur Fellig, aka Weegee, cared as did Jacob Riis, for example, about hearts and minds. To him it was a living on the fly. It was also an ego trip. Weegee proclaimed himself the world's greatest photographer. I don't hold that against him. He was trying, like every other journalist, to increase his profile and his value. That's not to run down or dismiss the huge value of the work he left. But if alive in this day and age, Weegee might aspire to become a Bill O'Reilly. Greatness takes ambition. That can lead to various places. I like the figure skater's mantra: All I hoped for was to finish clean. I hope for 2 negatives out of 100 to hit some sort of mark or other.
    00F4sw-27875784.jpg
     
  89. jtk

    jtk

    "Art" is the last refuge of people too limp and humorless to be scoundrels.

    Weegee and Gallela and Picasso might have had fun together.
     
  90. If Bun�el could only have made a movie.
     

Share This Page

1111