Winogrand Interview.

See if you have seen it?

 

 

http://elmo.academyart.edu/study/ph101/Required%20reading/Winogrand%

20Interview.htm

close the space between the last "%" and "20".

<i>W: Cameras intrigued me.</i>

<p>

<i>...cameras were always seductive...</i>

<p>

Uh oh. Hope he didn't mean that in a certain way. ;)

OOps, looks like he refers specifically to <i>Leicas</i> too. Shame, shame on him.

<a href="http://elmo.academyart.edu/study/ph101/Required%20reading/Winogrand%20Interview.htm">Winogrand Interview</a>

<i>"D: Does it really not matter what kind of equipment you use?

 

<p>W: Oh, I know what I like to use myself. I use Leicas, but when I look at the photograph, I don't ask the photograph questions. Mine or anybody else's. The only time I've ever dealt with that kind of thing is when I'm teaching. You talk about people who are interested in "how." But when I look at photographs, I couldn't care less "how." You see?"</i>

<p>

For a cantankerous old dude, I like his way of thinking. I must be getting old myself. :o)

Ummm, yep. Who gives a rat's arse about the gear used, it's the image stupid.

Musicians are so often guity of gear idolatry that's its pathetic, and vast fortunes are

made off this insecurity. Oh gee I need a...

<I>A photograph is not what was photographed, it's something else.</I><P> thanks

for

the link.

The interview is interesting - because onece again it displays a person who has never achieved the level of self-realization intellectually. What sticks i the sulky "I don;t know. I (just) photograph" without much understanding, consciously formulated aesthetics or realization of what happens in one's brain when the photograph is formulated, selected, or viewed.<br>

Leo Tolstoy once explained self-reference in this way: "he understood that I understood that he understood" (what was said or implied). Winogrand is too dumb to be capable of directing the ray of understanding on his own brain or photographic results. Something turned, something attracted his eye, but as a dumb animal he forever remained in the dark as to the reasons. It just happened.

<br>

I remember another stark proof of his intellectual level - the "honda fart" joke, also on-line, referenced from some recollections by Victor ????, who went to a Winogrand class<br>

One of Winnograd's committments seeems to have been to shy away from using a lot of words to replace the act of photographing. The photographs either speak for themselves or they don't. As he said, he is open to many interpretations and reactions to his work and is not interested in prescribing those reactions . Maybe he was not so insecure as to need to develop a set of well thought out rationalisations for what he did, either to justify it or to explain it. It seems petulant and crass to then make seemingly authoratative statements about his intelligence from such information, revealing more about the intelligence of those who want to denigrate him than anything else.

Elliott Erwitt once said photography is not about thinking, it's about seeing. You might do well to consider that, Michael.

once the self is realized, it is quickly forgotten.

<p>

its only the one who is NOT self realized that dwells on such 'ideas'.

<p>

i sed that

Garry Winogrand's Infamous "Honda" Joke

<br>

As told by Garry Winogrand at a photo workshop in New York in August, 1976. Warning: This Joke Is A) Politically Incorrect and B) Gross. Read responsibly.

<br>

So there was this guy, and he farted a lot. Suddenly, every time he farted, he went, "HONDA!"

 

Well you can just imagine. He'd be in a restaurant, some social function, at work, and there he'd be saying "Hi, howare ya? FFFFFFFFFFFFT--HONDA!" without any warning.

 

This was embarassing to him and his friends. Days went by and this would happen all the time, and now his friends didn't want to be seen with him.

<br>

So he goes to his doctor, "hey doc, every time I fart, I go "HONDA!". Can you help? So the doctor checks him out, gives him a complete physical. Can't find anything wrong. He goes to specialist after specialist, trying to get himself cured, but nobody can figure out what the problem is.

<br>

A few weeks go by and now he only has one friend left in the whole world, and even he is getting sick of it. "Hey pal" his friend said, "I'm your last friend on earth, everybody's deserted you. You've got a serious problem here, but I may have a solution."

<br>

So he gives him the name of an acupuncturist, an old Chinese guy. "This guy is brilliant. If he can't cure you, nobody can. Just do exactly what he tells you, even if it seems a little wierd."

 

So our friend says "Gee thanks, I'll give him a FFFFFFFFFFFFT-HONDA! call today."

<br>

So this guy goes to the acupuncturist, who is really ancient, looks like he's 200 years old. Very wise. And the acupuncturist checks him out, gives him a complete physical. He looks at him and says, "Go See Dentist."

"Huh?"

"Go see dentist!"

<br>

So he thinks, well, this guy must know what he's talking about but I have no idea. He goes to the dentist, who checks him out and sure enough, finds an abscess tooth. He pulls the tooth and as you could imagine the guy is real nervous and he's so nervous that, just after the tooth is yanked, he farts. And then, nothing.

<br>

No HONDA! He couldn't believe it--he's cured!

<br>

He jumps out of the dentist's chair. He farts again--again no more HONDA!

<br>

So he gets back to the acupuncturist and he's thrilled. "Thank you, thank you," he said. "But tell me, how did you know that the abscess tooth is what was making me go HONDA every time I farted?

 

The old man looked at him and said, "old Chinese saying...abscess makes the fart go HONDA!"

Having a sense of humor that occasionally tends toward the juvenile is NOT a sign that someone is stupid, just as not having a sense of humor is no sign that one is smart. For that matter, being unwilling to spout pseudointellectual tripe about ones work is not a sign that someone lacks self awareness, just as being able to prattle on endlessly about the greatness of ones work is no sign of self realization.

This is the second time you've posted this joke. Are you running an anti-Winnograd campaign or something? It's a silly joke, what does it prove?

 

Not much achievement in the world is accompanied by pedantic pseudo-intellectualism; it might be good to recognise this.

Grant,<p>

Do you realize what you just sed? :-)

Oh yeah, I can see where appreciating that joke makes the guy a real dimwit.

 

Nah, on second thought, more like human.

 

Maybe you could use a good fart.

huh?

<p>

:P

I was told that joke by the lawyer who invented the class action suit, father of someone I once knew.

That is a good one! I had forgotten that!

 

I was first told that joke by Nobel prize winning chemist over a beer one night several

years ago. I've also

heard from it from a pioneering heart surgeon, a fireman/EMT technician, a banker, a

screenwriter, an oil company president, a restaurant owner, and my aunt.

 

I guess

none of them are up to Michael's rigid intellectual standards. But then all of them --

and Winogrand --have been too busy or just too dumb to be as self aware as Michael

Bender is. Aren't we are just so lucky to have him for company here? I cannot imagine

what a rare privilege it must be to work with him , or even better to work for him

I think this misunderstanding that you all have with Michael Bender is a cultural thing. He's from Eastern Europe. I've gone to school with, and worked with, many East Europeans, and most of them are more well read and intellectually curious than their American counterparts. The average American's awareness of things outside the US is abismally low, given their current status in the world. Even in the Ivy League. Quite often, the Americans would misunderstand them and think of them as arrogant. No, they're just operating on a different plane.

 

So what's wrong with Michael Bender's quest for understanding the thought process behind a photographer's body of work? It's only a natural thing for people with a scientific bent to question things from a logical perspective. Most scientists argue against the existence of God (whatever the word means to you). Most people who blindly believe in God don't ask themselves why they do so, when they really should, it would enhance their faith.

 

We all make fun of George W. Bush, about his low intelligence (as well as Bush Sr. and Reagan). In fact it's quite a feat to achieve what they did. Many have tried and failed. Does it mean that we the voters are the stupid ones?

 

Mozart's output has never been understood. What's wrong with trying to find out?

>>> I think this misunderstanding that you all have with Michael Bender is a cultural thing. He's from Eastern Europe...

 

So we're to understand that all Eastern Europeans are arrogent assholes?

 

Bender doesn't like Winogrand for one reason: he was Jewish.

<i>So what's wrong with Michael Bender's quest for

understanding the thought process behind a photographer's

body of work?</i><P>

There's nothing wrong with wanting to understand what others

are doing. The problem is that when Bender fails to understand,

he always assumes the person whose ideas or work he fails to

comprehend is stupid or uneducated--his "self realization"

doesn't allow for the possibility that the lack of understanding is

his own fault.

W hat is wrong with Mr. Bender's approach to this particular topic is that it is grossly

ill -informed and provincial. This has nothing to do with Mr. Bender's heritage or

cultural

background. it is just flat out uninformed. he uses pseudo intellectual language to

justify his biases. For example instead of looking at Garry Winogrand's work or even

the real photographic issues raised in this single interview, Instead he resorts to

personal

attacks

accusing Winogrand of once telling a crude joke and goes on to write: <I>"Winogrand

is too dumb to be capable of directing

the ray of understanding on his own brain or photographic results."</I>, of being

<I>"a dumb animal"</I>, of being <I>"without much understanding, consciously

formulated aesthetics or realization of what happens in one's brain when the

photograph is formulated, selected, or viewed."</I>, of being <I>"politically

incorrect"</I> and <I>"gross"</I>.<P> These are not (in your words) the result of a

<I>"quest for understanding the thought process behind a photographer's body of

work."</I> or a <I>"natural thing for people with a scientific bent to question things

from a logical perspective"</I>. In my experience, the phrases and words Mr. Bender

uses are the words & phrases used by someone who is the opposite of

<I>"intellectually curious"</I>, of someone who has a closed mind. He knows what

he likes and if it does not fit that small pattern it must be categorized as the work of

<I>"a dumb animal."</I> Once again, this has nothing to do with Mr. Bender's

genetic heritage or academic training, just Michael Bender and his cultural biases.

Vic, that's a somewhat contorted thinking process you're adopting there. Well said Ellis.