Weston exhibit at Art Institute of Chicago

[jim_chinn1]

I would like to make a few comments and observations after viewing "Edward Weston: The Last Years in Carmel", currently exhibiting at the Art Institute of Chicago.

 

<p>

 

I have seen previous Weston exhibits and prints as part of gallery collections, and while always acknowledging Weston as a great photographer and 20th century influence, I did not agree with the near "god" status many have given him. However, upon seeing this show I will elevate him much nearer that status. For those who have not seen a review (see previous issue of Black and White magazine or archives of Chicago Tribune) the exhibit is mainly landscapes and abtracts from Point Lobos, nudes and images of his sons and family from 1938-1945.

While I was not impressed with the nudes or family work, the landscapes are quite incredible. The images are much darker with a wonderfully complex balance between the subdued highlights and shadows of the prints. Upon first examination of one print ( I forget the title) which shows a setting sun behind clouds taken from hills above Point Lobos the ocean looks almost completely black. Upon closer examination one begins to see an incredible tonal delineation in the shadows, subtley revealing every wave crest, ripple and trough. I have never seen prints that show such depth and gradation in the shadows while stil maintaining a perfect compelment in the highlights. many of thes images are of chaotic, almost random subjects and Weston's use of lighting and printing brings a beautiful melancholy to each compostion.

 

<p>

 

Alright, sorry to be so long winded, these thoughts bugged the entire trip home so two observations: First, Anyone who can see this show will have a new appreciation for his talents and vision as an artist, especially when one knows how primitive his methods were.

Second, and not to start a firestorm, this exhibit demostrates why Weston is one of the great artists of any medium in the 20th century. Here was a man who obviously knew his life would be cut short and yet continued to grow and evolve his vision and art. That is something that not even the much more famous Ansel Adams did, as his work was basically a repetion of old themes after 1950, even though he was blessed with many more years to work than Weston.

[david_clark4]

Hi James, wait until you see some of his personal snap shots in the

box which is known as his personal archives in the George Eastman

House collection. Best, David

[j.ryder]

Minor White compared these later Point Lobos prints to Beethoven's

later quartets. There is no higher or more appropriate praise

possible. Please listen and look. String quartet in C sharp minor OP.

131. Among our finest creations.

[mark_lindsey]

yes Weston was an amazing photographer, now you need to educate

yourself on Adams.

[josh_simpson]

Mark- Why?

[mark_lindsey]

because this statement,"as his work was basically a repetion of old

themes after 1950", is bs.

 

<p>

 

Mark

[ellis_vener_photography]

Mark you are right, it wasn't until after 1954 that Adams started

repeating himself. Even Adams himself admitted that. Try

reading Mary Street Alinder's biography of Ansel Adams for more

details.

[mark_lindsey]

I can see for myself from his work that it is not true. its funny to

me how everyone holds weston up as a god, yet ignore the fact that he

had great respect for adams as an artist and a human being. both adams

and weston talked of the other as being the better artist.

 

<p>

 

I know that to berat adams is the "fashion", especially amoungst those

who need to have the appearance of being "all knowing" and "modern",

but the most common trait is the lack of any substance in their work.

 

<p>

 

Weston wouldn't even let those who he considered to be uncreative

cross the threshold of his door--Adams was a good friend and always

welcomed, I doubt that most of you "intellectuals" who talk the big

talk here would even get onto the driveway.

[bj2]

Weston had a driveway?

 

<p>

 

You seem awfully defensive there Mark. You always this way?

[jorge_gasteazoro]

LOL....chill out Mark.

[mark_lindsey]

this goes way back, its an attitude that I find throughout this and

other forums, and your right, I should chill out---its not worth my

time....

[merg_ross]

Mark-

I knew Ansel and Edward. You are very wrong about Edward- his door

was always open. When I was starting out in photography (almost 50

years ago) Brett told me "there is no competition in the arts". That

is the way he felt and I think the philosophy served him well.

[jim_chinn1]

I don't mean to belittle Adams tremendous talent and craftsmanship.

All art opinion is subjective by the viewer, and IMHO Adam's work for

me is beautiful in the way that a beautiful object is used to

decorate a room. I know his work fairly well, the first phtography

exhibit I ever attended was the 117 print, "Ansel Adams: The Imprint

of his Vision" at the Museum of Photographic Arts in San Diego in

1985. After seeing the 30x40 enlargements of "Aspens" and I believe

an even larger print of "Monolith: The Face of Half Dome", I left the

book store with "Examples", and the three book photography series.

Then and there I decided to upgrade from my college issue Pentax and

acquire a view camera. Since then I have seen three other exhibits

of his work. I would have to say 90% of how I first approached

photography was directly influenced by his images and books. And I

will even concede he was probably one of the greatest photographers

of the 20th century, and may have done more to champion the cause of

conservation and enviromentalism than any other person. I just don't

think he was a great artist. IMHO his work never moved beyond showing

us the granduer and majesty of the landscape. The problem for me is

it doesn't matter if it is 1927 or or 1960, it all the same granduer

and majesty. this is the work of a master craftsman, not a great

artist.

 

<p>

 

I will add one more comment as food for thought. I believe while

his legacy was indeed great it has also been a curse for many

photographers. Instead of pursuing their own vision, they spend

their photographic lives trying to duplicate Ansel's lens selection,

and developer, and printing technique etc, all in the hope that

matching his technical skills will make their work somehow meaningful.

Looking at the Weston prints I admired the skill with which the

images were produced, but I was far more interested in how the prints

communicated to me the essence of who Weston was and his vison.

[michael_feldman1]

Fine, Ansel Adams was not one of the great artists of the 20th

century. But he was an artist, and some of his images could have

easily passed for a Weston landscape if printed smaller, and vise

versa. His attention to the technical aspects of photography, rather

than of the mystery of the artistic vision, obviously detracted

somewhat from his "message."

 

<p>

 

We all have our own "personal" images that each of us has created and

that has meaning to us as artists. But looking at things somewhat

objectively (if that is possible in the world of art), my guess is

that Ansel Adams� images, as a whole, would "touch" more people than

the images that have been produced by any of the participants of this

forum. So let�s not denigrate every photographer who does not measure

up to Edward Weston, because there would be a lot of artists in that

category.

[wilhelm]

Yes, Bubba, Weston had a driveway to park Heimey in. Why don't you

leave poor Mark alone. While being absolutely right on every subject

no doubt comes quite naturally to him, do you have any concept of the

tremendous amount of energy he expends to inform the rest of the

world that it is indeed a fact. Poor guy. You let him alone, now --

you heah?

[roger_urban3]

I went and visited the Weston exhibit today, Tuesday (free admission

day). It's too bad Weston didn't have access to an enlarger, as

squinting at 8x10 contact prints to see all the detail gets old after

awhile, let alone adding more 'crows feet' (lines by eyes) to my

face! <LOL!>

 

<p>

 

The larger the print the more the audience can get into the picture.

The Adams prints I have seen in person were enlarged, and it made a

difference, at least with me.

[armin_seeholzer]

Hi all

 

<p>

 

For me are holy Adams and Weston both are wonderfull artists and

photographers and I luck up to them.

And at least in the group f64 they influenced each other a little bit.

And it is not always true what is stated in a biography anyway.

Adams was maybe to critical against his on work if he really statet

thad with the repetition, thad means he was really a great artist.

Artists are always critical against the own work.

Adams and Weston were good friends and you guys should do it the same

way! ;-))

And take good pictures!!

[karnezis]

"Here was a man who obviously knew his life would be cut short

and yet continued to grow and evolve his vision and art."

 

<p>

 

How was his life cut short?

-A newbee in LF phototraphy.

[merg_ross]

His life was not cut short, however his ability to photograph was

impaired by the onset of Parkinson's disease in 1946. His last

exposures were made in 1948 and he died on New Year's Day, 1958.

Weston questioned whether he was deprived of more years of creativity

in a 1954 letter: Robin once wrote, "You are safe to finish what you

have to finish." Maybe he is right, in fact I'm sure he is. So

thinking,I wonder how that thought touches me. Was I cut off from my

creative work at just the right time? Was I through? I don't think

so, but could be. Edward Weston, Wildcat Hill. March 28, 1954.

[sean_yates2]

Well, perhaps

 

<p>

 

"a man who obviously knew his life would be cut short"

 

<p>

 

could be misconstrued, but I guess it's a matter of perspective.

Maybe it could instead be written, "a man who obviously knew his

career" or "a man who obviously knew his ability to produce work" ?

 

<p>

 

Edward lived to be 72, or close to it, so I guess he made his

Biblical alotment of 3 score and 12. But the Parkinsons' was first

noticed by Adams in 1941 or '44 ( I seem to recall ?) and he is

suppossed to have exposed his last negative in 1948. At first he

worked as he always did, and then he needed help to move the camera,

and finally Cole wound up turning the focusing knob for him, or so he

has written. I can only imagine what it must have been like in the

darkroom.

 

<p>

 

Cole was born in 1916 and despite a stroke is still running around

giving workshops and Brett, despite various health problems made it

to 82 or so and worked almost all his life.

 

<p>

 

So while Edward may have lived a reasonable span, without the disease

he would have lived longer and certainly been able to produce more

work in his last ten years. Supposedly he was able to outrun his

sons on the beach until the Parkinsons got bad. Some of the stories

you hear are just heartbreaking - him being stuck in a corner and not

being able to back out or turn around...both literal and figuartive I

guess.

[n_dhananjay3]

I've seen a photograph of him with his cat made by Wynn Bullock -

this was late in his years. Its heart wrenching, because you can see

the mask that Parkinson's has made of his face but his eyes have the

same eloquence in them that you see in all pictures of him. Must have

been a long, dark night of the soul. DJ

[wayne__]

I saw the exhibit in July. I was duly impressed by some of the prints,

but as always at AIC, i found the light to be far too dim and dreary

to appreciate the work to its fullest. The most important thing I

learned was that, in addition to his great work which rightly deserves

all the praise it gets, Weston was also occasionally capable of

mediocrity. IMO this is an important thing for us mere mortals to

realize.