A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » Medium Format Photography Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Oh, no we're back on the "art or not art" thing again



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 29th 04, 07:02 PM
The Wogster
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Oh, no we're back on the "art or not art" thing again

David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 1/28/2004 11:08 AM Ken Smith spake thus:

I never posted a thought to this original discussion, but for what
it's worth, here's my take on it. The medium does not determine
whether or not something is or isn't art.Art is what an artist does.
What becomes difficult and subjective is determining who actually
qualifies as an artist, but honestly one shouldn't trouble over
whether one kind of material or another is used. At least that is what
the 20th century decided about it all. The 19th seemed more adamantly
materialistic and rational about the subject. Photography was an
affront to the handmade.



I'll admit that my aversion to recognizing photography as art is
something of a throwback to the 19th century; I also know that I'm
clearly out of step with the 20ths take on it (I like the way you put
it, that the previous century "decided" that photography was Art, which
I suppose is the end of the discussion for most people). And I do hanker
after certain aspects of that bygone age; maybe not the deficiency of
medical knowledge compared with ours, but other things.


Art is something that when experienced repeatedly invokes the emotional
response intended by the artist. If a movie tries to make you sad, and
continually does so, then the artists have done their job.

A portrait of a politional that imvolves the response what a pompous $#@
probably doesn't qualify as art. A photo from a war zone, that
invokes sympathy for the victims probably has involked the proper
response, and therefore does qualify.

This is the problem I have with arts councils that make a grant for a
piece of blue painted paper, or a scuplture made from rotting meat,
isn't art it's crap.

W




  #2  
Old January 29th 04, 08:47 PM
jjs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Oh, no we're back on the "art or not art" thing again


"The Wogster" wrote in message
.. .

Art is something that when experienced repeatedly invokes the emotional
response intended by the artist.


Pure drivel. Horsepucky!
Art can be intellectual. It ain't all about hugs, kissing, pain and agony.

In fact, one of the very worst things about so many "famous" "art"
photojournalist images is that the "artistic" merits of it allow people to
view gutwrenching reality while at the same time feeling all cozy knowing
it's really shmoozy art. Eugene Smith is a famous early example of exact;u
that. So are the friggin lazy ass pictures taken by photographers who go to
India (for example) and _harvest_ closeup pictures of the poor, starving
kids.



  #3  
Old January 30th 04, 05:46 AM
David Nebenzahl
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Oh, no we're back on the "art or not art" thing again

On 1/29/2004 10:02 AM The Wogster spake thus:

A portrait of a politional that imvolves the response what a pompous $#@
probably doesn't qualify as art.


Oh, but you're very much mistaken about that, my friend; you obviously know
nothing of Daumier. I suggest you try to educate yourself better.


--
It's stupid, moronic and too fcuking obvious, as obvious as counting your
fingers, so TELL ME SOMETHING I DON'T KNOW or just shut the fcuk up.

- "jjs" in extremis on rec.photo.darkroom

  #4  
Old January 30th 04, 02:39 PM
Dennis O'Connor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Oh, no we're back on the "art or not art" thing again

I am in awe of Daumier... Jeez, what a mix of artistic talent and manual
skill...
denny

"David Nebenzahl" wrote in you obviously know
nothing of Daumier.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Graphic 120 roll film back for 4x5 Massimiliano Spoto Large Format Photography Equipment 2 May 24th 04 02:01 AM
FS: 6X8 ROLL FILM BACK FOR 4X5 Massimiliano Spoto Large Format Photography Equipment 0 May 20th 04 06:06 AM
6X8 ROLL FILM BACK FOR 4X5 Massimiliano Spoto Large Format Photography Equipment 0 May 20th 04 05:55 AM
Film holders for Graflok back for Nikon Multiphot Edwin Barkdoll Large Format Photography Equipment 0 March 9th 04 03:07 AM
Printing on the back of a print. Mark in Maine In The Darkroom 19 February 5th 04 11:32 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.