He's the Robert Frost of a different era.
I enjoyed the talk on criteria that someone had posted by Brooks Jensen (http://www.lenswork.com/podcast/LW0639%20-%20Criteria%20Part%202.mp3), and also thought that it somewhat defines the argument on this forum. I thought it was very short-sighted in that the names he mentioned (Adams, Weston, Evans, Lange) all defined their own criteria and thumbed their nose at existing standards, just as Tina Barney and Charles Bukowski did. In fact, I sometimes look at history of art books with the idea that, as I turn the pages, each is doing something they weren't supposed to do. A curator from from MOMA once said, "Art should make you think and feel, and hopefully take you to a place you haven't been." Life is too short to be shown the same stuff over and over again. Let's break the molds.
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Marilyn <marilyn160@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am enjoying following this thread (Museum Collections) very much. I've often wondered, also, how some pieces get into shows and collections. Having judged a few shows, and being on the board and commission of an art gallery, I understand the process more, but still, many times I'm . . . well . . . flabbergasted by decisions made.
I recently went to a display at the Huntington Library here in California. They offered a "show" of the writing of Charles Bukowski. Maybe I'm not sophisticated enough, but all the way through the display I was asking myself, "Why?" and "In the Huntington?" (I admire the Huntington greatly).
Life continues to be a puzzle.
Marilyn
****
Have you ever wished you could tell your childhood self a thing or two about growing up?
Would the knowledge you know now have saved you from learning things the hard way?
It's Tough Growing Up: Children's Stories of Courage
Marilyn Dalrymple and Joan Foor
www.itstoughgrowingup.com
-----Original Message----- From: Andrew Sharpe
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 8:50 PMSubject: Re: museum collections?
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
Or maybe it's just piffle.
An email exchange I had with Brooks Jensen was one of the influences
that caused him to produce these podcasts (Against What Criteria):
http://www.lenswork.com/podcast/LW0638%20-%20Criteria%20Part%201.mp3
http://www.lenswork.com/podcast/LW0639%20-%20Criteria%20Part%202.mp3
Andrew
On 01/24/2011 08:50 PM, Kim Mosley wrote:
For me, there is an element of dada in this picture. In the same way
that Marcel Duchamp put a urinal on a pedestal, we see a rather ordinary
snapshot enlarged to human proportions. It opens our eyes, showing us
how to see something commonplace in a very new way. Some of the
commenters from the list seem to want to judge the work rather than
experience it. This is a trap. The photographer is asking us to open our
eyes and look at something that we might have discarded. Look at humans
in this both comic and tragic theatrical setting. What do we see? How is
this work more powerful and more universal than that done by a
"professional" wedding photographer?
Kim
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 10:38 PM, David Schenken <jds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
An interesting series of comments about museums and art and how it got
there.
Nobody seems to be talking about what they see in looking at the photo -
some technical stuff but not what they SEE.
I see a set of four people, three of which are interacting in a really
strange manner.
These folks are identified as 'bridesmaids' so we assume (???) that
they are
friends or at least friendly.
Not in this picture. The lady to the far right is really angry /
disgusted
at the lady on the left.
Miss center can't yet make up her mind about what just happened and
it must
really have been recent to get that difference in expressions.
Perhaps they
have just noticed that Miss left is three months pregnant and that
might be
inappropriate for this wedding gathering. Perhaps it is the
identity of the
father that's the problem.
We have a mystery here waiting for a story to be told.
And then there's that really mysterious lady in the background. Not
in the
same kind of dress - so not a bridesmaid.
Perhaps she's the matron / maid of honor and has been left out of the
'festivities'.
This whole drama is being played out in the woods - not the usual
venue for
wedding.
Anyway, that's what I see looking at the image. I'm sure more would
come
out looking at the real image in the large so that more detail would be
apparent.
Cheers,
James
Original Message ----- From: "Lea Murphy" <lea@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:lea@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students"
<photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 8:22 AM
> Subject: Re: museum collections?
>
>
> This is a link to one of the images I was really wondering about.
How this
ended up on a museum wall I'd love to know.
>
> http://collections.kemperart.org/Obj651$6
>
>
your kids . my camera . we'll click
www.leamurphy.com <http://www.leamurphy.com>
--
Kim Mosley
mrkimmosley@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:mrkimmosley@xxxxxxxxx>
Website: http://kimmosley.com
Blog: http://kimmosley.com/blog
--
http://andrewsharpe.com
--
Kim Mosley
mrkimmosley@xxxxxxxxx
Website: http://kimmosley.com
Blog: http://kimmosley.com/blog
