>
>
> > But - really, folks. This guy does sound like a total nut. What does
> > he have against photography? Very few of us can afford a decent
> > telescope to view the planets - and, of course, NOTHING can even
> > compete with the space probes' photos! Indeed, what WOULD we do
> > without them!
>
> I've enjoyed reading all your comments on the planet article, and I think
> I should explain some of the author's points. (I don't have the book
> here, unfortunately)...I think he was saying that using the earth image in
> advertising cheapens it, and that having a graphic representation of the
> earth reduces it to a simple icon that we can manipulate as we please. He
> recalled that one of the astronauts blotted out the image of the earth
> with his thumb, and he saw this as an example of human domination over
> the planet. (However, if you read the quote that went along with the
> astronaut's story, you see it in a completely different way.
> Unfortunately I don't have that book with me either). Anyway, the author
> sees our ability to visualize the entire earth at once as a way to
> disconnect ourselves from it, a way to make it the "other." Since the
> photographs are taken from space, we have already managed to physically
> disconnect ourselves from the planet, and we cheapen the image by using
> it as a mere icon in advertising, etc. When I see Sprint or a pizza
> company using the earth image to sell their products, I begin to understand
> his argument.
> I'm afraid this wasn't very well thought out (I wish I had those
> books with me), but hopefully I've made my points.
>
> Jennifer Gilden
>
