Hi, > I was just glancing through Elliot Erwitt's massive compilation, "Snaps" on > the weekend. I really must get that book. I've always liked him, now I > love him.
I'm with you on this one. I have the book - it's great. > Lots of fuzzy shots, for one. For another, he called it "Snaps" > as a reaction to the "artsy" crowd (you know, the DIB's - Dressed in > Blacks). He really doesn't seem (if I understand him correctly) to think > it's important whether a photo is considered "art" or not - leave that to > the critics, I guess. I rather like that way of looking at things. I'm with Erwitt on this one. "Is it Art?" has always struck me as the most spectacularly pointless question. "Is it good Art?" is only fractionally less pointless. The only worthwhile response is "What difference does it make?". To me the only worthwhile question is "Is it an interesting photograph?". Erwitt's photographs are interesting. -- Cheers, Bob
