I think Helmuts answer was very elegant - and perhaps within the concept of "the art of conversation". He didn't say photography was art - or it wasn't. What he said was really, that he did not want to discuss if photography is or isn't art - thus didn't want to answer.
I do not consider myself an artist. I dont' consider most photography art. Of course some of it is - at least to some people. What is art to you may not be art to me. And vise versa. I can perhaps define art. But that definition may only apply to me. That's perhaps what Helmut meant too. I can't say that I disagree. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Bob W [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 8. februar 2006 00:43 Til: [email protected] Emne: RE: OT: Helmut Newton > > I don't want to start a whole big thing about whether or not > photography is "art". Far as I'm concerned it is and that's > "settled law". Helmut's "answer" is a bit oblique for me and > since you don't disagree, care to comment further? Thanks! > Define "art" -- Cheers, Wittgenbob
