No problem. I appreciate the feedback. I find that the series is seen in many different ways. I have shown it without identifying it as staged, and in that context, it wasn't questioned. I think that once something is identified as role-playing, the expectations change. I think only a caricature of a trailer park resident is then expected. Much like Shel's wedding, for example. In any case, some of these pics have served me well (I sold a couple as stock), and the shoot was a lot of fun. Paul On Mar 3, 2007, at 12:03 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Paul, > > I am not sure if you want to discuss this further, but if you do .. > and please don't take this as a personal affront. That is not the > intent. > >> ... The original name of the >> series was "Trailer Park Princess." It was meant to be a study of the >> woman rather than the lifestyle or the location. It was a role-playing >> exercise. It was a role-playing exercise. ... > > Setting that as the title of the series, or the conceptual basis for > the series, implies either a characterization, a exaggeration into > caricature, or a contrast of 'the princess' with 'the trailer park'. > So if it was to be a study of the woman and of role playing, how > could you present the study without relation to the lifestyle or > location suggested by the title? > > There's nothing wrong with the photos in and of themselves, but to my > eye the set looks more to be a modeling shoot of a young woman > without relation to the context implied by the title. The cues which > would lead me to see it as 'fantasy role playing' are either too > subtle or not present, where the sense of reality required of a > characterization ... of an actual person living in these > circumstances ... lacks sufficient context to satisfy what I'm > looking for when led by the title. In other words, the set as shown > does not give me ground to believe in it, or the grounds to 'suspend > disbelief' and accept it as "the princess who lives in a trailer park". > > In fewer words, the pictures look good but the story seems askew. ;-) > > I don't know about a debate on "making fun of the indigent". That > seems a bit over-much for the magnitude of the series, to me. > > G > > > On Mar 3, 2007, at 8:17 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: > >> I didn't set out to depict trailer park life. The original name of the >> series was "Trailer Park Princess." It was meant to be a study of the >> woman rather than the lifestyle or the location. It was a role-playing >> exercise. Personally, I'm quite fond of it as is the model. But >> perhaps >> it's not for everyone. In fact, it provoked a lengthy debate when I >> showed it on the photo.net Leica forum a few years ago. Some >> thought we >> were making fun of the indigent, which was certainly not among our >> objectives. In fact, when we were finished, we drank a bit more beer >> with some of the trailer park residents. But that's another story:-). >> Thanks for looking. >> Paul >> On Mar 3, 2007, at 11:12 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: >> >>> Hmm. Well, I think my problem here is that the set concentrates too >>> strongly on the model and not enough on the context of the >>> surroundings. That lends them all a feeling of being posed, rather >>> than being a characterization of trailer park life. >>> >>> Of the set, first >>> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5670679 >>> and then, a little less strongly, >>> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5670828 >>> make the transition into "reality" best for my eye. >>> >>> Godfrey >>> >>> On Mar 3, 2007, at 7:53 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Godders, >>>> I've posted eight from the series: >>>> http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=701586 >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mar 3, 2007, at 10:45 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: >>>> >>>>> Unfortunately, not for me. Standing alone, it appears a staged >>>>> photograph emulating a young person faking a dissipated >>>>> lifestyle. It >>>>> does not seem a real situation. If there's some broader context >>>>> to it >>>>> that has a relation to real life I'd have to see more photos to >>>>> establish the context. >>>>> >>>>> G >>>>> >>>>> On Mar 3, 2007, at 12:37 AM, Bob W wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Godfrey, >>>>>> >>>>>> surely the context is all there in the material evidence - trailer >>>>>> park, fake leopard skin, Budweiser, cigarettes, rivets. That >>>>>> ain't a >>>>>> photograph, that's anthropology. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hadnt gotten to this one yet, Paul. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It's not particularly appealing to me as a standalone photo, it >>>>>>> belongs as part of a set to have some context. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Technically, it's nicely done although the rendering lacks >>>>>>> some sparkle. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5667450&size=md > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
