On May 11, 2010, at 11:44 PM, Tom C wrote: > On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Doug Brewer <[email protected]> wrote > :(regarding Eggleston) > >> I'm pretty sure Christine had a little epiphany about it too, but I'll leave >> that up to her. Even Mark Roberts allowed, a touch grudgingly, that there >> might have been a couple of good photos in there. >> > > I really thought one (Eggleston) was excellent and two others were > very likeable. So I didn't totally dislike his exhbited work, though > those three represent probably 5% of what was displayed. > > He just, IMO, seemed a charlatan. Maybe Picasso was too, based on > some elementary school art exhibits I saw hanging in the local mall > today. > > It seems to me a question of: > > 1. Do I like it because it was REALLY a good photograph? > > or > > 2. Do I like it because it brings back fond memories for me, despite > it being a CRAPPY photograph? > > If #1, then it was probably a really good photograph. > > If #2, then it's because I'm in love with my own memories (nothing > wrong with that) and my emotional response to the image has little to > do with it's artisitic merit. > Invoking an emotional response is artistry in its highest form. Paul
> Tom C. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
