https://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2012/03/vital-role-of-critics-and-ongoing.html
A store on the drag near the UT campus. Sigma fp + Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 Nokton Classic. A horrible combination for shooting in full sun. Without an EVF.....
https://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2012/03/vital-role-of-critics-and-ongoing.html
A store on the drag near the UT campus. Sigma fp + Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 Nokton Classic. A horrible combination for shooting in full sun. Without an EVF.....
I tend to disagree with your take on critics. I think they're mostly useless, and when influential, mostly destructive. If the photography (art or documentary) is bad, ignore it. If it's commercial, it already has a built-in critic, the client. If it's good, it's okay to celebrate it, but criticism, as it's usually done, requires a level of psychological insight into the photographer's mind and processes that few (probably no) critics actually have. Maybe the best critic would be the photographer's spouse, who would like to continue eating. You mention Beaumont Newhall as a critic. He was the most prominent early modernist critic, but also one of the most destructive 20th century commentators on photography. He didn't like women, for one thing, and gave almost no time to female photographers now regarded as some of the finest photographic artists. He didn't like photographers who weren't "white." He liked a very narrow range of "art" photography, and gave almost no time to documentary photography. And so on. I got more, if you need it.
ReplyDeleteThe 20th Century was filled with mixed treasures. Men with faults, systems with prejudice and so much more. If you don't like Beaumont Newhall for his personal politics that's fine. But I think he was no more destructive as a commentator and tastemaker than John Szarkowski in pushing his unsettling preferences. Can we look instead to people like A.D. Coleman and Janet Malcolm? I'm not a fan of the biographical fallacy or I couldn't listen to Wagner, read Hemmingway, or read Ezra Pound. Times changed and culture advanced and yet, with the current milieu in America I think we're heading backwards to a time when Newhall would seem almost progressive... Focusing on Newhall instead of his very useful book, seems a bit futile. I'm guessing we could discover plenty of unsavory moments from just about all of our 20th century photography crew given time and effort. Where do we draw the lines?
DeleteIf you consider the photographer as an artist (amateur or professional) rather than as a professional technician providing products for a consumer (no disrespect intended), then the opinion of the critic may be (and usually is) an expression of their personal likes or prejudice. For the most part creative encouragement will be constructive and beneficial, gratuitous disparagement will almost always be destructive and unhelpful, maybe sometimes leading to the artist being psychologically damaged and restricting their work. For the professional, the most reliable critic is always the marketplace. YMMV G
ReplyDeleteMy favourite quote on the role of the critic comes from Ratatouille
ReplyDelete"In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little, yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. But there are times when a critic truly risks something, and that is in the discovery and defense of the new. The world is often unkind to new talent, new creations. The new needs friends."
I'll order the book. Thanks for making me aware of it.