Is Edward Weston falling "out of favor?"

[Bill_1856]

In my formative years, the photo magazines treated Stieglitz and Steichen like the photoheros to emulate. Then came a period when Gene Smith was revered. Eventually St. Ansel became (and still is) the Gold Standard.
For 20 years I assumed that Edward Weston's place in photography was the Weston Meter, (it turns out there was NO connection).
Then in the 70s when a few photography galleries began to appear, essentially lead by Lee Witkin in NYC, We began to read about and hear of Edward Weston. I bought The Daybooks, and a print of Pepper #30. The Daybooks have been out of print for many years, which is a real pity -- every photographer should read them, as both an inspiration and a warning.
Eventually books about Weston and his life and loves began being written, and seemed to be coming out every month. Anyone who had known or worked with him, particularly Tina Modot, were touted as Great Photographers.

There are "lots" of books of his pictures, but except for the Ben Maddow tome, not much is written. A wonderful picture is painted by his second wife, Charis Wilson, but by then he was failing as an innovator.
Now, it almost seems rare to find him mentioned except as a historical figure.

[Kirk Gittings]

Recognition in the art world goes through cycles like food, fashion etc.

[Ken Lee]

it almost seems rare to find him mentioned

Is there money to be made in mentioning him ?

[Tin Can]

Is there money to be made in mentioning him ?

Is that cynicism?

Money = Art

[Luis-F-S]

Not just no but HELL NO.

[karl french]

Um, he died in 1958. He is a historical figure.

"West Coast / California" School landscape photography has been out of style in the art world for a while now. He will always be considered a titan in the history of photography (much more so than Adams in my mind.)

The Madlow book is probably the worst biography I've ever read. More like a tabloid that a scholarly work.

The recent Beth Warren book about his time in LA is very well written and fills in many important gaps in his biographical history. Amy Conger never wrote her biography and probably never will.

I'm sure there are still grad students writing dissertations and scholars/historians writing on Weston.

I think the state of favor of a artist in the art word is probably not the best yardstick by which to judge greatness. Considering it is quite fleeting and generally superficial. See Ken's post above.

[dsphotog]

His minimalist technique seems like it would be too easy... Until you try it.

[mdarnton]

I just dug deeply into him a couple of months ago. Truly, we live in a golden age, when the internet gives up what it does, so easily, and then the rest you can buy from Amazon, used, for five bucks + shipping. With those resources so available, perhaps the lack a buzzful contemporary promotion hides a lot of what people actually are looking at.

[adelorenzo]

The recently published Group f.64 book has a healthy dose of Weston.

[tgtaylor]

For 20 years I assumed that Edward Weston's place in photography was the Weston Meter, (it turns out there was NO connection).

Similarly for years I had thought the Editor of Astronomy magazine was the same Robert Burnham, Jr. that authored the 3 volume Burham's Celestial Handbook. An Observers Guide to the Universe Beyond the Solar System until I discovered that the author of the Celestial Handbook was none other than that bum I had saw frequently sitting on a park bench in Balboa Park selling his art. Very interesting story: http://universalworkshop.com/guysblo...ert-burnham-2/

Thomas