Is Edward Weston falling "out of favor?"

[djdister]

Every serious study about the history of great photographers mentions Weston, so I believe your thesis statement is unfounded.

[Peter Lewin]

The OP ends by stating that Weston is rarely mentioned now, except as a historical figure. But that is exactly what Edward Weston is, one of the giants in the history of photography. I would suggest that Rembrandt isn't mentioned much today, except in the context of being a historical figure as well, which certainly doesn't diminish either Weston or Rembrandt.

All arts evolve over time. The current trends in photography (at least as art) seem to favor large color prints, images that take advantage of the technology available in wide-carriage digital printers, digital cameras, and the associated software. In that context, the 8x10 or 11x14 silver (or platinum) print is no longer what one finds on (most) gallery walls, or in any of the "Art" magazines. (I try to attend the annual AIPAD show in NYC, and there are galleries specializing in contemporary work, and galleries specializing in "classic" work, and rarely do the two overlap.) Again, I don't think that diminishes Weston, but it accounts for why he is not spoken about much these days, other than in a "history of photography" context. Or, to keep up my parallel with painting, "traditional" figurative portraiture is no longer "where its at," so many great painters are now regarded as that, "great" but long dead, painters.

[Fred L]

Eventually St. Ansel became (and still is) the Gold Standard.

Not universally, at least imo. I held him high for awhile but eventually felt the Group f/64 idea rather short sighted and too narrow and not where I wanted to go with my photography. Technically he's in the pantheon but I would place other photographers (starting with documentary and photojournalists) above him on my list, which is a a very subjective thing obviously. ymmv

and Kirk's post is spot on...photographers can be at the mercy of powers beyond their control

[koh303]

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.

This is amazing, and sums up almost everyword i was going to type, probably better then i would have so kodus here +1.

I think the OP was referring to Eugene Smith (not Gene).

The only thing i can add here is that the national endounment for the arts and thus museums, galleries and art critics, had a massive shift post the new topographics show, which changed how the art world treats photography, post Westen, Adams and their peers, pretty much forever, leaving less space for anything, outside of the classical canon of history of photography in the US (which is very different from that of anywhere else in the world). Weston, as a historic figure, is nothing more then a place holder in that canon, and his influence or favor are limited to that aspect of scholarly research and debate.

[RSalles]

This is probably true in USA but not in Europe in general and specially in France it's not. In France, Edward Weston is a reference in photography - as AA.
I'm not sure, but the fact that there isn't a place like Yosemite, Grand Canyon, etc in Europe didn't attract the same interest in landscape photography as in USA. By the same reason, studio, portraiture, street and photojournalisme were dragging more attention. To counterbalance, experimental photo was deeply developed - Bauhaus with Moholy-Nagi, the American Man Ray with the surrealistes, and many other, an area where the only "word spreading" legend is Minor White. Long story short: if you asked to a French photographer a name of an American photographer until the end of the '80s, 7 in 10 first answers were Edward Weston,

Renato

[John Kasaian]

"Each generation of rebels in turn is remembered by the next, not as pioneers who began the march, or started to break away from old conventions; but as the old convention from which only the very latest rebels have dared to break away."
GK Chesterton, in chapter 32 of All I Survey , London, Methuen & Co, 1933

[MIke Sherck]

"Each generation of rebels in turn is remembered by the next, not as pioneers who began the march, or started to break away from old conventions; but as the old convention from which only the very latest rebels have dared to break away."
GK Chesterton, in chapter 32 of All I Survey , London, Methuen & Co, 1933

Which is as it should be. As Sir Isaac Newton is supposed to have said, "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."

Mike

[r_a_feldman]

I think the OP was referring to Eugene Smith (not Gene).

Yes, they are the same person (W. Eugene Smith). Both Ansel Adams and Henri Cartier-Bresson called him "Gene" (as did Jim Hughes when Camera 35 named him "Our Man of The Year" in 1974), so the OP is not in a bad crowd.

[richardman]

As an admirer of Eugene Smith (I have many of his books), I can attest that he was frequently referred to as "Gene Smith." IMHO, he is one of the greatest documentary photographers ever.

[William Whitaker]

Edward who??