In an article in today's NT Times, there will be a TV PBS Art Special tonight entitled, "Imagining America", however, there is no one photographically contributing to the documentary--Stiegliz's name is mentioned more in association with O'keeffe.
I still have to wonder why these authorities in the "Arts" believe that photography historically has not contributed to the art scene in our culture.
Raymond
David Wojnarowicz is mentioned. He did photography among other media, for better or worse.
Funny, why didnt they just call it "painting in America" since they did not include photography? What I find even more ironic is the term "imaging" which came around with digital.....a capture method that could not be further apart from painting! (Well, unless you apply the water color PS filter... :-) )
And people wonder why I killed my TV.
Ain't nothin' worth watchin'. Including, apparently, PBS.
Bruce Watson
"Imagining America" Jorge - not Imaging. But don't let that stop your predictable knee-jerk anti-digital mini rant :-)
Perhaps most photography just lacks true imagination? (we seem a pretty anal lot after all...)
It is subtitled "Icons of 20th Century American Art" - it would be pretty hard to put almost any American photographer of the 20th Century in that category. Steiglitz, Weston (Adams...) - they all come across in the end as really rather parochial
But don't let that stop your predictable knee-jerk anti-digital mini rant :-)
You mean like your predictable knee jerk reaction to respond to my posts? Did I posted anything anti digital? No, but I imagine you wont let a small detail like that stop you either huh?... ;-)
Funny thing, is that I am not anti digital, I am anti BS......
Oh Mr. Hobbes - you are so quaintly disingenuous when you get so flustered
even today, there a lot of people who have studied art but who just haven't studied photography. it's off their radar.
i'm not too surprised, just based on art textbooks i've seen. some of them give a disproportional amount of attention to photography, others treat it like a footnote.
documentaries always choose what to focus on and what to tune out. sometimes the decisions are questionable. i had similar problems with ken burns' jazz documentary. the music world according to ken (and wynton marsalis) didn't much resemble the one i knew and loved.
but i can still think of better reasons to kill my tv than pbs.
Oh Mr. Hobbes - you are so quaintly disingenuous when you get so flustered
LOL...it takes someone far smarter than you to fluster me..... ;-)
Cindy Sherman is supposed to be there according to the NY Times article.
On the other hand photography is not the only medium to be snobbed by the authors, the very same article says that "barely any sculptor" is mentioned.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks