JMB, your comments are well said and elucidate one aspect of photography - the documentation of unpleasantness. Photographic history is replete with examples of such unpleasantness and I don't need to repeat them, but for example Gene Smith's Minimata series comes to mind. Many other workers focus on banality, hardly an exposition of beauty. Photography has become a sort of loose canon and therein, for me, is where the excitement lies.
I'm not trained in the fine arts and sometimes I think that is a good thing. I don't carry art history baggage with me but I do care greatly about it. A poor knowledge about it seems to help me see things out of that context and when not consciously thinking about what has been done before I am much more imaginitive and free to probe.
Ash's image I find particularly imaginitive just because of the bold connection between the patch and the beautiful female body; a connection that is at once controversial depending on the proclivities of the viewer.
Nate Potter, Austin TX.
Bookmarks