Weston: 125 photos book on sale on Amazon

[Darin Boville]

I received the following by a contributor who prefers to remain anonymous:

"I have both the Lodima book and the new one. I am most disappointed with the new one. The book contains all the usual suspects--virtually nothing I haven't seen numerous times before as all prints are from the CCP collection. .......

I would see the new book as being a "greatest hits" kind of volume--most have been published elsewhere numerous times.

I've been meaning to get back to this thread. I did receive this book as a gift and after flipping through it I'm a little taken aback by the anonymous comments that QT posted.

I'm something of a Weston fan and have several books of his work and have seen exhibits of his work in various cities plus single prints in many more exhibits--and held prints in my hand at the Fogg Museum...so basically I can make a claim that I know prints that are the "usual suspects" and those which are not.

That said, in my brief look at the book I saw numerous prints that were unfamiliar to me--and many more which were uncommon to see. My first impression is that QT's "Deep Throat" has it completely wrong.

It's a bit hard to contest a "hit job" by an anoynomous commentator but I'd love to know who they are--and if they have any connection to the other books.

I'll post more when I have a better look.

--Darin

[Merg Ross]

I've been meaning to get back to this thread. I did receive this book as a gift and after flipping through it I'm a little taken aback by the anonymous comments that QT posted.

I'm something of a Weston fan and have several books of his work and have seen exhibits of his work in various cities plus single prints in many more exhibits--and held prints in my hand at the Fogg Museum...so basically I can make a claim that I know prints that are the "usual suspects" and those which are not.

That said, in my brief look at the book I saw numerous prints that were unfamiliar to me--and many more which were uncommon to see. My first impression is that QT's "Deep Throat" has it completely wrong.

It's a bit hard to contest a "hit job" by an anoynomous commentator but I'd love to know who they are--and if they have any connection to the other books.

I'll post more when I have a better look.

--Darin

Darin, I have read again the post by "anonymous" and can agree with several of the points; I admit to not having seen the new book that you reference.

However, if the reproductions fall short of equaling the quality of those in the Lodima Press book, it is surely not worth the lofty sum asked. I am referring to "Life Work", with 110 superbly reproduced plates from the Hochberg-Mattis Collection.

Secondly, the essay accompanying the "Life Work" book, written by Dody Weston Thompson, is superb. She worked with Edward the last ten years of his life, and is without doubt the most knowledgeable scholar of his life and work; her essay is a necessary departure from the distorted biography written by Ben Maddow, a person who never met Edward Weston.

Where I disagree with "anonymous", concerns the comment that the CCP Collection is "not exhaustive". Such a comment suggests that there are some overlooked EW gems, not represented by the 1,800 prints in the CCP collection. I have seen the collection, and although not every print he ever made is there, the 1,800 are very representative of his life work from 1903 to 1948.

[Darin Boville]

I'm working on the computer, stitching images (i.e., lots of little spaces of dead time) s I shot a few pages from the Weston book showing images that I was either unfamiliar with or which I considered to be uncommon images. That is, the opposite of the "usual suspects" in the claim in the post above. I let you be the judge as to whether these really are uncommon or not. (I had originally shot about two dozen images but am only showing half here...)

Shot with my cell phone--you really need to see the book firsthand

--Darin

[Darin Boville]

More.

--Darin

[Darin Boville]

Last batch.

--Darin

[Michael Jones]

Except for the "beach houses" image that was in the recent Leaves of Grass exhbition, while they are not the "ususal suspects, I've seen them all before in various volumes. That said, you can never see them too many times.

Mike

[Merg Ross]

I'm working on the computer, stitching images (i.e., lots of little spaces of dead time) s I shot a few pages from the Weston book showing images that I was either unfamiliar with or which I considered to be uncommon images. That is, the opposite of the "usual suspects" in the claim in the post above. I let you be the judge as to whether these really are uncommon or not.

--Darin

Thanks for posting. I must admit to being familiar with all of these images, although several of them I would not characterize as being the "usual suspects".

However, the book could have merit if the printing is superb, the bar being raised with the Lodima Press book. What is your impression?

[Thom Bennett]

Merg,

You mentioned Ben Maddow's "distorted biography" of Weston. I've heard that term used before in reference to that bio but was never quite sure in what aspects it was considered distorted or inaccurate. What do you consider to be the primary distortion? It's been a number of years since I read it and have recently wanted to go back to it. Always enjoy reading your reminisces about the Weston's.

[Michael Alpert]

Merg,

You mentioned Ben Maddow's "distorted biography" of Weston. I've heard that term used before in reference to that bio but was never quite sure in what aspects it was considered distorted or inaccurate. What do you consider to be the primary distortion? It's been a number of years since I read it and have recently wanted to go back to it. Always enjoy reading your reminisces about the Weston's.

The reference is from Charis Wilson's book: Through Another Lens, My Years with Edward Weston. In her very well-written biography/autobiography Wilson wrote that she did not recognize the man she had been married to when she read Maddow's study. I take what Charis Wilson wrote at face value.

[Merg Ross]

Merg,

You mentioned Ben Maddow's "distorted biography" of Weston. I've heard that term used before in reference to that bio but was never quite sure in what aspects it was considered distorted or inaccurate. What do you consider to be the primary distortion? It's been a number of years since I read it and have recently wanted to go back to it. Always enjoy reading your reminisces about the Weston's.

The reference is from Charis Wilson's book: Through Another Lens, My Years with Edward Weston. In her very well-written biography/autobiography Wilson wrote that she did not recognize the man she had been married to when she read Maddow's study. I take what Charis Wilson wrote at face value.

Not a reference to Charis' book, although she also said as much in conversation. My considered authorities on the subject are his sons, in particular Brett. We had many conversations on the subject of the Maddow book.

Maddow was at a disadvantage, having never met the subject of his prose. Had he, perhaps less fiction would have crept into his essay. Perhaps not, as sometimes sensationalism and distortion are the intent of the author. The recent biography of Brett Weston comes to mind.

Thom, I have not read the Maddow book for decades, and have no interest in revisiting it. However, I have always been comfortable with the assessment of Edward made by those who knew him well, early on. Among them I would include Merle Armitage, Willard Van Dyke, Ansel Adams, Charis and Ira Latour, all of them having written extensively about the man they knew. Compare those writings with the Maddow book, and you have the answer.

Thanks for the kind comment.

Merg