Speaking of Caponigro...

[Mark Sawyer]

The latest edition of View Camera arrived a couple of days ago, and featured a small portfolio of Paul Caponigro's recent work. His photographs seem to have a wide appeal to people with very different philosophical approaches to photography. I see them as having considerable near-metaphysical qualities, trying to see beyond the surface of the object into a more contemplative world, and a zen-like (resorting to an over-used metaphor) beauty of simplicity. But other people on this forum who eschew such talk (and maybe justifiably so) as meaningless "art-speak" and "psycho-babble" (see the recent Walker Evans thread) respond to his work strongly too. (Are you reading this, Jorge?)

I really want to know; what is it in Caponigro's work that you all respond to?

[Armin Seeholzer]

For me:
He's technical perfection which creates an impact on me.

[Oren Grad]

A reminder to those interested in this topic, who happen to be withing hailing distance of Santa Fe: as mentioned in View Camera, a show of Paul Caponigro's recent still lifes opened yesterday, at the Andrew Smith Gallery:

www.andrewsmithgallery.com/exhibitions/paulcaponigro/stilllifes/paulcaponigro.htm

[Bill_1856]

My library contains four of Caponigro's books, and I much prefer his very early work. It was so free and...lyrical...especially the simple woods and water images. I have never been there, but I know those places -- they are as real to me as the Tennessee countyside where I grew up. For the past few years he seems to be striving for something ethereal without finding it. His images have become more cerebral but less visually intuitive. Technically his ability is superb; my print of Stonehenge almost gives me goosebumps.

[Oren Grad]

Guess I should try to answer the question Mark actually asked, too.

In fact, although I do tend to like quiet, understated photographs, Caponigro's work usually doesn't do that much for me. On the other hand, the work of William Clift, another photographer often included by "art-speak"ers in an imagined school of "metaphysical photography", often does. Go figure.

I could try to cite aspects of their respective compositional and printing styles, and I'm sure that's part of it. But really, I don't entirely understand why one often works for me and the other typically doesn't. I doubt that all the factors that contribute to emotional resonance are available to introspection.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

(Are you reading this, Jorge?)



Yeah I am reading it, so, when do you go back on your meds?... :-)

His technique as well as composition is flawless, but I must admit I am not to keen on the samples shown in the link provided by Oren. Someone posted he had knee surgery and I imagine this is the reason he presented still life. I always thought his still life was not as good as his landscape (of course with a few exceptions)

In any case is good to see he is getting back on the horse, which I imagine at his age is not small feat. I wish him much success and sales with his new work.

[Alec Jones]

Technically, he's as good as anybody printing today. Metaphysically speaking, I find his current work dull. I guess his linear clock and mine just aren't in the same timezone.

I respond to photographs that interest me. His don't anymore.

[Alan Davenport]

I'll confess that I'm not familiar with Caponigro's work, and the portfolio in the magazine is the first I've seen.

That admitted, while his subject matter doesn't particularly excite me, I'd love to see some of his prints. To reproduce this well in a magazine, the originals must be something.

[Barry Trabitz]

I first saw some of Caponegro's prints in the middle 60's in a gallery in Stockbridge, MA. One in particular, I found riviting. It was the image of a waterfall. In the area behind the waterfall was a darkness that just sucked me in. I stared at that for perhaps 30 minutes finally convinced that something was there. At the time I believed there was an image of a nude hiding in the shadows. Twenty years later I saw the same photograph in Lil Farber's house. I mentioned to here that when I first viewed the print I saw a nude. Lil laughed, and said that it was Caponegro's wife.

For me, the sense of mystery that is present in the shadows is the essence of his best work.

The print in Stockbridge that afternoon was for sale for $100. I did not buy it. Two young daughters, and a third on the way , a mortgage, and a very young practice convinced me that it was prudent to save the $100. Not my smartest decision.

[jerry brodkey]

I like his old stuff like the Stonehenge series and "the white running deer" is really unique.
The current work is too formal for my tastes - too symmetric and structured
with no real content. What does it mean?