Bad HTML! BAd HTML! </I>Sit!</I></I>
Bad HTML! BAd HTML! </I>Sit!</I></I>
Well, when I see all the venom spat on Fatali in this forum, I feel sad and ashamed to be a part of the LF community. I am in the middle of preparing a portfolio for some US galleries but am at this very moment somewhat discouraged and disgusted.
I think we (with my friend Paul, well known in this forum) should invite Michel Fatali to come to Switzerland for some time to get rid of this howling. Fires are allowed here in most places. You bet he would bring back some fine pictures.
I wish good light to all of you.
Who Fatali? Where Canyonlands?
Sorry - no speak Americano.
So, back to LF...
Firstly I was not castigating the bearer of the report on the Fatali incident alone but all of you. Who on this forum went to Delicate Arch after the incident and actually looked at the damage? Anyone? Who on this forum has spent more than one day picking up all the damn cigarette butts, beer cans, and trash left by all the tourists that descend on Delicate Arch everyday? Who on this forum actually read all of the accounts of the incident and the appology Fatali offered? ME. Anyone else? You "should" be indignant of what he did. You should be indignant of all the damage visited on Delicate Arch by all the damn tourists that visit because the National Park service advertizes the Park around the world. It spends more on advertizing outside the US than inside it. The damage caused by Fatali wasn't done on purpose no more than somneone having an accident on a rain slick road. He tried to do something that backfired. He thought he was taking enough precautions but was guilty of not thinking it through far enough. The fires in the pans didn't cause the damage but the act of putting out the fires in the dark and tracking soot around the area which 3 weeks later I couldn't see. Hell the Park Service cut a trail along a rock face to facilitate the publics access to the place but no one castigates them for that. There are plans to install handrails along the ledge to lessen the liability to the Park Service. As with most things the Park Service(now that's an oxymoron if I ever heard one) does they are the worst offenders of all. When I say leave Fatali alone I mean let's get on to bigger and better things like writing your representatives about the stupid rules they enact that exacerbate the crowding in the parks. Fatali should be the least of your concerns. And if you could have seen the minor smudges on the rocks(which were very hard to make out, if that was them to begin with, you would see how over blown the Park Service made this out to be. Example. You were speeding and you misjudged the turn and hit someone and caused a fender to be bent. The police give you a speeding ticket and you pay to replace the fender. You didn't mean to cause the accident. And you pay for it. Fatali tries something he thinks will make a nice image. He means no harm but in his oversight he tramps some soot over the rocks. He did't mean to but it happened. He offers an apology and pays for the cleanup. He then is severly(in relation to the actual damage caused) punished. He files no appeal. He takes his lumps and goes on. If you count "all" the things stemming from this incident, I think you will see that he has paid his due. The loss of workshops and print/poster sales through the Arizona Highways alone was probably close to tens of thousands of dollars. His reputation is continually tarnished by repeated newspaper and magazine articles detailing the trial and incident. I think this is enough. Oh! You mean that you don't like landscape images or images that are full of color as so many of you espouse here? Well too bad. Get a life and get over it. If you didn't go and see the paltry amount of damage right after the incident then how can you accurately judge the severity of the crime and the severity of the punishment? Why not use that energy and tackle the biggest problem. The Park Service which is your biggest enemy. Oh. And go look at all the topurist names that are carved into the rocks around there. You won't find Fatali's name there at least. James Mickelson
"Firstly I was not castigating the bearer of the report on the Fatali incident alone but all of you." Gee, James.... I found your post at the very top, before anyone else had posted...I guess you knew what was going to be said... As I said in my previous post, it makes NO difference if there was any damage or not. Let's get right to the heart of this - a photograph, no matter how spectacular, no matter the photographer, is not THAT *&^%$$###'n important! <<<GASP!!!>>> <<<SHOCK!!>>>
James, I believe your example would be closer to the mark if you made Fatali a driving instructor with a car full of students. Under these circumstances, he should be exercising greater care, not less, and he should be held to higher standards of performance and/or conduct, not lower standards. Accidents do happen but speeding on a slippery road was irresponsible and I'm sorry if you disagree but I think he should have known better.
How's this for irony, just three days after the Fatali sentencing...
http://www.kgw.com/sports/olympics/olympicstory.html?StoryID=36085
I sure hope Ms. Spann had the proper permits.
I don't see any irony here Kerry. Now if she was splashing a molten parafin, chemical (sp?) & ash mix and doing so in the dark then we would have irony. As it is we just have marketing.
Ellis,
While I appreciate the different circumstances in these two situations, I most c ertainly do find it ironic in terms of the overall messages presented by our fed eral government.
On Feb 1, 2002 our federal government says:
fire + Delicate Arch = bad, VERY bad (illegal, in fact)
On Feb 4, 2002 our federal government tells the world:
fire + Delicate Arch = good, VERY good (after all, isn't the point of a marketin g campaign to create a positive response)
I'm not trying to justify what Fatali did. Nothing of the sort. He broke the l aw, he faced the charges, plead guilty and was sentenced by the powers that be. End of story, as far as I'm concerned. (it's already been beaten to death here, and elsewhere online). I just personally found it ironic that the same governm ent that would make a high profile case out of Fatali's fires at Delicate Arch w ould turn around three days later and use fire at Delicate Arch as a promotional tool. I'm not commenting on the right vs. wrong or legal vs. illegal aspects o f the two "incidents", just the juxtaposition of fire + Delicate Arch = bad vs. fire + Delicate Arch = good. Given the hoopla that the Fatali case has caused h ere (and elsewhere), it was the absolute FIRST thing I thought of when I saw tha t image of the olympic torch blazing away in front of Delicate Arch. Perhaps, n ot the image the olympic marketeers intended, but none the less, the one that po pped into my mind.
Sorry for trying to inject a little humor into this tedious thread. I now retur n you to your regularly scheduled flame war (oops, there I go again, sorry about that).
Kerry
By god Kerry, I missed that point. My silliness quotient was out to lunch. I say we roast Fatali alive on a pyre of his images at the base of Delicate Arch. the Earth Gods have been angered and they need to be appeased. let the act be commemerated only on black & white film for that is the only film a purist needs.
Now if the runner had tripped and in falling rolled over the torch causing the torch to catch her synthetic outfit (made, no doubt in China or Vietnam by prisoners or child labor) on fire melting it into into the rock as she rolled down toward the base of the arch and In the media crush more camera men and pr flacks fell and crashing into the base of the arch had caused it to fall... Now that would be irony.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks