1. ... We could have a long discussion about art if you like.
g'day spiral
yeh, we could have a long discussion, or you could just explain yourself a little more, as i have asked of you twice already
as for these images, don't get hung up on the fact that this photographer is known/published/whatever
make up your own mind about him
to me his work is poor and could have been done by anyone
why don't you try this kind of image making and you may come to realize, as i have, that it's not hard or particularly special but can be done much better with diffferent light, different material, different subject, but still done simply
- sleazey comes to mind, why does a middle aged man need to photograph quite young women in such a slip shod and perverse manner with little artistic intent?
Art, schmart. Just because someone calls it art doesn't mean anything. It doesn't do a thing for me. Anyone with a 35mm and various rolls of film can do this stuff all day long. Slip-shod, poorly done, ect., ect., ect. Ho-Hum. Quite amateurishness IMO.
HAH! Here's a couple lines from the Wikipedia article on Kern:
Quote:
- he had a deep interest in the aesthetics of extreme sex, violence, and perversion -
and
Quote:
He has pornographic spreads for Hustler and Hustler's Leg Show magazines, and is currently having his work showcased on a pornographic subscription site called NewNudeCity - The World of Richard Kern.
So he's on some fringe edge and is a recognized professional pornographer. DUHHHHH!
I dont feel the need to defend Kerns work. Richard Kern could do a much better job at that than I.
MR. HEATH, I dont feel the need to explain anything to you. Perhaps you should go back and read my last post.
Quote:
as for these images, don't get hung up on the fact that this photographer is known/published/whatever
make up your own mind about him
to me his work is poor and could have been done by anyone
That statement couldnt ring more true. Perhaps you should reread what you wrote, or perhaps you feel it is your duty to tell others what art should be.
Everything cant be Flowers, smiling children, and happy clowns.
Art is as we see it.
Last edited by spiralcity; 10-04-2007 at 03:08 AM.
What's punk about them? I grew up surrounded by other kids who were punks at the end of the 70's, they looked great compared to this lot. These people look like a bunch of geriatrics on a fashion shoot...............
That said, the aesthetic quality reminds me of Cindy Sherman's work, but not nearly as accomplished.
What's punk about them? I grew up surrounded by other kids who were punks at the end of the 70's, they looked great compared to this lot.
Harry, I should have made myself more clear. I was reffering to a book called 'New York Girls'. when I made that comparison.
I understand that many people will find Kerns work objectionable, and I agree. Some of his work is disturbing and uncomfortable to view.
Quote:
Just think about the cognitive dissonance between these two statements...
I dont see the conflict. Perhaps your reading a bit to deep into a simple post.
Last edited by spiralcity; 10-04-2007 at 03:30 AM.
I dont feel the need to defend Kerns work. Richard Kern could do a much better job at that than I.
MR. HEATH, I dont feel the need to explain anything to you. Perhaps you should go back and read my last post.
That statement couldnt ring more true. Perhaps you should reread what you wrote, or perhaps you feel it is your duty to tell others what art should be.
Everything cant be Flowers, smiling children, and happy clowns.
Art is as we see it.
g'day spiral
i didn't mention 'art', maybe you should reread, i suggested that you try this work yourself and not be lead by some overrated sleaze bag
do you find it difficult to express yourself in a meaningful way?
you started this thread, i'm just seeking your opinion
I'm very familiar with kern's work - it's a bit of a funny niche market - because his work (here referring to his EARLY work-which REALLY - are his films) was more about conveying an attitude of nihilism - one specific to the new york punk scene of the late 70s. I see his work (and Mapplethorpe's) forming a nexus whose missing element was probably the work of Jimmy DeSana (a contemporary of mapplethorpe - but both preceded Kern, and inspiration for Cindy Sherman). I think it would have been better perhaps to look more at this work - the kind you'd see festooned on album covers, etc...
But I guess the whole deal with niche 'markets' like this is simply the fact that it wouldn't mean much to you if you weren't part of it... kind of like a fred picker photo is for other people (i.e. people find meaning in the work through a common love for something - and in that case it would be the zone system)
Linear Mode
