Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,689   Posts: 1,548,797   Online: 1177
      
Page 16 of 18 FirstFirst ... 6101112131415161718 LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 179
  1. #151

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Louisiana, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,325
    "And to be clear: people who have been complaining most vociferously about Greenberg on the web have been zealously exploiting this hoo-hah to draw web hits to their own sites, using the cheapest sorts of demagoguery, particularly in demonizing anyone with differing opinions, and lots of hand-wrung declarations about the "importance" of their own assertions."

    Lots of name-calling there, lots of accusations directed at someone un-named(don't know, don't care). From my perspective, the demagoguery is in Greenberg's photographs. I certainly see no demagoguery in the honest criticism of her work. That's opinion. The critic's opinion is just as valid as the artist's.

    I find it difficult to believe everything should be accepted just because the creator says it is art and you must accept their vision. If you go that route, anything goes. "Anything" in this particular instance includes the physical and/or psychological abuse of children. Does this acceptance of exploitation extend further? To the torture of animals, perhaps? To rape or murder in the commission of "art"? Of course not! Good judgement trumps blind acceptance...at least, it should.

    Jill Greenberg makes a damn poor poster child for artistic freedom.

  2. #152

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    25
    Good judgement trumps blind acceptance...at least, it should.

    I haven't read every post in this thread but I am willing to bet that no one blindly accepted anything about these photos. I don't think anyone said anything very positive about them at all, except me, sort of. I know that there are many many subjects that most photographers would never photograph, or even think to photograph, but that does not mean that everything isn't worthy of photographing. Nan Goldin made some very stark, graphic images of subject matter that...well...very few people would think of photographing. Arbus sought out those that others would never photograph. It is the daring photographer that pushes the boundaries of the medium. Photograph what you are afraid of, seek out that which makes the viewer uncomfortable... It's life, and life only.

  3. #153
    bjorke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    SF & Surrounding Planet
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,032
    Images
    20
    It's easy to find, Lee. Just Google her name, or sift for even a few seconds through BoingBoing. I could cite quotes and name names if you want, sure.

    "What Would Zeus Do?"
    KBPhotoRantPhotoPermitAPUG flickr Robot

  4. #154

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Louisiana, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,325
    Don't care.

  5. #155

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    246
    I know that there are many many subjects that most photographers would never photograph, or even think to photograph, but that does not mean that everything isn't worthy of photographing.
    I am not sure if everything is worth photographing. Certainly my ugly mug would be near the bottom of the list. I understand your point though.

    I don't know if anyone here is arguing that photographing a crying child is wrong. The issue, at least for me, is not what is photographed but the circumstances under which the photo was made.

    Would the face of a man grimacing in pain after being hoofed in the coin-purse be worth photographing? Maybe. But what if I, as the photographer, deliberately hoofed him in order to get the photo? Would that be justified? Or would I need to somehow wrap the work and the actions required to create it in a one-size-fits-all "Bush is Evil Incarnate" theme to make it more acceptable? Or how about just making the print really colourful and really, really big? Now is it ok?

    Ms Greenberg can photograph whatever she wants, from crying babies to, say, horrible car accidents or men gimacing in pain. I do not believe however that as an artist she is automatically granted immunity from the consequences of deliberately making babies cry or wrecking cars or kicking men in the coin-purse.

  6. #156

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by CraigK
    ...or kicking men in the coin-purse.
    You know, there are probably some men out there who'd pay for that.

    And that is why it's good the neighbors home is not made of glass...

  7. #157

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    246
    You know, there are probably some men out there who'd pay for that.
    Now there's an idea for a website. kickinthecoinpurse dot com. $9.95/month recurring.

  8. #158

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Shooter
    Plastic Cameras
    Posts
    10
    [FONT=Times New Roman][COLOR=Red]Friends don't let friends shoot digital.[/FONT][/COLOR]

  9. #159
    Cheryl Jacobs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Denver, Colorado, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,708
    Images
    213
    I don't know how I missed this thread before.

    Obviously I am shocked to know that there is a commercial photographer out there who is cold enough to use the kinds of methods this woman employed. It's offensive, and it's frightening.

    The photographer states that the candy or whatnot that was snatched from the child was given back within 30 seconds. That's hardly the point. It only takes one second to betray a child's trust, and that's what she has done. For photographers like me who spend large amounts of time and energy gaining the trust of our young subjects in order to get genuine expressions, this is repugnant. You can bet that her subjects learn some valuable lessons from this experience, even at the young age: 1) photographers are not to be trusted and 2) adults are not to be trusted.

    And if she believes that "doing no permanent psychological damage" equates to acceptable tactics, I truly feel sorry for her, because she has completely missed out on the best part of photographing people. The most rewarding part for me is not the photograph itself, but rather making someone feel important and valued, validating who they are and making myself available as a confidante, should they want one. It's an opportunity to record a person's strengths, quirks, vulnerabilities, attitudes, whatever they choose to show. It's the give and take and the unique connections that make people photography so rich and amazing.

    To exploit the inherently trusting nature of a young child...how can that possibly be fulfilling?

    - CJ

  10. #160

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    140
    I'm thinking there's another way to look at it. Always trying to understand someone else, I'll bet in her mind she probably knows it's wrong to make a kid cry and take a photo but justifies it because what she's doing is so important that a small wrong far overshadows the big picture.

    Her work is so vital to society that a few small bad deeds are making a big difference for us all.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin