Art critics and art entrepeneurs are, IMO "real works." Was it Dean Swift who wrote about the critics and "interpreters" "who see more in Homer than what Homer wrote?"
For mine own self, if I wish to see what a crippled elderly man without modern equipment could tell us about art photography in Communist Czecholsovakia, I'll go back to Josef Sudek.
__________________
John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA
I used to like the bits and pieces of his work that I had seen on the net. I eventually found an inexpensive book of his and was completely underwhelmed when it arrived. All sense of wonder disappeared and it just felt like a collection of crappy lo-fi photos. I must be losing it because I'd rather look at a cyanotype of fruit in a bowl.
Oh my gods, this man is a real genius! His photographs are in the
same league as Havel's dramas, and his world view seems to be
every bit as sophisticated. Tichy should become the next president
of Czechistan. He's possibly a bit old, though, but so is John
McCain.
I think a few of those photos are great.
His dedication to creating his style of art is what is truly inspiring, though
Art is nothing more than inspiration
Plenty of people on the internet talk a good game and probably take some photos of which some are surely pretty fair
Plenty are definitely rubbish
Only a few are likely truly great
People take dianas out and shoot
This guy has an even worse -possibly- camera
and the rest of his equipment might not be any better
This guy probably really enjoys what he's doing
Give someone here his equipment and they wouldn't allow themselves to be seen in public let alone let their work with such a camera
he's producing art on a daily basis with it
good or bad art
art the same
He's living in a time warp
more photographic inventor than consumer
and that's really neat, to me
He represents the First Photographer. Caveman walking around with garbage in his hands clubbing cavewomen over the head (with camera) and somehow makes magic with it back in the darkness of his cave
Pervert? Like there are any guys here who have never taken a photo of a chick before. please.
Seen one seem them all, right?
If you take one photo of a girl solely because she is a chick you're the same as this dude. period.
Art doesn't have to be great. It can be subtle, shallow, interesting, comical, twisted, mundane and on and on. If we will only accept as art those things that are great or better we miss the vast majority of all the good stuff out there and we accept, in our own way, the ethos of the art promoters that we all deride.
Well at least he is original. With the Guggenheim hanging a Photograph of a photograph it would seem anything goes.
the more I look at Tichy's stuff the more I get it. I will stop short of saying I like it because that is not a Strong enough word. his stuff is creepy and voyeuristic I think that is the point.
to address the original post: Tichy is not the guy to lead a zone system work shop. This work is not about that type of craftsmanship.
After doing a little research, it sounds like nothing more than a sickening story of manipulation and greed, by the charlatans that "discovered" Tichy. The found this manipulable old character with his pervy photos, scooped the photos up for a few bucks, and promoted him as the next big thing, so the photos could be sold for big money.
This seems to be the case with more than a bit of what is sometimes presented as "outsider" art. Of which this seems to be a classic example. And why shouldn't a pervy homeless stalker with a homemade camera get a gallery showing? Makes as much sense as anything else. The thing I like about this sort of art is that unlike a lot of "real" contemporary art, when it works it's like getting a glimpse right into the inside of someone else's head, in a direct, unedited way. Which can be disturbing and weird, because it works against the conscious control we normally try to exhibit in our daily lives.
So yeah, he's a pervy homeless stalker, but the pictures are still cool.
Linear Mode
