Quote Originally Posted by dasBlute View Post
We should not forget. His treatments are not the same -IMO- as Stalin's erasing people from official state portraits.
I haven't walked in Mr Smejkal's shoes to see his thinking but I cannot agree with the usefulness of the result.
The profoundly edited images only exist as faint echoes of the originals. Why would one aid in the 'erasing' of history?
The resulting images have nothing to recommend them visually either, having been stripped of their essentials.
Wow, I almost literally could not disagree more. To me they make a huge, incredibly effective point---something about the nature of "significant" events, and how much "significant" is a human concept that we project onto completely indifferent settings. The only one that doesn't work for me is "Berlin, 1945"---it's much changed from the original, but there's so much affective content left in the setting that it doesn't come off as mundane as the others.

I don't understand how it's possible to see this as "the 'erasing' of history", actually, because the images don't stand by themselves---the point they make is exactly about the importance of what's been erased. Can you elaborate on what you're thinking, a little bit?