My only point is that the photographer has taken a very singular idea and done a nice job of bringing it to fruition. He appears to have completed his work, and here it is, for what it is. A document of a bygone era, with the added bonus of having a visual continuity that is in many instances beautiful, and at the very least interesting.
Beyond that, I don't see anyone giving it reverential significance, nor is it exciting thy loins. (ok, well maybe a bit...)
All I'm trying to say is that a critic is able to take something and work backwards, deriding the artist's intentions and supplanting a simple, noble idea with something corrupted; i.e. hero worship.
Not to say that some artists don't begin with innoble ideas.
Look, I think we're all upset that our trays weren't featured....