Quote Originally Posted by BainDarret View Post
I teach a photography composition course, part time, and I find there is a real age divide. My students range in age from late teens to retirees. The first 3 evenings they are briefly exposed to Daguerre, Fox Talbot, Fenton, Samuel Bourne, Cartier-Bresson, Winogrand, Weegee, Salomon, Brassai and several other of the big names from photography's past. You can just see that the younger students are bored, this stuff just ain't cool for them. The older students, in some gratifying cases, become enthralled. I always try to instil in them that photography has a long and glorious tradition. One approach I take is to show them how easy they have it now. They don't need dozens of porters humping 10x12 wet plate equipment through the Himalayas to get a good landscape photo as Samuel Bourne did. I also acquaint them with the hardships that Hurley and Ponting went through to get shots in Antarctica a hundred years ago. Sometimes that gets the attention of the younger folk. But history is not valued by many these days. I think that is disempowering.

If time travel were possible I guarantee that no matter what time period you chose you would find the same age divide. Boredom is part of the definition of being young. Instant gratification is what the young have always wanted. As a youngun I HATED history and everything to do with it. I knew about Ansel Adams because of his images were of places I wanted to go. Old Weston had Charis and she took her clothes off. Honestly I did not need to know any more than that and did not want to. As these young folks who are bored now age they will become more and more interested.