I do like Per's approach. Smart to avoid discussing the meaning or substance (that may be there). To me when an artist explains their 'art' they fail, instantly. Better to talk about the peripheral stuff. The nuts and bolts of how/where/when or perhaps what they were thinking at the time.
Robert Adams has said [paraphrased] "For photographers; words are proof that the vision they had is not fully there in the picture". As for that Szarkowski fella, sheesh what does he know? :P
But for goodness sake say something. Or you may become the unfortunate subject of a discussion like this.
Last edited by John McCallum; 06-15-2006 at 03:02 AM. Click to view previous post history.