Yes. I noticed he was associated with Warhol and that bunch. To me that screams fame first, talent second. I think Eggleston has settled in to his role as eccentric elder statesman but suspect that too is an affectation in part.
Still, I am moved by a good many of his photos and give him due credit for them. And while he may not be the color pioneer they make him to be, I still like the way he sees things. If nothing else it lends me a way of looking at the world around me in a different way, photographically speaking, and silences my complaints that "there is nothing to photograph around here" which is usually a cop out or laziness rather than actual lack of inspiration.
And yes, he wallows in the banal but even that leads me places. I think about Wolfe's:
“. . . a stone, a leaf, an unfound door; a stone, a leaf, a door. And of all the forgotten faces.
Naked and alone we came into exile. In her dark womb we did not know our mother's face; from the prison of her flesh have we come into the unspeakable and incommunicable prison of this earth.
Which of us has known his brother? Which of us has looked into his father's heart? Which of us has not remained forever prison-pent? Which of us is not forever a stranger and alone?
O waste of lost, in the hot mazes, lost, among bright stars on this weary, unbright cinder, lost! Remembering speechlessly we seek the great forgotten language, the lost lane-end into heaven, a stone, a leaf, an unfound door. Where? When?
O lost, and by the wind grieved, ghost, come back again.”
That simple stone, or leaf or door can serve as the stimulus to remember that lost language, the lost connection between others. Does Eggleston rise to that task? I'm not sure. But maybe.
Yes. I noticed he was associated with Warhol and that bunch. To me that screams fame first, talent second. I think Eggleston has settled in to his role as eccentric elder statesman but suspect that too is an affectation in part.
Still, I am moved by a good many of his photos and give him due credit for them. And while he may not be the color pioneer they make him to be, I still like the way he sees things. If nothing else it lends me a way of looking at the world around me in a different way, photographically speaking, and silences my complaints that "there is nothing to photograph around here" which is usually a cop out or laziness rather than actual lack of inspiration.
And yes, he wallows in the banal but even that leads me places. I think about Wolfe's:
“. . . a stone, a leaf, an unfound door; a stone, a leaf, a door. And of all the forgotten faces.
Naked and alone we came into exile. In her dark womb we did not know our mother's face; from the prison of her flesh have we come into the unspeakable and incommunicable prison of this earth.
Which of us has known his brother? Which of us has looked into his father's heart? Which of us has not remained forever prison-pent? Which of us is not forever a stranger and alone?
O waste of lost, in the hot mazes, lost, among bright stars on this weary, unbright cinder, lost! Remembering speechlessly we seek the great forgotten language, the lost lane-end into heaven, a stone, a leaf, an unfound door. Where? When?
O lost, and by the wind grieved, ghost, come back again.”
That simple stone, or leaf or door can serve as the stimulus to remember that lost language, the lost connection between others. Does Eggleston rise to that task? I'm not sure. But maybe.
And yet again, the power of words is greater than that of pictures.
On a more banal level, it's why I think simple captions or titles usually help images along. Ambiguity is all very well, but sometimes it demands even more from a viewer than he/she might be able to bring to the party, possibly even more than the shooter had when he went click. Perhaps I need more written material in order to "understand" our William a little better.
;-)
Rob