Yes I can Russ.
The image of HCB here above.
This image lives his life thanks to all the cinema around it.
I don’t say it doesn’t have it’s merits and I don’t want to minimize it’s impact , but they are not in proportion with the hysteria around it.
HCB is a lot of fantastic images, but also a lot of blabla generated by wannabes who think having to say something about HCB increases their seriousness.
Did you had the chance to visit the HCB foundation in Paris? Loaded with only the after talk and pompous reflections of all so called HCB specialists, you run into a massive deception.
On the other side of the spectrum I could point to Gursky’s ‘The Rhine’. It is an impressive picture, but hyped to sky by all who feel great by joining the hype.
Or Vivian Maiers hyped œuvre that would never had surfaced without the smart marketing of John Maloof.
Lartigue’s œuvre, the snapshots of jumping, racing or tennis playing woman, only made possible because he had the money to buy the newest gear / technical possibilities. Also here it was the curator of MOMA who hyped the early works of Lartigue to the status it is now.
Etc etc
Interesting, Ivo. I finally got you to support one of your off-the-wall opinions. Strangely enough, to some extent I agree with you. There’s been an awful lot of hype around HCB’s stuff. But the most important thing about HCB is that he was one of the first (Kertesz probably was the first) photographer to use the Leica to catch life in progress rather than life suspended while we take a picture. He certainly was the guy who defined street photography.
I agree with Rob about “Behind the Gare.” There’s a great deal in that picture, though I agree it’s probably been over-hyped. The point is, it’s just one of the pictures that was a masterpiece in its time. You show ignorance of the historical background when you criticize the work of people like HCB. Yes, HCB’s work has been over-hyped in general, but he certainly was the most influential photographer of the twentieth century, and today’s best photography owes him a lot.
Gursky’s Rhine, along with the work of people like Cindy Sherman, is centered on museum hype. It’s based on hyper-marketing but it hasn’t much to do with photography as fine art.
In general I agree with you about Vivian Maier. She’s been hyped as a street photographer, and she did a few good street shots, but most of her stuff that’s been held up as street isn’t street.
You can knock Lartigue if you want to, but your critique comes across as envy of Lartigue’s financial situation rather than on the quality of his work, which was quite astonishing for its time.
As far as “Walk to Paradise Garden” is concerned, why focus on that less-than-fantastic shot when Gene did things like Dr. Ceriani smoking after losing a patient, and like the Haitian asylum inmate, and like Tomoko Uemura in her bath? Gene Smith was one of the greatest photographers of all time. When you try to reduce his stature by picking one of his weaker works, all you do is expose your envy.