Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8   Go Down

Author Topic: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...  (Read 7410 times)

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14854
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #40 on: May 11, 2019, 11:37:15 am »

To paraphrase a Clintonism, Slobodan: I guess it depends on what the meaning of the word "it" is. Maybe Oscar will explain.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

amolitor

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 607
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #41 on: May 11, 2019, 12:49:58 pm »

It is a truism that of you have to explain it, it's not art.

But why? Why isn't something that requires an explanation (for you) not art? Is an airplane unable to fly because you don't understand aerodynamics?

If it's not art, what is it?
Logged

faberryman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3488
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #42 on: May 11, 2019, 12:59:27 pm »

It is a truism that of you have to explain it, it's not art.

Because I am not an expert, I have always thought explanation gives me greater insight into art. It is why I say I don't get contemporary photography. I have never read a cogent explanation of it. Note: I do not consider artist statements cogent explanations - more like MFA-babble.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2019, 01:11:23 pm by faberryman »
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17158
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #43 on: May 11, 2019, 01:06:23 pm »

It is a truism that of you have to explain it, it's not art.

But why? Why isn't something that requires an explanation (for you) not art? Is an airplane unable to fly because you don't understand aerodynamics?...

What if I understand aerodynamics, but the explanation offered, in not so few words, is that it is God's will it flies?

OmerV

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 509
    • Photographs
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #44 on: May 11, 2019, 01:35:08 pm »

What if I understand aerodynamics, but the explanation offered, in not so few words, is that it is God's will it flies?

Heh!  :D

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2359
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #45 on: May 11, 2019, 04:40:56 pm »

The arts challenge, confront and open the door to controversy.

Photography as an art form should challenge, confront and open the door to controversy.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #46 on: May 12, 2019, 04:28:42 am »

The arts challenge, confront and open the door to controversy.

Photography as an art form should challenge, confront and open the door to controversy.

Possibly; however, the photograph in question does absolutely none of that. The only reason we discuss it is because this is LuLa and there's not a helluva lot more we can do here. If nobody had raised the topic, had I just stumbled onto the image online - without its backstory and the fact somebody had wanted to talk about it - I'd have rapidly flicked to the next image.

I understand perfectly exactly what Oscar is saying; the problem for me, is this: none of it applies to the picture under discussion. It does not ignite the touchpaper.

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2359
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #47 on: May 12, 2019, 04:40:22 am »

Possibly; however, the photograph in question does absolutely none of that. The only reason we discuss it is because this is LuLa and there's not a helluva lot more we can do here. If nobody had raised the topic, had I just stumbled onto the image online - without its backstory and the fact somebody had wanted to talk about it - I'd have rapidly flicked to the next image.

I understand perfectly exactly what Oscar is saying; the problem for me, is this: none of it applies to the picture under discussion. It does not ignite the touchpaper.

Three pages of comment here says it does.
Logged

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1341
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #48 on: May 12, 2019, 06:00:02 am »

The arts challenge, confront and open the door to controversy.

Why should that be valid? Is just an opinion.
I don't see these characteristics in Leonardo, Turner or Rembrandt.
Just awesome
Modern "artists" just cannot reach those heights.
Then one redefines Art to fit what one has.

We have three pages of controversy, but it is about why those things should be praised at all, not for their content.
Logged

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2359
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #49 on: May 12, 2019, 06:26:48 am »

Why should that be valid? Is just an opinion.
I don't see these characteristics in Leonardo, Turner or Rembrandt.
Just awesome
Modern "artists" just cannot reach those heights.
Then one redefines Art to fit what one has.

We have three pages of controversy, but it is about why those things should be praised at all, not for their content.

You have to be joking.

Turner was an expressionist before expressionism was even a twinkle in the eye of the expressionists. Leonardo challenged the accepted scientific and medical knowledge of the time. Rembrandt brought a new understanding of light, shade and realism. They all challenged the mores of their time, as do 'modern artists'.

Long may they continue.

 
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #50 on: May 12, 2019, 06:28:54 am »

Why should that be valid? Is just an opinion.
I don't see these characteristics in Leonardo, Turner or Rembrandt.
Just awesome
Modern "artists" just cannot reach those heights.
Then one redefines Art to fit what one has.

We have three pages of controversy, but it is about why those things should be praised at all, not for their content.

Exactly.

There's a huge difference between discussing art and something that is just symbolic of another naked emperor. A real naked emperor would have been more interesting. It doesn't open any discussion about its intrinsic, visual value because it doesn't have any, but discussion of how it gatecrashed the party. You could put a photograph of a turd in its place and at least that would have forensic interest: is the turd fresh or old; is it of herbivore, carnivore or possibly clue-busting mixture of both, designed to throw off the hunter after truth?

Sobering to think there is more to be said about a turd than about a lousy photograph.

;-)

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1341
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #51 on: May 12, 2019, 07:12:02 am »

You have to be joking.

Turner was an expressionist before expressionism was even a twinkle in the eye of the expressionists. Leonardo challenged the accepted scientific and medical knowledge of the time. Rembrandt brought a new understanding of light, shade and realism. They all challenged the mores of their time, as do 'modern artists'.

Long may they continue.

Njet.
Leonardo Turner and many more did more than that.
They are awesome in their own right.
Then and NOW

I mean:
They ARE STILL considered art, even without the "challenging, confronting or controverting" thing.
ART in capitals.
No excuses or pioneering deeds needed.
Because we are here and now and we lowly amateurs who perceive this as ART don't need explanations to enjoy and appreciate it.
Just maybe sometimes a little push but not theories
Logged

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2359
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #52 on: May 12, 2019, 07:27:15 am »

Their work is up there on that pedestal because they used their undoubted talents to challenge the existing mores and in doing so their remarkable work changed understanding, opinion and the very direction of art and artists.

Please note, I have not expressed any opinion on the image or body of work that this thread referenced.
Logged

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2359
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #53 on: May 12, 2019, 07:30:17 am »

Exactly.

There's a huge difference between discussing art and something that is just symbolic of another naked emperor. A real naked emperor would have been more interesting. It doesn't open any discussion about its intrinsic, visual value because it doesn't have any, but discussion of how it gatecrashed the party. You could put a photograph of a turd in its place and at least that would have forensic interest: is the turd fresh or old; is it of herbivore, carnivore or possibly clue-busting mixture of both, designed to throw off the hunter after truth?

Sobering to think there is more to be said about a turd than about a lousy photograph.

;-)

There were those who at the time thought much the same of Leonardo, Turner and Rembrandt.
Logged

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1341
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #54 on: May 12, 2019, 07:46:50 am »

Their work is up there on that pedestal because they used their undoubted talents to challenge the existing mores and in doing so their remarkable work changed understanding, opinion and the very direction of art and artists.
But the artists that followed them were also artists.
There is a difference between pioneers (artists in our case) and "just artists", who were ALSO artists, no doubt
I guess you are referring to the former.
I shouldn't have named names. My fault
Logged

elliot_n

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1219
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #55 on: May 12, 2019, 07:48:21 am »

Rabanito, Stephen Waddell's work like the work of Jeff Wall before him is very much engaged with the tradition of painting you rightly admire. I suspect you would find much to savour in an exhibition of his work. Remember these are sizeable prints (painting-sized), not teeny jpegs to be liked on Instagram.
Logged

faberryman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3488
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #56 on: May 12, 2019, 08:08:21 am »

This is exactly my point... truly NEW art is not understood.
One difference is the half life of movements. It would seem things are changing so fast that you can't understand them before they are superseded. And if they are rapidly superseded where they ever more than just a photographers style.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2019, 09:25:24 am by faberryman »
Logged

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1341
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #57 on: May 12, 2019, 08:11:07 am »

Rabanito, Stephen Waddell's work like the work of Jeff Wall before him is very much engaged with the tradition of painting you rightly admire. I suspect you would find much to savour in an exhibition of his work. Remember these are sizeable prints (painting-sized), not teeny jpegs to be liked on Instagram.

That's a point. It could very well be.
A Rembrandt (or else) in a book is not the same as in nature :-)
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #58 on: May 12, 2019, 08:38:24 am »

Rabanito, Stephen Waddell's work like the work of Jeff Wall before him is very much engaged with the tradition of painting you rightly admire. I suspect you would find much to savour in an exhibition of his work. Remember these are sizeable prints (painting-sized), not teeny jpegs to be liked on Instagram.


So, in essence, you are saying a big turd is justifiable even if its smaller brother is not?

Is it, then, a matter of critical mass on the pavement?

:-)

Rob

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17158
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: And the $50,000 Scotiabank 2019 Prize in Photography goes to...
« Reply #59 on: May 12, 2019, 10:18:39 am »

... I understand perfectly exactly what Oscar is saying; the problem for me, is this: none of it applies to the picture under discussion...

Amen, brother!
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8   Go Up