First off, I dont read what he says. So that is not an issue. I am pointing out the fact that quite a lot of 'photographers' do not strive to really say anything with their work. Their photos consist of flowers, random objects in their house, which show no relation or viable meaning behind them. There is no thought process or concept behind any of it.
I would then say, why does it have to? This also changes over time. I took some photos oooh, 6 years ago. That's not long, at the time they had no meaning really. They were snaps. 6 years later thinking they had been lost, I found them again. And now they have some meaning, I'm not sure what, but they remind me of where I was, what I was doing at the time etc. -- people look at photos of our neighbourhoods years ago with interest but on the day they were taken, they had seemingly no meaning. It's an important thing to note, when these things are gone, what is there left to evidence they ever were there, those children in the photos with the life they lead, or the town changed beyond comprehension, the artetfacts of US road trips such as these quirky motels -- they may mean nothing now, but in time they could be as much as the spoken word and recollection from memory a great visual memory of the way we were.
Of course that's an opinion but I don't think a photo has to have meaning as such, it's the meaning you give to it. What could be a vase of flowers in the dim light of noon meaning nothing to you or I, could be the moment a photographer snapped of the time when someone died, reminding them of the benign platitude of that that dimly lit noon when someone they knew or loved passed on. But to us, it'll always be that vase of flowers in that flat light...
We cannot no matter what we feel about it, change what a photo means to someone. And it may take time for that meaning to develop. In fifty years time, I'll look at some nonsense I snapped the other day and remember when, and then it has meaning...
Also, I would be rather happy for people to look at my work and be completely honest with me. The flat, harsh, and realistic truth to it all, is that there will always be people who are opposed to your work. The sooner you realize that, and are able to objectively listen to their reasoning, and at least attempt to understand their point from one way or another, it gives you a much broader and understanding view of how others viwe your work.
Uhhhuhh, but what they think doesn't take away from what you feel about your work if that depth of feeling it strong enough. There will be people
opposed to my work, that to me is the wrong expression, I'd say there would be people who think my photos are a bunch of formulaic done before baloney that is dull tedious and about as awe inspiring as an insipid afternoon in a down at heel bar. That's fine if they think that. But I don't have to agree with them because someone feels that way, it';s good in life to know when to heed criticism but also sometimes to stand by your judgements when you feel you need to. Or you'll get walked over, it's like everything in life : balance.
No one is ever going to see your work the way you do, so what is the point of getting 'married' to your images? There is none.
Disagree. If I don't have attachment to what I create then what is the point. If I derive no attachment to the work I like that others don't, then where's my pleasure of my reason? Is my reason for enjoyment, or to play up to the ideal of the artist I think I should be? And if I never get attached to any of my work, then when will my artistic vision (if I have one) ever be complete or begin to be fulfilled? It wouldn't in my view, it would be just a series of intellectually rich and aesthetically rounded photos or works that hold no emotive feeling or sense of satisfaction in. That's not for me personally, I want to once a year take a photo that I look back on and think, "I really like that. Good job." I'm not here to impress anyone, I'm not here to prove myself, I am here to enjoy myself but horses for courses.
So no, it is not harsh. Its the truth. Either you have an idea, concept, story, or some motive to your work that attempts to say something meaningful, otherwise (to me) it is useless.
It's the truth -- the truth as
you see it.
I choose to look at it as a form of expression to do something meaningful with. To either change one person's view on life, or try to explain something in or world which may otherwise go overlooked.
Very rarely will you change someone's view. Maybe peversely the need some feel that their work should try to change someone's view or explain something in life is a sign of that attachment to our photos after all; because they are married to the thoughts and ideas we wish to explain through them. No human can divorce themselves from this, we will always be a little subjective as hard as we might try to be utterly objective.
Vicky
