“Laura Greenfield: Generation Wealth”

[FPjohn]

http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/01/02/lauren-greenfields-gilt-edge/

yours
FPJ

 

[nickla]

Awesome book.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jpressman]

She had an exhibit of the photos from the book (and a video) last year here in LA at the Annenberg Center for Photography and it was terrific, really well-observed and poignant.

 

[benlees]

I just see cheap moralizing. Does she even understand the implications of her own work? It reveals little, just like her subjects. It's easy to gawk but where do you go from there? Pretty cold work. Cindy Sherman, Martha Rossler, Victor Burgin, Allan Sekula (just to name a few); darlings of the 70-80's, had similar thoughts but were much more interesting in execution.

 

[jsrockit]

I just see cheap moralizing.

But you bring this perspective to it...

 

[Dogman]

Cheap moralizing seems to be the main ingredient in much work today.

 

[benlees]

But you bring this perspective to it...

I do, because that is what I see when I look at the work. I see that wealthy people are weird. I see that regular folks want to be wealthy. If I had never seen her work I would still know this. I would like to see analysis, or at least perspective, of why this needs to come to our attention. Compare it to some of Martin Parr's work. His work is humane; the humour is a connection between the subject viewer photographer that exposes foibles without judgement.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

In some of Winogrand series/pictures I see same flavor of society. I think, Winogrand did it right. I never read any comments about what is in photo. It was left to my own judgment.
I looked at pictures in provided link, some of them are very exclusive. I think, if this photographer wants to continue this way, it is better to avoid media like in provided link.
Because too many of wealthy are trying to capitalize on more wealthier moralizations.
But maybe it is all Kardashian.

 

[x-ray]

I just see cheap moralizing. Does she even understand the implications of her own work? It reveals little, just like her subjects. It's easy to gawk but where do you go from there? Pretty cold work. Cindy Sherman, Martha Rossler, Victor Burgin, Allan Sekula (just to name a few); darlings of the 70-80's, had similar thoughts but were much more interesting in execution.

If you look around you it's everywhere unless you live in a depressed 3rd world country. This is what I call 1st world behavior. this even extends into the photo world. How many "photographers" carry around one or more Leicas, Top of the line Nikon, Canon or Hasselblad equipment hoping someone will notice them. How many are more concerned about how cool they look with their (fill in the blank) camera than how cool their photos are? Really, it's so common now it's not worth looking at.

IMO she's about thirty years too late with her project too. How many times has it been done.

 

[Dan Daniel]

If you are going to do cheap moralizing, at least be up front and direct:
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/12/the-people-that-capitalism-makes

 

[fireblade]

Interesting read by the journo Alissa Quart.

 

[x-ray]

If you are going to do cheap moralizing, at least be up front and direct:
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/12/the-people-that-capitalism-makes

Wow, I wish he'd just say what's on his mind. 😱

 

[DwF]

I saw this exhibit at ICP on Bowery last week. As this thread shows, her work isn't for everybody, and it isn't my cup of tea, but I felt that it presented well.

 

[jsrockit]

I do, because that is what I see when I look at the work. I see that wealthy people are weird. I see that regular folks want to be wealthy. If I had never seen her work I would still know this. I would like to see analysis, or at least perspective, of why this needs to come to our attention.

OK, but your life experience concludes that wealthy people are weird. They may not think of themselves this way. Sometimes documenting something does not need an analysis. The perspective is there... a rich woman documenting the wealthy. You may not like that perspective, but it is what it is. A lot of her work has been in this vein:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauren_Greenfield

Compare it to some of Martin Parr's work. His work is humane; the humour is a connection between the subject viewer photographer that exposes foibles without judgement.

Some really consider MP's work to be mocking of its subjects... I mean he almost didn't get into Magnum because of this. I prefer Parr too, but both are interesting.

 

[benlees]

OK, but your life experience concludes that wealthy people are weird. They may not think of themselves this way. Sometimes documenting something does not need an analysis. The perspective is there... a rich woman documenting the wealthy. You may not like that perspective, but it is what it is. A lot of her work has been in this vein:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauren_Greenfield



Some really consider MP's work to be mocking of its subjects... I mean he almost didn't get into Magnum because of this. I prefer Parr too, but both are interesting.

It just seems to me there should be more there. The photos are good but I prefer some rich gravy with the biscuits. Can't have it all!

 

[jsrockit]

It just seems to me there should be more there. The photos are good but I prefer some rich gravy with the biscuits. Can't have it all!

Exactly, substance is the hard part in photography. But perhaps this isn't about substance.