Flickr Delete Me group. What is it?

Steve B said:
Has anybody else seen the Joshua Bell experiment that I posted a link to above?
Click to expand...

that experiment is interesting on more than one level. While it is easy to see the behavior of the passersby as either inexplicable or indicative of something, the reaction of the experimenters is at least as fascinating. They predicted a number of reactions, preferring to believe that this famous classical musician would draw a crowd amongst busy commuters, inferring that those who did not stop were somehow oblivious.

But is the purpose of a street musician to draw a crowd? How many people ride elevators just to listen to the music? When's the last time you requested to be put back on hold to listen to a particularly fine piece of music? I have stopped to listen to a street musician, gave a buck on more than one occasion, and have also found that my encounters with good street music rarely coincided with my schedule in a manner that let me linger. But there is no question that a great performance was appreciated whether I had the time to stop or not. Or whether I had any cash/change to donate.

I don't think it is fair to criticize or make any assumptions about the commuters in the Joshua Bell episode. These people were on their way to work. They might very well appreciate the man at a friend's wedding or a work party or any other time/place when they had the time/inclination to simply relax and enjoy. But blindsiding a crowd and then acting surprised when the reaction is not what the naive expected is a bit silly. You could plant pretty much any decent performer at that mall and get a similar response.

The HCB "Delete Me" episode is a different kind of experiment. Taste varies. When working tech support for a video game company, I learned that no matter how crappy something is, there are those who will swear it is the best ever. The difference between the timeless classics and the quickly forgotten, IMHO, is the size of the crowd, not the devotion of the fans.

Just as things like coffee are an acquired taste, those things we might hold as undeniable greatness are perhaps acquired rather than absolutes. Faulting those who can't "see it," is no different than telling a 6th grader he/she is an uncultured pagan for not preferring French-pressed Kona over chocolate milk 🙂
 
Last edited:
J J Kapsberger said:
Gabriel,

You've brought out the elitist in me. I think it's simpler than what you describe: most people I meet simply aren't sensitive to, or appreciative of, artistic beauty. Period. Putting an HCB image in front of them is like casting the proverbial pearls before the proverbial creatures that cry "Oink!"

They certainly have it within themselves. We all do. But this is, after all, a profoundly superficial age (if you'd permit me that ironic description), one in which simple, immediate amusements are more valued than artistic offerings of a more challenging nature. Cute images of a person on the beach holding the sun are what gain notoriety these days.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should read the mentioned NYT article ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040401721.html ) and read the reasons for people ignoring the artist. It's not ignorance, it's not stupidity, it's not that they don't care. People simply often have other things to do, or other things to like.

I for one don't give a damn about HCB. Some of his photos I like but most are IMO dull beyond words. I did go to the HCB exhibition, and did see his photos (up close and in real life) and still I was bored. Now, when I saw the Winogrand "Women are beautiful" exhibition I was intrigued, pulled in, flabbergasted. I loved them, even though before that exhibition Winogrand never really appealed to me. Same with Lartigue. I saw the exhibition and fell in love with his work, especially his earliest work as a child/adolescent. The real photos contained something I missed in the reproductions in the books.

However, to dismiss a photo because it's not sharp, is blurred, or shows some other technical inadequacy is like dismissing the sky because it's not Sky Blue all the time.
 
somecanuckchick said:
You basically submit a photo to their group, and they critique it... deleting it from their group if they deem it unworthy.

Note: It's not deleted from your flickr account.
Click to expand...

yup, just bringing this to light again...
 
RML,

My post didn't refer to the Washington Post article and made no attempt to explain the behavior of the passers-by. We were discussing reasons for a lack of appreciation of HCB's work, not of the (planted) street musician's playing. I was merely elaborating on Gabriel's post, specifically his observation that people refuse to give certain artistic matters sufficient thought. I pointed out that most people I know don't give a damn about art (something which, I'm afraid, you cannot dissuade me from) and that this is a great age of superficiality. Therefore, it should come as no surprise (it didn't to me) that an HCB image was dismissed out of hand due to simple lack of sharpness.

You are certainly right when you argue that every viewer has a right to determine for his or her self which art succeeds or fails. As a matter of fact, I too wouldn't include HCB among my favorite photographers.
 
J J Kapsberger said:
My post didn't refer to the Washington Post article and made no attempt to explain the behavior of the passers-by. We were discussing reasons for a lack of appreciation of HCB's work, not of the (planted) street musician's playing. I was merely elaborating on Gabriel's post, specifically his observation that people refuse to give certain artistic matters sufficient thought. I pointed out that most people I know don't give a damn about art (something which, I'm afraid, you cannot dissuade me from) and that this is a great age of superficiality. Therefore, it should come as no surprise (it didn't to me) that an HCB image was dismissed out of hand due to simple lack of sharpness.
Click to expand...

The dismissal of the HCB photo was indeed entirely ludicrous. That said, that "people refuse to give certain artistic matters sufficient thought" is just an opinion. It's my opinion that people actually do give plenty of thought (however deliberate or not). Much of one's appreciation comes from education and if the US edu system is like in Holland then most children/ adolescents/ adults aren't very educated in art (or Art), and definitely not exposed to much. Not to mention they have little or no knowledge about the different movements, periods, artists, etc. The world of art does not stop at MoMA.
 
RML,

It's your opinion that people do give thought to art. I respect that opinion and assume that it is based on your life's experiences. If so, I must move to Amsterdam or Ulaanbaatar. Here, the arts languish somewhat--attendance of classical music performances are down, the architecture is very mundane, off-Hollywood films do not turn a profit, etc. Why? Because the average person doesn't want something which challenges them aesthetically or something which makes them think. They just want to be amused.

Yes, I'm an incurable snob.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom