i am occasionally hearing questions or chats about the nationalities of photographers. i could not figure out why people are mentioning about the nationality of any photographer. why is it important?
This should be discussed in a separate thread as a philisophical debate around Aesthetics.
But, I will say this:
It is natural for the nationality(I suggest using the word citizenship) of a photographer to be discussed. Back to Ansel Adams for example. He was an American photographer who was well known for his work in the Amercan West. He is an american hero of photography. He plays a big part in the history of american photography. He is not French, he is not German la la la. He is American. He lived it, loved it, his art portrays that.
Nationality comes into play when you look at the life of a photographer. If they are born and raised in the region, they know better than anyone the lay of the land, the light, the skies, the natural beauty. They know where to go and when to go to capture the beauty. It is a LIFETIME of work to do what he did. One can not be parachuted in to do what he did. The fact that he is American and his works are of the American West tells a story and is part of what makes him famous. I'm sorry, but a French tourist(for example) producing the same work would not get the same attention.
This is all part Aesthetics and Aesthetic judgement. Which, in fact takes into concideration the experiences and pleasures. When I look at a photo or painting or any art, especially a series of works, I always concider the life and experience of the artist. Who doesn't?
You should substitute citizenship for nationality when we are talking about where an individual is from. Nationality imposes ethnic and political issues. Citizenship is simply where someone is from.
