Lartigue exhibition at The Photographers Gallery, London, 11 October to 5 January
- Thread starter lynnb
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 9
- Views 2K
edge100
Well-known
Excellent. I'll be in London for 3 days in November, and will be sure to see this along with the Tony Ray-Jones/Martin Parr show at the Science Museum Media Space.
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
I love some of Lartigue's images so this was always going to be a definite note for the diary and a little birthday present for me too.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
There was a BIG Lartigue exhibition at Arles this year (Rencontres 2013) and it actually lowered my opinion of the man. I always thought he was very good but after seeing that exhibition I decided that he must have benefited from brilliant curators and editors. He came across as basically a rich twit who was bound to get a few good pictures, given the sheer number he took: the old monkeys/typewriters syndrome. I'll be interested to see if anyone else has their opinion similarly revised after visiting the Photographers Gallery exhibition.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
Interesting. Perhaps the exhibition at Arles was too big? I only know his work from various books and TV documentaries I've watched having never seen his prints in person. Roger, I'm aware that he did quite a bit of commercial work once he'd been 'discovered,' was any of this shown at Arles or did you get to see virtually his entire output from his early years?
Meeting your heroes, so to speak, can be disappointing but also enlightening too. Perhaps I'll find out next month.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Simon,
It was certainly too big, and it was almost all early stuff, but even then, I don't think it was "virtually his entire output from his early years". I'll be interested to hear your reaction when you see it.
Then again, I've seen quite a few exhibitions or indeed just pictures by my "heroes", or at least photographers whose work I admire, and I've frequently been astonished by how much better they look in repro: Ansel Adams (grotesquely over-enlarged), Karsh (iffy focus -- I can't believe that he wanted the arm of Desmond Tutu's chair sharper than his eyes), Rodchenko (muddy prints), Drticol (muddy and dirty)... But equally there are countless photographers where the original prints far outstrip any repro: Salgado, Gursky, Avedon, for a start.
Cheers,
R.
Vince Lupo
Whatever
There was a show of his back in 1993 at the Palais de Tokyo, and I was fortunate to have been there opening night. Similarly the show was massive, and they even managed to turn some of his photos into 3D representations using two mirrors (too much to explain here).
The one thing that I found curious was that he did his very best work by the time he was about 18 (certainly much better than I've done thus far in my late 40's!), and for me his photos became less interesting as he progressed into his 20's and beyond. Wonder why?
The one thing that I found curious was that he did his very best work by the time he was about 18 (certainly much better than I've done thus far in my late 40's!), and for me his photos became less interesting as he progressed into his 20's and beyond. Wonder why?
telenous
Well-known
My feelings too though I have not had the luck to go through a comprehensive (or even limited) exhibition of his. His early photos seem much more spontaneous and there's unbridled joie de vivre in them. I read the Independent article yesterday and out of curiosity searched for his photos of his later partner Renée Perle. (The ones with which the article compares the photos of his first wife.) They were still beautiful photos but they look like they were designed to fit a specific mould. It seems as if the explosive curiosity and enthusiasm of the precocious young photographer had turned into meticulous and somewhat predictable design.
.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Although I did not analyze it in this way (which is my fault), I VERY strongly suspect that you are right.
A parallel, perhaps, is with Dickens. His early "Sketches by Boz" were brilliant. Then he became prolix, self-indulgent and predictable.
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
Roger Hicks said:
The danger for all those whose endeavours are creative but perhaps especially so when starting so young and powered by that "explosive curiosity and enthusiasm."
I wonder if he were able to recognize this in his later work compared to the earlier images or if, like many of us, he were blinded rather more than those around him. I certainly recognize the damage that can occur when a natural, joyful exploration and investigation (in a looser sense) are supplanted by the restrictions that experience can sometimes cast over you if you're not alive to it.
This should be a very interesting exhibition, though I mustn't let this conversation lead my thoughts too much whilst I'm there. Hopefully I'll be along on the 14th.
Similar threads
- Sticky
