Why William Eggleston is...

Good point Roger...and that is what it boils down to most of the time. However, there are people that CAN see well, photographically speaking, that still do not care for Eggleston's work. There's a difference between understanding and it not being your taste and just not being able to tell the difference because you aren't experienced enough.
I'd like to think I was one of them. It's... OK. I quite like it. I can learn from it (and, I hope, have learned from it). But I'm not going to fall down and worship at his feet.

Then again, the people who feel like I do are not going to try to re-create Egglestons. They're gping to try to create their own pictures. With any luck, their own work will be better is some ways; or at least, it will appeal to those who find Eggleston less than godlike.

Cheers,

R.
 
.. and if one drops a name from a NYC rooftop it make a hell of a noise when it hits the sidewalk
yes.gif
 
8 pages of people disparaging Eggleston's work--or, perhaps more accurately, disparaging those who enjoy his work. Why bother if no one except me and a few others here actually like his stuff (apparently)? It seems an exercise in futility.

Can we pick on someone else now?
 
One never knows about these things until they happen. But it is wise to behave and not grovel at their feet? The first day I was in NYC a guy I met in my new neighborhood took me to a rooftop BBQ, to meet a friend of his from Florida.

I was stunned to realize it was Robert Rauschenberg, so quietly "worshiped" in stunned silence -- which I have done in many such situations since. I have not eaten BBQ with the subject of this thread.

I can say drinking with Tom Waits was more difficult composure-wise -- the voice was unnerving.

My point -- you just never know in advance how much worship may be involved once you become even marginally involved.
For me, the bar is set pretty high. If I don't 'worship' HH Dalai Lama -- and he gets annoyed if you do, 'cause I've seen others try it -- then I don't think I'm going to be more impressed by any artist or photographer.

People are people, even Tenzing Gyatso.

Cheers,

R.
 
8 pages of people disparaging Eggleston's work--or, perhaps more accurately, disparaging those who enjoy his work. Why bother if no one except me and a few others here actually like his stuff (apparently)? It seems an exercise in futility.

Can we pick on someone else now?
Disparaging? No, just not worshipping.

Cheers,

R.
 
8 pages of people disparaging Eggleston's work--or, perhaps more accurately, disparaging those who enjoy his work. Why bother if no one except me and a few others here actually like his stuff (apparently)? It seems an exercise in futility.

Can we pick on someone else now?

Just a semi-healthy debate. Most photographers are going to have their detractors on a site with the amount of traffic that RFF has. Eggleston seems to be one of the more polarizing ones though. See the Gursky thread... it's very similar.
 
For me, the bar is set pretty high. If I don't 'worship' HH Dalai Lama -- and he gets annoyed if you do, 'cause I've seen others try it -- then I don't think I'm going to be more impressed by any artist or photographer.

Well, I guess if you do refer to him as HH then, by definition, you worship him in a certain way even if you don't act like it around him.
 
Eh? It's a title. Like HH The Pope. Or HM The Queen. My feelings have very little to do with it.

Cheers,

R.

Oh, ok I understand. Sorry, I mistook it for an expression of admiration because you cited him as an example for your bar being high.

I do admit, though, that I have a bit of a problem refering to people as holy even if it's just a title, although I guess one can refer to them as HH as long as they are holy to someone.
 
Back
Top Bottom