Do I have something against those online talk groups?
What, or why does it matter?
They are found, pointed out by people and bots. Google is the major router, since it is a simple minded algorithm, it directs traffic the way traffic is already heading. They are unaware of a broader use of the mechanics they spend so much time on. They are, at best, a bad adult ed center, focused on keeping the bodies coming; yet without motive… nope, their is motive, they are believers. They believe that photography, as applied by limiting range of subjects, becomes an art. Further, more by neglect than by plan, they reduce the options under discussion, limiting it to a vantage point which peaked in the mid 60’s.
This means that as you frequent them, you become them — you, too, become a true believer, and avoid discussion encountering or encouraging work beyond those early foundation choices. This limits vocabulary, which reduces the range of visual mind. They clutter the field seemingly knowledgeable, but they purposely limit discussions– they miss, and cause you to miss the alternate skills … skills not found, nor likely to be discussed on Format Forums –too much background knowledge needed — knowledge formed by a different experience of the world
Why it matters to me? If you had wider range of aesthetic choices, you would have several possible answers. One of which is that you could matter more
childhood ends — but mature action isn’t next, that comes even later
They limit palette, and vocabulary, while reducing your choices. This means that I have to wade through more imagery to locate work that has grown past the camera stage.
By 1970 photography had established its own history; its own courses, syllabi, as well as an alternate market scheme. As it matured it stalled, almost certainly to regurgitate what photographers had already formulated. At that point photography was saved from itself by being accepted as a medium by painters and sculptors. In the 70’s, photography was almost annexed by other artists. If the glory boys, so adored by the Formatoria, hadn’t devoured themselves, photography would have stay stuck on the Sierra trails, showing itself only in the National Park Concession Stands.
That didn’t happen. Photography was saved by the young counter-photographers.
and so it goes…
An alternate version – updated, here in summary of other pages on this site –
FORA OUTLINE NTS:fora
- tale of two chicagos
- architecture photographers — local / location
- chicago randys
- generically dangerous
- cycle of increasing awareness
There was a source of PROs- people who were both proficient, and productive. They shared by showing, both in studio and school labs. We are further from that source information, so most of what the forums provide is wrong, or lies. perhaps bullshit
Forums As Bullshit
Frankfurt presents a definition specific to its use in communication: bullshit can be neither true nor false; hence, the bullshitter is someone whose principal aim—when uttering or publishing bullshit—is to impress the listener and the reader with words that communicate an impression that something is being or has been done, words that are neither true nor false, and so obscure the facts of the matter being discussed. p.61, On Bullshit.
You must be logged in to post a comment.