Strategist
Senior Member
...to read about her "techniques," and someone who doesn't have children. IMHO, that is.
--
Tom
--
Tom
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
controversial photographer - Jill Greenberg
- Thread starter Mrpresident7
- Start date
Thibault D
Forum Enthusiast
Exactly. Witkin is one of the most gifted photographers. Indeed, his work is highly shocking. You can take most of his photographs as a punch in the gut.
Yet, if you take the time and let the photos reach you, they are true things of beauty and emotion. Many radiate a sense of sacred. That's his real gift. Going to a nationnal park and shooting beautiful landscape does not take an artist. The beauty is already there, created by Nature, God or Luck. It only takes a great technician to capture it. And a lot of patience to be at the right time at the right moment.
But Witkin is able to look at the rot, the ugly, the people society rejects. And he is able to Look with love and reverance. And he is able to make us share his vision and see sacred beauty where she should only experience revulsion. That's what really makes him a great Master.
Much like Bacon actually, who is also one of the very few true Masters of the past century in his field.
Yet, if you take the time and let the photos reach you, they are true things of beauty and emotion. Many radiate a sense of sacred. That's his real gift. Going to a nationnal park and shooting beautiful landscape does not take an artist. The beauty is already there, created by Nature, God or Luck. It only takes a great technician to capture it. And a lot of patience to be at the right time at the right moment.
But Witkin is able to look at the rot, the ugly, the people society rejects. And he is able to Look with love and reverance. And he is able to make us share his vision and see sacred beauty where she should only experience revulsion. That's what really makes him a great Master.
Much like Bacon actually, who is also one of the very few true Masters of the past century in his field.
Strategist
Senior Member
--
Tom
Tom
I don't like the photos and I find it a bit disturbing that someone would go through all that trouble to take these images.
But the negative reaction their getting is part of the photographer's intention. She's aware she's doing something a bit nasty (whether it's to make a point or make money or a combination of the two).
Those parents who push their kids at hockey games, for example, and abuse them because they don't perform up to the parents' fantasy standards are worse.
And those parents who tart 6 year old kids up as pedophile bait and enter them into beauty pageants are much worse.
In both latter cases, the people abusing the children don't even know they're doing it and that's a lot more disturbing then consciously trying to disturb people.
I doubt anybody would be titillated by these images and that's the whoel point. The whole "innocence of childhood" thing is something you hear perfectly normal people talk about. It's also something pedophiles talk about. This is a lot more realistic, a lot less creepy in some ways.
But the negative reaction their getting is part of the photographer's intention. She's aware she's doing something a bit nasty (whether it's to make a point or make money or a combination of the two).
Those parents who push their kids at hockey games, for example, and abuse them because they don't perform up to the parents' fantasy standards are worse.
And those parents who tart 6 year old kids up as pedophile bait and enter them into beauty pageants are much worse.
In both latter cases, the people abusing the children don't even know they're doing it and that's a lot more disturbing then consciously trying to disturb people.
I doubt anybody would be titillated by these images and that's the whoel point. The whole "innocence of childhood" thing is something you hear perfectly normal people talk about. It's also something pedophiles talk about. This is a lot more realistic, a lot less creepy in some ways.
Roger J. Buffington
Veteran Member
Ghastly .... that sums it up. Repulsive. I'd be happiest never to see that again. Ever.
--
Roger
Huntington Harbour, California
Surf City, USA
'I want to die peacefully, in my sleep, like my Grandfather...'
Not screaming, and in terror, like his passengers...'
--
Roger
Huntington Harbour, California
Surf City, USA
'I want to die peacefully, in my sleep, like my Grandfather...'
Not screaming, and in terror, like his passengers...'
Strategist
Senior Member
...and please realize that not too many are trying to make a political comment, at least not one so clumsily constructed as yours, but those who are against what she has done are those who don't like her methods (at least that is my point of view.)
Comparing the pain of her subjects with those of children who suffer much more from disease or neglect is not the point, so don't get on your high-horse about that one. Are you saying that it is okay to cause a child to cry only if that child is spoiled by his/her family? Many of us who don't like her methods are also concerned about the more difficult situations that children face outside of "lack of a lollipop."
Where do YOU draw the line, Chris-in-Osaka? Where is it acceptable to cause a child to cry in your mind? Is it also wrong to "abuse" children through poor lifestyle choices that we may allow? Yes. But once again, you are missing the point of this discussion: Are her methods acceptable to one or not? In my mind, not in the least are they acceptable, and those parent's/guardians who allowed this technique are also to blame for their poor choices in helping this pervert to make her political statements.
--
Tom
Comparing the pain of her subjects with those of children who suffer much more from disease or neglect is not the point, so don't get on your high-horse about that one. Are you saying that it is okay to cause a child to cry only if that child is spoiled by his/her family? Many of us who don't like her methods are also concerned about the more difficult situations that children face outside of "lack of a lollipop."
Where do YOU draw the line, Chris-in-Osaka? Where is it acceptable to cause a child to cry in your mind? Is it also wrong to "abuse" children through poor lifestyle choices that we may allow? Yes. But once again, you are missing the point of this discussion: Are her methods acceptable to one or not? In my mind, not in the least are they acceptable, and those parent's/guardians who allowed this technique are also to blame for their poor choices in helping this pervert to make her political statements.
--
Tom
Backdoctor
Forum Pro
You are clueless on this. You dont have kids or grandkids, do you?
If a child cries or throws a fit because he doesnt get what he wants immediately, like a candy bar, that is part of growing up and parenting. You're right, there is no permanent damage. Nobody said there was permanent damage to the kids being photographed either. So if you smack them in the rear to get them to cry, there is no permanent damage, is that ok too? Even if it bruises, that will go away, no permanent damage so its fine?
Giving a child a candy bar then taking it away with the express purpose of making him/her cry, thats borderline abuse. You dont get it, wont get it, and in the remote chance you do have kids, I pity them. It not about whether there is permanent damage, you are taking adavantage of and abusing a child for profit.
Harris
PBase/DPReview/NTF supporter
Egret Stalker #4, WSSA #29
http://www.pbase.com/backdoctor
If a child cries or throws a fit because he doesnt get what he wants immediately, like a candy bar, that is part of growing up and parenting. You're right, there is no permanent damage. Nobody said there was permanent damage to the kids being photographed either. So if you smack them in the rear to get them to cry, there is no permanent damage, is that ok too? Even if it bruises, that will go away, no permanent damage so its fine?
Giving a child a candy bar then taking it away with the express purpose of making him/her cry, thats borderline abuse. You dont get it, wont get it, and in the remote chance you do have kids, I pity them. It not about whether there is permanent damage, you are taking adavantage of and abusing a child for profit.
--
Harris
PBase/DPReview/NTF supporter
Egret Stalker #4, WSSA #29
http://www.pbase.com/backdoctor
Strategist wrote:
Are you saying that it is
Or (in my case thanks to alcoholism in the family):
"You kids don't know how f* ing good you have it. You've never gone through a Depression or a war. You don't know what it's like to see the motherf8cking g* ks blow your best buddies head blown off right in front of you."
I would have been thankful to have had someone given me a lollipop and snapped my photo...
Are you saying that it is
"Eat your vegetables. There are starving kids in India".
Or (in my case thanks to alcoholism in the family):
"You kids don't know how f* ing good you have it. You've never gone through a Depression or a war. You don't know what it's like to see the motherf8cking g* ks blow your best buddies head blown off right in front of you."
I would have been thankful to have had someone given me a lollipop and snapped my photo...
Strategist
Senior Member
...parents are making regarding her technique, then perhaps you could use some counseling, yourself? There is nothing wrong with any parent who doesn't enjoy seeing his/her child crying because of the actions of an "adult." And, IMHO, this woman's techniques are, at least, in poor taste. If someone did this to my child, I would have some nice, artistic shots of their own tears. About that you can be certain.
--
Tom
--
Tom
Strategist
Senior Member
..."leave it to Sally Struthers," but tell everyone else how short sighted they are for turning away from pain and suffering in other countries. Oh, and I believe that Sally is from the US, isn't she? Are you supporting her efforts or merely saving up your money for your own personal gratification whatever the form of gluttony?
--
Tom
--
Tom
Strategist
Senior Member
...but others have had difficult upbringing (I've decided to leave that in the past, myself), but that doesn't negate the ignorance, or stupidity of this woman's techniques regardless of how they were delivered. My question is still: where do you draw the line when it comes to what is acceptable behavior to make a child cry for your own art or artistic satisfaction? As far as I can see, nothing is acceptable. But then, I am a parent who will protect my family from needless pain, intimidation, mockery, you name it, at the hands of some self-serving adult.
--
Tom
--
Tom
bm bradley
Veteran Member
Mrpresident7, 1.) don't want pics of nude kids & 2.) don't care to hurt children. 3.) beautiful photography -bmb
Greg Zillgitt
Veteran Member
(1) A thing can't be bad as long as something else is worse
(2) It's sick to disapprove of child abuse
(3) In fact a little bit of child abuse is really a good thing - shows those little buggers a thing or two about the real world!
(4) Contrived = honest! This will be great for the nature photogs - they can just shoot at the zoo!
(5) Kitsch = art!
--
http://www.pbase.com/gzillgi
http://www.pbase.com/gzillgi/wedding_portrait
(2) It's sick to disapprove of child abuse
(3) In fact a little bit of child abuse is really a good thing - shows those little buggers a thing or two about the real world!
(4) Contrived = honest! This will be great for the nature photogs - they can just shoot at the zoo!
(5) Kitsch = art!
--
http://www.pbase.com/gzillgi
http://www.pbase.com/gzillgi/wedding_portrait
RomanJohnston
Forum Pro
I am not one to be hedonistic....accepting all that comes in my life including pain and strife. Dosnt mean I prefer the painful side of life....just that I embrace all of life.
I am sure the children are not psychogolicaly dammaged by the photo shoot and it shows an extreemy diffrent view from the norm.
Emotive......
Well though out....
Controversial....
And flawlessly executed.
I like things that go against our normal grain and make us pause if but a second.
Roman
--
Photography in short...is about the love of the beauty of your subject. Without that....all the technology in the world will not help you get a good picture.
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/
I am sure the children are not psychogolicaly dammaged by the photo shoot and it shows an extreemy diffrent view from the norm.
Emotive......
Well though out....
Controversial....
And flawlessly executed.
I like things that go against our normal grain and make us pause if but a second.
Roman
--
Photography in short...is about the love of the beauty of your subject. Without that....all the technology in the world will not help you get a good picture.
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/
LiveM
Veteran Member
Some paranoid people out there, that's for sure. But then we've already seen that with plenty of other threads.
By son was a backup baby for a commercial with a scene like this. Did anyone call the police? No. Did anyone care? Yes, we all cringed and laughed when the lead baby balled his eyes out for ten seconds. He was too good - our boy just pocketed the cash and played with his toys.
And what do you think these babes will say when they are older? Will they hate their parents? Or be extremely thankful for the cash? Seems some people are too brainwashed to know the answer to this already.
By son was a backup baby for a commercial with a scene like this. Did anyone call the police? No. Did anyone care? Yes, we all cringed and laughed when the lead baby balled his eyes out for ten seconds. He was too good - our boy just pocketed the cash and played with his toys.
And what do you think these babes will say when they are older? Will they hate their parents? Or be extremely thankful for the cash? Seems some people are too brainwashed to know the answer to this already.
RomanJohnston
Forum Pro
People EATING TASTY ANIMALS?!?!?!?
Sorry....had to!
Roman
--
Photography in short...is about the love of the beauty of your subject. Without that....all the technology in the world will not help you get a good picture.
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/
Sorry....had to!
Roman
--
Photography in short...is about the love of the beauty of your subject. Without that....all the technology in the world will not help you get a good picture.
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/
David SL
Veteran Member
of ultimate cruelty to a happy child.
nice! (sarcasm)
seems like anything that hasn't been done before is considered "art" these days..after all, the p.c. and creative ideas have all been taken up ..so now it's time to do things like take pictures of smeared fecal matter or of intentionally emotionally injured children. What's next? pictures of tied up children taken by pedophiles as art??? Actually, looking at some of these pics they seem awfully like stuff I'd imagine sick degenerate pedophiles getting a high from. And look at those prices! $4,500 for a print of vivid sadism against children in action! oooh I am just dying to buy one and put it on my living room wall!! (more sarcasm) I predict "art" will continue to embrace the dark areas of human psyche, as those are the only areas where "concepts" exist that haven't been publicly portrayed as art yet . IMO, we are in an era of art as sensationalism to bolster the careers of formerly obscure photographers/artists, rather than art as representing something non obvious and non sensational...do you think this girl is the first to have the "idea" of taking pics like this?? I doubt it, she probably was just the first to have the balls to take them and call it a show. Ironically, the fact she doesn't have "balls" was probably in her benefit to getting this accepted, a guy taking pics like this would probably be taken to prison.
Sorry but though I like the look of the images from a technical standpoint, the subject matter is quite disturbing and by definition of how they were created, quite sadistic. Of course by some definitions the controversy of such images can be a representation of their artistic merits, however that is only true if inspiring controversy was part of the intent of the artist to engender this type of discussion. Which leaves us in a conundrum, as the photographer then would be admitting that her work is designed at least in part to engage in sensationalism ...which makes it not a very creative artistic expression these days since thousands of "artists" have done the same thing but with different subject matter. So from that perspective this "art" isn't really creative at all!
(putting on flame suit while flashing a develish grin...)
thanks for the link!
Regards,
nice! (sarcasm)
seems like anything that hasn't been done before is considered "art" these days..after all, the p.c. and creative ideas have all been taken up ..so now it's time to do things like take pictures of smeared fecal matter or of intentionally emotionally injured children. What's next? pictures of tied up children taken by pedophiles as art??? Actually, looking at some of these pics they seem awfully like stuff I'd imagine sick degenerate pedophiles getting a high from. And look at those prices! $4,500 for a print of vivid sadism against children in action! oooh I am just dying to buy one and put it on my living room wall!! (more sarcasm) I predict "art" will continue to embrace the dark areas of human psyche, as those are the only areas where "concepts" exist that haven't been publicly portrayed as art yet . IMO, we are in an era of art as sensationalism to bolster the careers of formerly obscure photographers/artists, rather than art as representing something non obvious and non sensational...do you think this girl is the first to have the "idea" of taking pics like this?? I doubt it, she probably was just the first to have the balls to take them and call it a show. Ironically, the fact she doesn't have "balls" was probably in her benefit to getting this accepted, a guy taking pics like this would probably be taken to prison.
Sorry but though I like the look of the images from a technical standpoint, the subject matter is quite disturbing and by definition of how they were created, quite sadistic. Of course by some definitions the controversy of such images can be a representation of their artistic merits, however that is only true if inspiring controversy was part of the intent of the artist to engender this type of discussion. Which leaves us in a conundrum, as the photographer then would be admitting that her work is designed at least in part to engage in sensationalism ...which makes it not a very creative artistic expression these days since thousands of "artists" have done the same thing but with different subject matter. So from that perspective this "art" isn't really creative at all!
(putting on flame suit while flashing a develish grin...)
thanks for the link!
Regards,
--
RomanJohnston
Forum Pro
May their lollypop being take from them for a split second be the absolute worst that happens to them in their life....
As their life will be a portrait of perfection...(if you'll pardon the pun.)
Roman
--
Photography in short...is about the love of the beauty of your subject. Without that....all the technology in the world will not help you get a good picture.
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/
As their life will be a portrait of perfection...(if you'll pardon the pun.)
Roman
--
Photography in short...is about the love of the beauty of your subject. Without that....all the technology in the world will not help you get a good picture.
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/
Robin Hood Dial II
Member
Alas,
Reading this tread has depressed me.
Here, there is clearly a chasm between folks exposure to the wonderful technology of cameras vs. the extraordinary art they produce.
Photographing barns, flowers, birds, sports and family can be art, but the ART world is a very different scene. It necessarily involves strong creative vision, controversy, and in many cases breaking the rules.
I am not giving my yes or no to this particular artist.
However, were this thread posted on a film/photo school forum, or in an art school there would be reviews, analysis and coments which would educate us all...
...and more importantly: tollerance and patience.
We owe it to ourselves to learn about what art is saying... and it's tough, no doubt about it. Not every artist will be our cup-of-tea.
I believe it would be a nice idea to have a forum here devoted to Artists, the Fine Art World, and Gallerys.... much could be learned.
Pax,
Robin
Reading this tread has depressed me.
Here, there is clearly a chasm between folks exposure to the wonderful technology of cameras vs. the extraordinary art they produce.
Photographing barns, flowers, birds, sports and family can be art, but the ART world is a very different scene. It necessarily involves strong creative vision, controversy, and in many cases breaking the rules.
I am not giving my yes or no to this particular artist.
However, were this thread posted on a film/photo school forum, or in an art school there would be reviews, analysis and coments which would educate us all...
...and more importantly: tollerance and patience.
We owe it to ourselves to learn about what art is saying... and it's tough, no doubt about it. Not every artist will be our cup-of-tea.
I believe it would be a nice idea to have a forum here devoted to Artists, the Fine Art World, and Gallerys.... much could be learned.
Pax,
lharris
Veteran Member
I was seeking the words and the poster above me (hope this is in order) said it well. If these were to be for the purpose of affecting some appropriate change or benefit--as in the case of photo journalists who are enlightening us as to a social condition that tho brutal we should not turn away from that would be one thing.
The fine line is not only does it evoke emotion, but perhaps also to what end????
Linda
The fine line is not only does it evoke emotion, but perhaps also to what end????
Linda
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum