Hi, I missed everything in this thread except for this one email. Can I assume the Tim in question is Tim Page, the photographer? If so, I've been to a talk he gave a year or 2 ago and I think he's unsardonically interesting. Whatever his motives or mental state, and whatever the causes of any of his mental states, he's lived a very interesting life (one that I don't envy) and produced some interesting photographs.
I don't rate him particularly highly as a photographer, but I've noticed that some of his shots are almost identical to some of the best shots by Larry Burrows and Philip Jones Griffiths, which suggests at the very least that he was travelling with one or both of them; if he's good enough for them, he's certainly good enough for me. And the world is certainly more interesting for his being in it. As Mike has pointed out, people like Coleridge, de Quincey, Aldous Huxley and others were druggies (not to mention all the alcoholics); that in itself seems to be no disqualification when it comes to being interesting or producing interesting work. If you're not talking about Tim Page, then just ignore me... <g> -- Cheers, Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Monday, June 16, 2003, 9:38:25 AM, you wrote: > HI > Keith Whaley wrote: >> Tim? He's an acid-head. And, that's the BEST thing you can say about him... >> >> He ponders, "What's wrong with my brain?" >> Fact is, he has little normal brain left. >> He will NEVER have a normal, functioning brain. That's also a fact. >> >> "...an interesting guy?" If you get your rocks off talking to >> malfunctioning aging druggies and such, it may be okay for YOUR tastes, >> but they're way, WAY too irrational for my tastes. >> They're spaced out even when they're totally off it! And you think it's 'cute.' >> Yuk! Yet another wasted human being... > I was using it sardonically, as I might if I said that GWB was > interesting, or in the interests of fairness, WJC. Or our dear, beloved > Prime Minister. Of course, they are all interesting for different > reasons. > One of the great disadvantages of short, written communications. > Unsardonically, I do think he has produced some thought-provoking > images. I also unsardonically think that a number of artists of various > eouvres have produced magnificent works whilst under the influence of > various substances. Whether they would have done better or worse > without the substance is something we will never know. > mike > mike
