Jerry Todd wrote:
I'm not sure that's the case, but what if it is? So what if they're posted
to make people aware of situations that exist in the world outside of
flowers and landscapes, and apart from digital shmigital cell phone
cameras? That is one of the purposes of photography, is it not, to
document and report on the world in which we live and to present ideas in
the form of images to provoke thought and discussion.?
Jerry Todd
[Original Message] From: Caveman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 10/29/2004 7:17:56 PM Subject: Re: PAW PESO - Breakfast in Bed
It is most evident now that you post these pics here with the purpose of starting social/political debates and not artistical/technical ones related to photography. May I suggest some other controversial subjects like guns/abortion/religion. This would help make the list perfectly unreadable.
This sort of crap is totally absurd.
Shel's image is at the heart of photography, and historically always has been.
The entire span of publishing photographic images is not to please everybody's taste for knowing what the world is like, but to record it. Were it not for the unique eye and recording efforts of many photographers, the world would be more ignorant of the "human condition," wherever it exists, and for whatever reason.
The only "statement" that Shel, or any other image maker is making is, "Here is what _I_ saw, and now I show it to you. I'm not asking you to like it. It is what it is. What you do with the thoughts that arise when you view it, that's entirely up to you. I've done my job, which is portraying the world as I saw it..."
I think Shel has done a fine job of carrying on the tradition.
keith whaley
