Amy Arbus fine photographer

[Stephanie Chernikowski]

-----Original Message-----
From: globe@zipcon.net
Sent: Jun 26, 2004 6:48 PM
To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net, Jon Ford <jonmfordster@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Amy Arbus fine second-rate photographer

is Diane Arbus considered a great photographer because of 
her skill or because she chose to photograph freaks?  If the latter then does 
tht mean greatness is freaky and unpleasant?  In some other age beauty and 
symnetry were considerd great but now is considered mediocre.


don't get me wrong, i am a fan of diane arbus. that being said, i think what you say is often true. there is a real tendency to go for scandalous in the arts. if you can create a scandal, you get recognition, hence elephant dung smeared on paintings. much is just lethally boring, badly executed, infantile. 

both mapplethorpe and arbus were groundbreaking in their choice of subjects as well as highly skilled artists w/a vision. love them for their courage, as i love michael moore for his. avedon and penn focused on beauty, as did mapplethorpe, but they transcend pretty. people who imitate mapplethorpe by taking pictures of flowers all too often just embarass themselves by comparison.

big is another ticket to being called "art." just cuz a photo is huge does not mean it is good, but it is frequently a ticket to being taken seriously.