Re: You Say Krappy, I Say Crappy

From: SteveS ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 01/09/05-03:55:47 PM Z
Message-id: <000a01c4f695$fa85f6e0$2604e4d8@VALUED65BAD02C>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Baird, Darryl" <>

> Folks,
> I've avoided this thread (like a bad cold, but not the plague) for
> lack of time and not having much interest in the definitions that
> ultimately bubbled to the top. (I generally read K.Thayer's responses
> after a topic has gone on for too long, simply to get a sense of where
> the thing has gone due to her careful wording and clarifications..
> like a mini-review of the whole thing). I love photography and its
> many-headed offspring and thus began reading the 'original' topic with
> slight interest, plus I have used crappy/krappy cameras for personal
> work.
> Having qualified (??) why I've returned to the topic I have a brief
> comment about the "Art" thing. We (artists) don't get to qualify what
> is or isn't art, it is decided for a culture/society by other (some
> current, some future) players in the mix; seldom are these players the
> actual artists involved.
> Atget didn't consider himself and artist, nor did he produce art. He
> sold images to artists, but is considered one of the great
> photo-artists in history. He is long dead and died without ever
> controlling any aspect of his 'artistic' output.
> In the end, do what feels right to you and cut the crap/krap. It's too
> soon to tell if we are making art (and it is easier if we don't care
> so much.)
> big hugs, now go out and change the world (for the better, please)
> -Darryl Baird

Apart from the hugs, I agree with Darryl.

I simplys with to add what Edward Weston said: A photograph should be
clear, with a unity of puriety from corner to corner, edge to edge - with
metaphor. A Bohemian artist who makes excuses in the name of art is not
more than a Bohemian artist. (no quotes, for this may not be a direct quote)

Received on Sun Jan 9 15:55:56 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 02/01/05-09:28:07 AM Z CST