Alec Soth on William Eggleston

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I haven't seen the whole video, but I like Soth's comments on Eggleston.

Enjoy!

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Looking at other photographers' works through his eyes is a fantastic experience. All these videos are great.

 

[250swb]

Very interesting, thank you for posting the link.

 

[radiant]

Soth has made quite a bunch of similar videos, check his channel. Just awesome and very different content from the normal "photography" content which is usually abou film or cameras. Quite rare that the content is acutally on photography, not the technical things.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Here's another great video by Alec Soth. His comments shows his love of photography and his thought processes behind his work.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Art is so personal, Soth stating one particular book is the best for a particular decade is highly biased. Plus there are different types. For example, would it make sense for me to say that a particular jazz album is the best music of a decade when there are other jazz styles such as soft jazz, New Orleans jazz, etc., much less other music styles like country, rock, etc? How does Soth know what's best? Who cares?

 

[warden]

Soth has an outstanding grasp of photographic history and is a natural teacher. I’m thankful he’s making these videos. I’ve learned a lot from him, and purchased a few of the books that he’s reviewed.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Soth has an outstanding grasp of photographic history and is a natural teacher. I’m thankful he’s making these videos. I’ve learned a lot from him, and purchased a few of the books that he’s reviewed.

At 14:27 in the video, he says referring to a woman holding a pizza, "What an amazing picture."

At 14:36 he says, " I mean this book - - every picture is so good it's hard to look at."

Maybe it's only hyperbole. But to me the pictures look like banal snapshots someone took of their family at home like 90% of everyone else's family.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Art is so personal

Actually, it's not. There are certain consensus that are either immediate or are built through time. Beethoven was considered the greatest European composer during his lifetime. He's just one example, in one art form. You could name dozens in music, painting, literature, drama, etc.—from Michelangelo to Dante to Hosukai to Dostoievsky to Beethoven to Hemingway to Cervantes to Achebe to Manet to Stravinsky to Borges and on and on—, not only in Europe but all over the world, for which the value and meaning we ascribe to their works has nothing to do with personal tastes.

Eggleston may be an acquired taste, but appreciating his work (which I do), or even understanding it, and recognizing its importance—in the history of photography, amongst other stuff—are two different things.

I can't stand Andy Warhol. Him, his personality, and anything that has to do with him—with the notable exception of Basquiat. Hate the Campbell Soups, but I cannot but acknowledge that they are immensely important in the history of American art, and I would listen with interest to someone talking intelligently and passionately about them.

 

[warden]

At 14:27 in the video, he says referring to a woman holding a pizza, "What an amazing picture."

At 14:36 he says, " I mean this book - - every picture is so good it's hard to look at."

Maybe it's only hyperbole. But to me the pictures look like banal snapshots someone took of their family at home like 90% of everyone else's family.

Sounds like Alec Soth is not for you, Alan. No problem.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Art is so personal, Soth stating one particular book is the best for a particular decade is highly biased. Plus there are different types. For example, would it make sense for me to say that a particular jazz album is the best music of a decade when there are other jazz styles such as soft jazz, New Orleans jazz, etc., much less other music styles like country, rock, etc? How does Soth know what's best? Who cares?

I do agree that art is personal. One's taste reflects life experiences due to race, class and education. Personality also comes into play with the creation and appreciation of art. Sadly, art in rich countries have been commodified and taste in art have been shaped by the need by the rich to show off wealth and sophistication. I love Alec Soth's work because he see beauty in the ordinary and prosaic. Art is so broad to me that I don't even dare try define what it is.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Actually, it's not. There are certain consensus that are either immediate or are built through time. Beethoven was considered the greatest European composer during his lifetime. He's just one example, in one art form. You could name dozens in music, painting, literature, drama, etc.—from Michelangelo to Dante to Hosukai to Dostoievsky to Beethoven to Hemingway to Cervantes to Achebe to Manet to Stravinsky to Borges and on and on—, not only in Europe but all over the world, for which the value and meaning we ascribe to their works has nothing to do with personal tastes.

Eggleston may be an acquired taste, but appreciating his work (which I do), or even understanding it, and recognizing its importance—in the history of photography, amongst other stuff—are two different things.

I can't stand Andy Warhol. Him, his personality, and anything that has to do with him—with the notable exception of Basquiat. Hate the Campbell Soups, but I cannot but acknowledge that they are immensely important in the history of American art, and I would listen with interest to someone talking intelligently and passionately about them.

McDonalds has huge commercial historical importance. They changed the fast food industry that changed eating habits around the world. But many people don't like to eat Mcdonald's hamburgers. I think you're mixing up historical importance with taste and personal preference.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

I think you're mixing up historical importance with taste and personal preference.

If you read my post, you'll see that I'm actually making a difference between the two. And it goes beyond historical importance. It's also a question of aesthetics, meaning, impact, etc, i.e., everything that comes into play when you're engaging in a dialogue with a work of art and trying to understand it.

Of everything one can say about a work of art, taste and personal preference is the least interesting. What someone likes or doesn't like tells me a lot about the person but rarely something important about the work in question.

That said, sometimes, that's the point. What I like about the Soth videos is that he's purposefully moving away from in-depth criticism in favor of spontaneous "ramblings"—in much the same way that any of us would pick up a photo book we like in our book shelf, show it to a friend, and let our enthusiasm about it speak for it. The effect is a "OK, I never liked the work of such and such, but seeing how much you admire it makes me think I'm missing something, so I'll trust you (for now) and go back to it." It's a novel a refreshing approach, and not as superficial as it sounds, as there are hidden insights in Soth's comments. As far as photographer talking about other photographers, it's a nice counterpoint to the more elaborated works of a Steven Shore, Robert Adams (a must read!) or Luigi Ghirri.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

If you read my post, you'll see that I'm actually making a difference between the two. And it goes beyond historical importance. It's also a question of aesthetics, meaning, impact, etc, i.e., everything that comes into play when you're engaging in a dialogue with a work of art and trying to understand it.

Of everything one can say about a work of art, taste and personal preference is the least interesting. What someone likes or doesn't like tells me a lot about the person but rarely something important about the work in question.

That said, sometimes, that's the point. What I like about the Soth videos is that he's purposefully moving away from in-depth criticism in favor of spontaneous "ramblings"—in much the same way that any of us would pick up a photo book we like in our book shelf, show it to a friend, and let our enthusiasm about it speak for it. The effect is a "OK, I never liked the work of such and such, but seeing how much you admire it makes me think I'm missing something, so I'll trust you (for now) and go back to it." It's a novel a refreshing approach, and not as superficial as it sounds, as there are hidden insights in Soth's comments. As far as photographer talking about other photographers, it's a nice counterpoint to the more elaborated works of a Steven Shore, Robert Adams (a must read!) or Luigi Ghirri.

Alex, you seem to keep contradicting yourself. On the one hand, you ascribe to the lack of importance of taste and personal preference. Then, you add that in the case of Soth, you seem to ignore those parameters and seem pleased with less intellectual feelings of emotion about what you're seeing.

Of course, both are good in their place. I would think though that most people however look at art from a feeling standpoint. They don't spend too much time analyzing its historical background or other intellectual meanderings. That would be like admiring a pretty woman and wondering what college she went to.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Alex, you seem to keep contradicting yourself. On the one hand, you ascribe to the lack of importance of taste and personal preference. Then, you add that in the case of Soth, you seem to ignore those parameters and seem pleased with less intellectual feelings of emotion about what you're seeing.

Well, I certainly hope that if you are going to set up a video series about photography books, you are going to do it about books, and photographers, you actually love! But the particular feeling that comes through in Soth's videos is admiration—a photographer admiring other photographers is always fascinating because it's the eye putting itself in the other person's eyes. But it's the after that's interesting. His ramblings are often about why he admires. So there is an analytic process going on, as always when we talk about feelings, something we all do, asking "Why do I like this so much," or "What is it about this that I like so much" (To pick up on your analogy, it's like admiring a pretty woman and wondering what is it about her that you admire—i.e., learning as much about you as about her.) Leads you many interesting places. Has little to do with taste, in the sense of simply expressing "I like" or "I don't like," which leads you, and others, nowhere.

To get back to this specific video and Eggleston, I do understand why many people don't like that photographer. But, to state it again, I think there is a lot to be gained by listening to someone credible and interesting thoughtfully expressing his or her admiration about something that you don't like. You may still end up not liking it yet having learned something from it.

Last thing I will say is that if art were only a matter of personal taste, there would never have been art.

 

[MattKing]

If you look at (or otherwise experience) Art and think about anything more than "that would look good in the living room" the insights of people like Alec Soth are both interesting and useful.
Even if you don't agree with him, exposing yourself to his insights is likely to deepen your understanding and appreciation of what he talks about.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Well, I certainly hope that if you are going to set up a video series about photography books, you are going to do it about books, and photographers, you actually love! But the particular feeling that comes through in Soth's videos is admiration—a photographer admiring other photographers is always fascinating because it's the eye putting itself in the other person's eyes. But it's the after that's interesting. His ramblings are often about why he admires. So there is an analytic process going on, as always when we talk about feelings, something we all do, asking "Why do I like this so much," or "What is it about this that I like so much" (To pick up on your analogy, it's like admiring a pretty woman and wondering what is it about her that you admire—i.e., learning as much about you as about her.) Leads you many interesting places. Has little to do with taste, in the sense of simply expressing "I like" or "I don't like," which leads you, and others, nowhere.

To get back to this specific video and Eggleston, I do understand why many people don't like that photographer. But, to state it again, I think there is a lot to be gained by listening to someone credible and interesting thoughtfully expressing his or her admiration about something that you don't like. You may still end up not liking it yet having learned something from it.

Last thing I will say is that if art were only a matter of personal taste, there would never have been art.

If you look at (or otherwise experience) Art and think about anything more than "that would look good in the living room" the insights of people like Alec Soth are both interesting and useful.
Even if you don't agree with him, exposing yourself to his insights is likely to deepen your understanding and appreciation of what he talks about.

Deep insights maybe. But to copy a couple of his comments I posted earlier doesn't seem very deep. Not much more than one of my "nice shot" comments to someone's picture posted here.

At 14:27 in the video, he says referring to a woman holding a pizza, "What an amazing picture."

At 14:36 he says, " I mean this book - - every picture is so good it's hard to look at."

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Deep insights maybe. But to copy a couple of his comments I posted earlier doesn't seem very deep. Not much more than one of my "nice shot" comments to someone's picture posted here.

At 14:27 in the video, he says referring to a woman holding a pizza, "What an amazing picture."

At 14:36 he says, " I mean this book - - every picture is so good it's hard to look at."

Couple of comments, Alan. I mean, even in Nietzsche you'll find a few banal sentences that you or I could utter while cooking our eggs & bacon for breakfast.

 

[Nitroplait]

At 14:36 he says, " I mean this book - - every picture is so good it's hard to look at."

A couple of seconds before he said that, I was actually feeling exactly the same.

I am a fan of Alec Soth and probably put different importance on his videos than that of a person who's indifferent to his work, but I think his generous sharing of his overwhelming love for photography is admirable and should have some value to many photographers interested in photography beyond 'the great shot above the sofa' as Matt puts it.
Not everyone is as eloquent as Robert Adams, but I feel I can take as much from Soth as I can from Adams.

 

[NB23]

McDonalds has huge commercial historical importance. They changed the fast food industry that changed eating habits around the world. But many people don't like to eat Mcdonald's hamburgers. I think you're mixing up historical importance with taste and personal preference.

Actually, isn’t McDonald’s art?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Actually, isn’t McDonald’s art?

I suppose it is when you think about it. You look at at really juicy hamburger dripping with fat and ketchup from a delicious painting and it gets your appetite going, just what art is supposed to do. Activate feelings and emotions. Yes, it's an example of commercial art and it's made them billions of dollars and people billions of calories.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

I think he meant this:

 

[warden]

Not everyone is as eloquent as Robert Adams, but I feel I can take as much from Soth as I can from Adams.

I'm right there with you. Adams and Soth are good examples of photographers that can make quality images but also excel at art/photographic criticism, albeit in different ways.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

I'm right there with you. Adams and Soth are good examples of photographers that can make quality images but also excel at art/photographic criticism, albeit in different ways.

Love reading Adams. This past year I went through Beauty in Photography and Why People Photograph, and am now reading Art Can Help. Immensely profound, thoughtful and inspiring.

Stephen Shore's latest, Modern Instances: The Craft of Photography, is also a fascinating read.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I think he meant this:

Big Mac with extra Manet. Forget the Special Sauce.