For me, to better appreciate Friedlander, pick up America By Car and Western Landscapes. Probably his most accessible and closest to conventional aesthetics. For a good overview of his oeuvre, Lee Friedlander Framed curated by Joel Cohen is a good start.
but his compositions are not really my cup of tea. Please convince me otherwise, or not.
The world is uncomposed. It is messy and chaotic. It's made of a bunch of things that have nothing to do one with the other. It makes no sense.
It's interesting to compare Friedlander's and Winogrand's relationship with the American vernacular landscape. In Winogrand, you sense people are the subject and the vernacular landscape is the scenery in which they evolve; with Friedlander, it's the opposite: the vernacular landscape is the subject and people are just another element of it, much in the same way as are cars or billboards.
I've been told that this helps explains driving a car in Montreal.
Perhaps I've been mis-informed?
they certainly aren't beautiful
His pictures might be cerebrally stimulating
they certainly aren't beautiful
there's a lack of finesse which I find annoying
His pictures might be cerebrally stimulating; but they certainly aren't beautiful. I'd call them more artsy obnoxious, probably deliberately so.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?