Joel Peter Witkin talk in Santa Fe

[atenlaugh]

Sarcasm and a picture of an animal corpse aren't very effective as arguments, Sparky. In fact, neither are really arguments at all.

If this dialogue is any precedent, there isn't really anything I can say to you, beyond that.

Of course - you're perfectly right, Wayne... I see it all much more clearly now. I should NEVER have gone off my medication this weekend...!! Goodness me!!

Okay - back to photographing bunnyrabbits...!!

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=888193

 

[Sparky]

I am through making any argument I had. Now I'm just amusing myself. Hope you can understand.

 

[Sparky]

postscript

give the people what they want - right?

 

[atenlaugh]

give the people what they want - right?

No.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Jorge

I did not ask the question earlier because I accept your answer as I accepted Jose's answer three months ago.

But labeling Jose's work as strickly Documentation is to easy in my opinion.

There is obviously two sides on this issue, I do not approve of what JPW did , I would be pissed and suing his ass if it was my family in fact I would be after him personally.
Jose's work on the other hand I can see that there is a need for this type of documentation (if that is strickly the end purpose, and not art pieces)
I have always stated that JPW work is interesting and it is.
Attacking each other, like this thread has shown from both sides of the moral issue, is of little interest to me as JPW's work is in the photographic world domain and all that this thread started out as a discussion on his work.
My stance is in no way a knock on Jose's work in fact I give him credit for some of the directions he is going in.
But to be insulted by *some* on this thread for having a differing point of view than someone else is lame.

 

[Robert Kennedy]

HOLD IT!


Everyone realizes that this is EXACTLY WHAT WITKIN WANTS right?

Look, I can give a flying F*&% when Witkin uses donated bodies. The problem I have with him is that he went down to Mexico and used, sans familial permission, bodies. That is wrong. Especially in a culture that reveres the dead as much as the Mexican people do. They even have a whole holiday based around revering their dead family members (one of the most beautiful holidays I have ever seen, and I have been to many countries BTW).

Now, back on topic.

WITKIN IS A 12 YEAR OLD BOY!

Well, psychologically at least.

By his own admission, he just loves it when people get grossed out by his work. He brags about it even.

Think about a 12 year-old boy. At least half of us have been one. It is all fart jokes and trying to gross out each other.

That is Witkin in a nutshell. He just works at that level. Sure, he may use some more advanced techniques, but all of his work comes down to "LOOK! THAT IS SO GROSS!"

Now, what is one thing a 12 year-old can't stand?

Being ignored.

His work, while technically beautiful, is just not worth talking about. It isn't.

So I say we don't. The most maddening thing one could do to Witkin (besides sick the Federales on him...) is to ignore the twisted little f&*#er.

I put my academic career on the line to do it by refusing to view his work in a lecture. Fortunately, living in a state with a strong Hispanic population buffered me from the threat of being flunked for simply refusing to entertain the guy's sickness.

So, if you hate Witkin, ignore him.

And if you hear he is going down to Mexico, make a few phone calls....

 

[realitysandwich]

Guys....

What are we trying to argue here? Morality? "It is only moral to you if it agrees with your views". Well, ... yuh! .. but let us hope that our views are moderated by our morality. Are we trying to fill the role of "Moral Policemen" here? I've been involved in Art long enough to realize how deeply entrenched those moral values - or lack of them - are in artists, and how futile it is trying to change them.

I, personally am disturbed by Witkin's work. I do not particularly LIKE it, but it does serve a purpose; to indicate to me that his subjects are the vision of some out there there, and, no, I don't support or "condone" (try to get another to do the same?) them, but this is "I disagree with what you say, but I will die for your right to say it!"

Why dwell on this so intensely? You all have made your opinions known -- isn't this approaching "dead horse" status?

Let's cool it down a bit .. we are dropping down into ad hominem arguments here, and that is really immoral.

BTW ... I, for one, understand what Sparky means by using the term "sophisticated". He does not mean esoteric or "elitist exclusionary" ... he means to describe those who zealously practice seeing a work from a variety of views ... something I strive for all the time.

This is a web site dedicated to "Policing Morality" - my description. Set you teeth before you acess it - it is not pornographic - to me it is much worse.
[ http://www.reandev.com/taliban/ ]

Sorry this post was ignored it was (in my opinion) the most articulate and thoughtful of this thread.

 

[Sparky]

oh crap, zoe

I'm a fan of Witkin. But, I'm also a Scorpio, ruled by the planets of sex and death. (trying to lighten the place up a bit) I view it as Witkin chose to submit himself to death in his work like one would have to submit themselves to death at the end of their lives. Maybe it was his way, as an artist, to make peace with the idea of dying. A lot of times artists choose this form of therapy... each of us does it differently.

PLEASE don't start this one up again...!!! - please!!
(my thoughts exactly though)

well, maybe I'll sit back and just watch in glee this time.

 

[Jorge]

Point of fact regarding the bodies and body parts Witkin photographed in Mexico was they were ALL unclaimed bodies. No family members stepped forward to claim their relatives remains.

I'm a fan of his work.

Now I will shut up like a good...........<--I'm joking people!

You are wrong, the bodies were those from recently deceased people of whom their families had not had a chance to claim them. Please do not give "facts" of which you know nothing about.

 

[Jorge]

If you took the time to read this thread instead of posting what you have read you would see what the objections are. As a Mexican, living in Mexico I think I know better than you the realities of this country. Bottom line, people like you always fail to answer "If there is no problem with this, how come he did not do this in the US?".....

 

[Wayne]

"If there is no problem with this, how come he did not do this in the US?".....

Oh! Oh-oh! I think I know this one!! is it because he would be in jail with one his fans, photographer Thomas Condon?

http://www.thefileroom.org/documents/dyn/DisplayCase.cfm/id/476

 

[david b]

oh boy.

 

[avandesande]

The moral of this story is to do your own darkroom work.

Oh! Oh-oh! I think I know this one!! is it because he would be in jail with one his fans, photographer Thomas Condon?

http://www.thefileroom.org/documents/dyn/DisplayCase.cfm/id/476

 

[Wayne]

Yes, being investigated for taking non-sexual photographs of children with theirs and their parents permission is "the same thing", lol. Jock didnt go to jail and he shouldnt have. Jock had everyone behind him, including his "victims".

 

[avandesande]

So what is the difference between taking a picture of a dead person or a living person? If I go to a automobile accident it is okay to photograph them there? When is it a bad thing to do?

 

[mark]

Ignore button Jorge, Use the ignore button. It is kind of like the Force or Duct Tape. Ultimately it eases the stress.

 

[John McCallum]

Hmmm ... I put it down to a Roman Catholic mother and too much Weegee when he was young. Steichen should never have encouraged him either :rolleyes:.

Don't forget, someone who avidly follows and enjoys an artist's work is not responsible for the artist's morals, values, actions.

Just a thought.

 

[mark]

I think the problem is when the viewer seeks to defend the actions and morals that it becomes a problem.

....What is wrong with a ROman Catholic mother?

 

[tim atherton]

War and the Holocaust were not staged Bob. They are horrible real images that must be seen to help prevent them from ever occurring again.

As probably the best living war/conflict photogrpaher Don McCullin has said - not a single one of his photographs ever made a difference

 

[John McCallum]

....What is wrong with a ROman Catholic mother?

You assume I think there is something wrong with the artist ?

Sheesh just trying to lighten things up! C'mon guys play nice.

Do you thing that as we get older, our buttons get bigger and more plentiful?

What happens to the tolerance of youth, and the desire to get to know others' sunny side?

Just a thought.

 

[david b]

I just want to thank everyone for this thread.

Now I can turn off Jerry Springer.

 

[Ed_Davor]

I think this guy was one of those folks who like to shock people to make themselfs feel different and special.
That's the easiest way to build a cult around yourself. Do the oposite of what people expect, and you will be a big artist.
Same way, if you made a porn and aired it on a national television in daytime, you would be called an misunderstood artist just because it's shocking.

I don't like this stuff for two reasons:

-I see nothing exciting in corpses. When you cut out the social weight of it, the shock and all, all you get is a bunch of body parts on photos, that is like having pictures of car parts, which is boring really

-I'm sure the guy didn't ask those men wheather they would like their cut-off heads to be kissing in a photo that many people are seeing.
I know I sure would object to that if it were my head. It's just a matter of
courtesy toward the head owners. If he asked them before they died, fine, but don't think he did, so I think there is an issue of respect there.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Life is short...seek the positive.

Murray

 

[Sean]

Oh boy, I think I can see where this thread is going.

David mentioned this on page one, well I think it finally got there.. getting out the keys..