lee-friedlanders-intimate-portraits-of-his-wife-through-sixty-years-of-marriage

[slackercrurster]

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/p...s-of-his-wife-through-sixty-years-of-marriage

I'm not much of a fan of his. I like a few of his photos. But he is an ancient throwback to the golden age of photography.

Here is an interview of Freindlander as a bonus!

https://www.nypl.org/audiovideo/live-nypl-lee-friedlander-giancarlo-t-roma-passion-projects

 

[jtk]

I "like" “Cannon Beach, Oregon,” 1997.

My tendency is to avoid using "but" in conversations/writing because its such a weenie-kind of word. Someone can't commit to "liking" or "disliking" or to writing more fully about "why" one likes or dislikes.

I don't think many "street" photographers are so obviously as good at relationships with subjects as Friedlander often is...

 

[slackercrurster]

I "like" “Cannon Beach, Oregon,” 1997.

My tendency is to avoid using "but" in conversations/writing because its such a weenie-kind of word. Someone can't commit to "liking" or "disliking" or to writing more fully about "why" one likes or dislikes.

I don't think many "street" photographers are so obviously as good at relationships with subjects as Friedlander often is...

The but is the excuse to write about him as a throwback from the golden age or I would not have written this on my liking of his work alone. Same as if I sent in something about Winogrand. Don't like his work on the whole. Even more so for Eggleston. But both are popular with many photogs. The but tells you not to confuse the fact that I don't like his work even though I'm sending it in as news. The but tells you I am not enthusiast about something, just half-ass like it.

 

[jvo]

i appreciate the opportunity to look at his photography again... hearing the interview though will put you to sleep!

 

[awty]

But why are they note worthy?
They dont give me any connection or any idea of personality. Look similar to any other family snaps, except better photo quality than average.

 

[CMoore]

But why are they note worthy?
They dont give me any connection or any idea of personality. Look similar to any other family snaps, except better photo quality than average.

This happens with ALL hobbies.
But to answer your question.....for the SAME reason guitar players will listen, for 20 minutes, to Jimmy Page talk about what strings he used, or what tubes, or what amp, or what pedal, or how much Heroin he used.
Once a Photographer, Musician, Athlete, becomes "famous". the most mundane things often become of great interest to their Fans/Admirers.
It just kind of follows. Everybody wants to know what Superman's cape is made of, even though, if they had it, they could still not fly like him.
You could make a book of 70 excellent photographs from most anybody on this forum. They are just pictures for F sake, not magic.Then that book s what is focused on.
Not all of their crappy photos, or all their lousy prints, or that they cheated on their wife with a 16 year old, or they abused their daughter, or cheated on their taxes, or were impossible to live with, or drove drunk, or never gave a dime to charity.
Fame (tends to) raises a person above scrutiny.
How many times have you heard the phrase.....Separate the art from the artist.
What for.?
They would not do the same for you or me.
I am NOT saying Lee was bad in any way. He might have been a peach of a guy.
I am simply pointing out how fame (often) changes "everything".
Look at a site like Yahoo for example. MILLIONS of people are dying to know what car somebody (famous) bought, or what their girlfriend bought them for Valentines day, or who cuts their stupid hair.
Fame elevates people into the realm of Great Interest.!

There is a GREAT interview, on Dick Cavett, of George Harrison. To paraphrase......Dick asks him if there is anything he would like to talk about. George says, Not Really, i do not have much to say. Dick laughs and the audience laughed. But George says, what i mean is, I am just a normal person. You have me on your show because of that band i was in.
The Beatles made him famous. That is the ONLY reason his Opinion/Thoughts are (were) suddenly of interest to The World.

 

[awty]

This happens with ALL hobbies.
But to answer your question.....for the SAME reason guitar players will listen, for 20 minutes, to Jimmy Page talk about what strings he used, or what tubes, or what amp, or what pedal, or how much Heroin he used.
Once a Photographer, Musician, Athlete, becomes "famous". the most mundane things often become of great interest to their Fans/Admirers.
It just kind of follows. Everybody wants to know what Superman's cape is made of, even though, if they had it, they could still not fly like him.
You could make a book of 70 excellent photographs from most anybody on this forum. They are just pictures for F sake, not magic.Then that book s what is focused on.
Not all of their crappy photos, or all their lousy prints, or that they cheated on their wife with a 16 year old, or they abused their daughter, or cheated on their taxes, or were impossible to live with, or drove drunk, or never gave a dime to charity.
Fame (tends to) raises a person above scrutiny.
How many times have you heard the phrase.....Separate the art from the artist.
What for.?
They would not do the same for you or me.
I am NOT saying Lee was bad in any way. He might have been a peach of a guy.
I am simply pointing out how fame (often) changes "everything".
Look at a site like Yahoo for example. MILLIONS of people are dying to know what car somebody (famous) bought, or what their girlfriend bought them for Valentines day, or who cuts their stupid hair.
Fame elevates people into the realm of Great Interest.!

Fair enough. I know nothing of the man, had to look him up. The pictures of his wife seem to be more of his personality than hers, seems to be very reserved, a little sad.......in my naive opinion.

 

[jtk]

The but is the excuse to write about him as a throwback from the golden age or I would not have written this on my liking of his work alone. Same as if I sent in something about Winogrand. Don't like his work on the whole. Even more so for Eggleston. But both are popular with many photogs. The but tells you not to confuse the fact that I don't like his work even though I'm sending it in as news. The but tells you I am not enthusiast about something, just half-ass like it.

.

OK, understood. Me, I think I see something about a well known photographers relationship and something about time itself. I reject the popular idea that there ever was a "golden age"...nostalgia is a feeble aesthetic.

I especially agree about Eggleston.