Inferences based on sparse information, sure. No information, not so. What jollies? I'm just debating here. For all we really know, she never took any of the photos.Large leaps of convolutions with sparse information nails it. No personal notes, no diary, and certainly no autobiography. But this is very much off topic. Go to the other thread to get your jollies off.
I really like the concluding paragraph of the review:
If you read enough biographies, you realize that the genre has a fatal flaw, a system error: Every person is unknowable, not least of all to themselves. There is, in everyone, some small cinder of truth that never sees the light of day. Biographers pretend that this cinder can be revealed, and that order can be imposed upon an unruly life. That’s a lie. Ann Marks hasn’t solved the mystery of Maier—why would we want her to? The photographer’s mystery remains intact, suffusing the thousands of indelible images she left behind in those storage lockers. It’s better to look there for the truth of her life, in those pictures of the world that she put away, as if she saw, and understood, what the rest of us never would."
From Anne Marks biography of Vivian. it seems that her mental problems did not keep her from photographing. It may have, however, kept her from exhibiting.
Marks mention that she did attend, at least twice, the 1955 Family of Man exhibit. But it may have been to her more a vindication of what she was already doing rather than direction/influence.
Btw, Marks biography is a good read.
No. It is about Vivian Maier and her photography. Just not legal issues. Read the original post.Please keep this thread for discussing Vivian Maier's photography and not her life. There is another thread where you are free to trash her as much as your heart desires, but not here.
No. It is about Vivian Maier and her photography. Just not legal issues. Read the original post.
It's your thread. Why don't you start us out? What are your favorite Vivian Maier photographs and why?You missed the history and the memo, this thread as the title states is about her photography. Go back to trashing the other thread.
And which one would that be?You missed the history and the memo, this thread as the title states is about her photography. Go back to trashing the other thread.
And which one would that be?
Thanks. So helpful.The one you missed.
And which one would that be?
If we are going to discuss Vivian Maier's photography, it seems appropriate to discuss factors that may have influenced that photography..
No, but a lot of people interacted with her during their lives. In fact, she had a very meaningful effect on many of them.There are no interviews with her, she never worked with others as a photographer, she never took photos for anyone - photography as a practise had nothing to do with her work at any point during her life.
a lot of people interacted with her during their lives. In fact, she had a very meaningful effect on many of them.
Right, it's like Vivian Maier meets the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principal. The asking of the question renders the answer uncertain.None of it is reliable. All of it is tainted by the knowledge "oh, now she's famous and wasn't she talented".
None of it is reliable. All of it is tainted by the knowledge "oh, now she's famous and wasn't she talented". Practically nothing documentary regarding her photography exists, except the word of people who were per-adolescent at the time the photos were shot.
It's fodder for gawkers.
If you read enough biographies, you realize that the genre has a fatal flaw, a system error: Every person is unknowable, not least of all to themselves. There is, in everyone, some small cinder of truth that never sees the light of day. Biographers pretend that this cinder can be revealed, and that order can be imposed upon an unruly life.
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?