Another half submerged question lurking in the discussion, was really: are there standards by which we can assess the excellence or otherwise of a work of art? Is there is a qualitative difference between the novels of Tolstoy and those of Dan Brown – or should we just say, ‘if you like it, it’s as good as anything else’? Here, I think, the discussion often gets confused. Mainly futile, I think, as the unanswered question was surely better at what? It’s not clear that one can usefully compare -and rank -an early 19th century lyric poet with a 20th/21st singer-songwriter, because they aren’t really doing the same thing. But what makes something ‘better’ when it it comes to art?Ī few years ago, there was a debate in the pages of a British newspaper along the lines of ‘is Keats better than Bob Dylan?’. ![]() So it seems that there is the belief that judgment is entirely subjective, and yet, somehow, not. To this end certain photographers in the various genres (landscape, street, portrait etc) are held up as exemplars (Ansel Adams, Cartier Bresson etc). Some is about the technical business of using the camera to best effect, but much more is about the notion achieving the goal of making aesthetically ‘better’ pictures. On the other hand there is a tendency to search out the opinions of others, talking about improving, learning from other photographers and generally getting better at the craft. On the one hand, it is widely accepted that photographic results are subjective: if you like what you do, its enough: you should ‘shoot for you’, not for anyone else’s taste, because nobody can be right or wrong about what makes a good image. It wasn’t long before I noticed a paradox in the way they view what they do. When I first began to take photography seriously, as a practitioner as well as a viewer, I naturally discussed the activity with other photographers. How can I know what I think until I see what I say? -EM Forster De gustibus non est disputandum -Roman Maxim
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |