|
|
MFA?
There is one poster here who has an MFA. He includes it (proudly!) on every post.
He obviously knows nothing about logic, optics, physics, or chemistry. Whatever school awarded him this 'degree' ought to be shut down for incompetence. |
Hey, look, U.C., let's stay civil in this group, OK? You don't need to hurl
insults, and clearly none of us needs to see them. Photography is a mellow and intriguing profession for some and hobby for the rest of us. We can share knowledge, views, and opinions without vindictiveness or passing judgment on one another, can't we? If you need to indulge in such--as you have here--please find another space. "Uranium Committee" wrote in message om... There is one poster here who has an MFA. He includes it (proudly!) on every post. He obviously knows nothing about logic, optics, physics, or chemistry. Whatever school awarded him this 'degree' ought to be shut down for incompetence. |
"Jean-David Beyer" wrote in message ... Unfair to criticise an inanimate object for the shortcomings of its operator. -- .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. My Apologies ;~) |
Uranium Committee wrote:
"Jim Phelps" wrote in message ... "Uranium Committee" wrote in message .com... There is one poster here who has an MFA. He includes it (proudly!) on every post. He obviously knows nothing about logic, optics, physics, or chemistry. Whatever school awarded him this 'degree' ought to be shut down for incompetence. Why would you need to know any of the above four disciplines for a Masters in Fine Art? Aren't you one of those who profess Photography isn't "Art"? Photography not only ISN'T art, it CANNOT BE art. If it cannot be art, how is it that some photographs are better than others? That some can cause a deeply moving experience for the viewer? That a very few can touch one's very soul? -- .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 21:15:00 up 1 day, 23:56, 3 users, load average: 4.03, 4.17, 4.14 |
Uranium Committee wrote:
"Jim Phelps" wrote in message ... "Uranium Committee" wrote in message .com... There is one poster here who has an MFA. He includes it (proudly!) on every post. He obviously knows nothing about logic, optics, physics, or chemistry. Whatever school awarded him this 'degree' ought to be shut down for incompetence. Why would you need to know any of the above four disciplines for a Masters in Fine Art? Aren't you one of those who profess Photography isn't "Art"? Photography not only ISN'T art, it CANNOT BE art. If it cannot be art, how is it that some photographs are better than others? That some can cause a deeply moving experience for the viewer? That a very few can touch one's very soul? -- .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 21:15:00 up 1 day, 23:56, 3 users, load average: 4.03, 4.17, 4.14 |
David Nebenzahl wrote: On 12/4/2004 6:19 PM Jean-David Beyer spake thus: Uranium Committee wrote: "Jim Phelps" wrote in message ... "Uranium Committee" wrote in message om... There is one poster here who has an MFA. He includes it (proudly!) on every post. e obviously knows nothing about logic, optics, physics, or chemistry. Whatever school awarded him this 'degree' ought to be shut down for incompetence. Why would you need to know any of the above four disciplines for a Masters in Fine Art? Aren't you one of those who profess Photography isn't "Art"? Photography not only ISN'T art, it CANNOT BE art. If it cannot be art, how is it that some photographs are better than others? That some can cause a deeply moving experience for the viewer? That a very few can touch one's very soul? Lemme jump in here, No. snip |
David Nebenzahl wrote in message ...
On 12/4/2004 6:19 PM Jean-David Beyer spake thus: Uranium Committee wrote: "Jim Phelps" wrote in message ... "Uranium Committee" wrote in message om... There is one poster here who has an MFA. He includes it (proudly!) on every post. e obviously knows nothing about logic, optics, physics, or chemistry. Whatever school awarded him this 'degree' ought to be shut down for incompetence. Why would you need to know any of the above four disciplines for a Masters in Fine Art? Aren't you one of those who profess Photography isn't "Art"? Photography not only ISN'T art, it CANNOT BE art. If it cannot be art, how is it that some photographs are better than others? That some can cause a deeply moving experience for the viewer? That a very few can touch one's very soul? Lemme jump in here, being one of the few folks (on the planet, I'm guessing) who actually somewhat shares MS's view of photography/art (though I'm not quite so absolutist about it): The fact that something moves the viewer doesn't make it art: art requires other attributes in order to be art. Lots of things can cause "deeply moving experience[s]", but not all of them are art. However, even if photographs aren't art (as I believe they are not), there are certainly many aspects of a photograph that can make one better than another. Some of these things are fairly well agreed upon by those who take, view and criticize photographs, while others are, let's say, a lot more subjective. Which brings me to an issue I've been wanting to raise with regard to this whole "is photography art?" thing, or more properly, the subject you broached, the relative merit of photographs. That is a pretty subjective matter, but I find it interesting that this isn't true certain artforms, particularly music. In music, there are actually pretty objective standards by which you can measure ability and competence, which is what happens, for instance, when one auditions for a position in an orchestra. The judges can pretty well tell who's "better" than who. (Of course, there are lots of other aspects of music that are lots more subjective.) I think it's harder, though, to tell whether one photograph is better than another. You are obviously trolling here, but just in case you are not I want to enlighten you. I am not going to claim to be an expert in art history or critisism, just point to some who are. The whole "is photography art" debate is as old as the medium itself. You are stuck in the early part of the last century in your thinking. People who have the view that photography cannot be art are the same people who walk into the Abstract Expressionism wing at MoMA and say "I could paint that!" |
David Nebenzahl wrote in message ...
On 12/4/2004 6:19 PM Jean-David Beyer spake thus: Uranium Committee wrote: "Jim Phelps" wrote in message ... "Uranium Committee" wrote in message om... There is one poster here who has an MFA. He includes it (proudly!) on every post. e obviously knows nothing about logic, optics, physics, or chemistry. Whatever school awarded him this 'degree' ought to be shut down for incompetence. Why would you need to know any of the above four disciplines for a Masters in Fine Art? Aren't you one of those who profess Photography isn't "Art"? Photography not only ISN'T art, it CANNOT BE art. If it cannot be art, how is it that some photographs are better than others? That some can cause a deeply moving experience for the viewer? That a very few can touch one's very soul? Lemme jump in here, being one of the few folks (on the planet, I'm guessing) who actually somewhat shares MS's view of photography/art (though I'm not quite so absolutist about it): The fact that something moves the viewer doesn't make it art: art requires other attributes in order to be art. Lots of things can cause "deeply moving experience[s]", but not all of them are art. However, even if photographs aren't art (as I believe they are not), there are certainly many aspects of a photograph that can make one better than another. Some of these things are fairly well agreed upon by those who take, view and criticize photographs, while others are, let's say, a lot more subjective. Which brings me to an issue I've been wanting to raise with regard to this whole "is photography art?" thing, or more properly, the subject you broached, the relative merit of photographs. That is a pretty subjective matter, but I find it interesting that this isn't true certain artforms, particularly music. In music, there are actually pretty objective standards by which you can measure ability and competence, which is what happens, for instance, when one auditions for a position in an orchestra. The judges can pretty well tell who's "better" than who. (Of course, there are lots of other aspects of music that are lots more subjective.) I think it's harder, though, to tell whether one photograph is better than another. You are obviously trolling here, but just in case you are not I want to enlighten you. I am not going to claim to be an expert in art history or critisism, just point to some who are. The whole "is photography art" debate is as old as the medium itself. You are stuck in the early part of the last century in your thinking. People who have the view that photography cannot be art are the same people who walk into the Abstract Expressionism wing at MoMA and say "I could paint that!" |
"Jim Phelps" wrote in message ...
"Jef" wrote in message om... Regardless of text books and teachings (they are not always correct as they are not always current), I believe the definition of art is made by the viewing population at large. Casual photography at the family reunion is not art, on this we'll almost all agree. However, photography as a medium can be art as the population at large has accepted photographs to be art. Placing photographs in an art museum is one means to prove this test. Oh, please! That is no 'test'! Photographs need to be maintained, especially after the photographer has passed away. Who's going to take care of them? Photographs are made to be looked at. Where are you going to put photography so people can see it? An 'art' museum is a convenient place for exhibiting and preserving photographs. Many photographs that are simply records of the past (with no pretentions of artistry) are kept by museums too, simply because museums have the facilities to keep them in good condition and provide access to them when demanded. Not every community can support an historical museum, a natural history museum, and an art museum: so it is not uncommon for a given facility to serve all these needs. Third, All, I did not wish to start the "photography, is it art" question. I am truly sorry it has degenerated into that topic. Too many emotions and firmly held beliefs there. Worse than religion or politics. Anyway, what I was trying to say to UC is that a person with a MFA is more likely to understand the aesthetics of photography than someone who's major claim to fame in life is working in a camera store. I have a BA in Philosophy. I have published at the Ph.D. level. Have you? I put myself through college working in a camera store. So what? Some Ph.D.'s end up as truck drivers. Jim |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:11 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
PhotoBanter.com