what it normally means is that the photograph is a bunch of arse and the ‘photographer’ has written some wordy heap of bollocks to go with it.
and everyone falls all over it because they’re too proud to admit that they’re not exactly sure what the ‘conceptual photographer’ is really going on about…]]>
I’m thinking especially about Uta Barth, here: “I will take a picture of a window, and then another picture of the same window from slightly to the left. This represents BLAH BLAH BLAH”.]]>
“Gursky provides viewers with a new visual vocabulary in which to comprehend the massive changes that have been brought on through globalization and commercialism,” (http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/newswire/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003466018)
What the fuck? Say that with a straight face.
I’ll take a Meyerowitz photo of real humans close up and personal over a gursky abstraction any day.]]>