Charles Bukowski was a wonderful poet. See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRc6mHS9PjE
He's the Robert Frost of a different era.
I enjoyed (but disagreed) the talk on criteria that someone had posted by Brooks Jensen (http://www.lenswork.com/podcast/LW0639%20-%20Criteria%20Part%202.mp3), and also thought that it somewhat defines the argument on this forum. I thought it was very short-sighted in that the names he mentioned (Adams, Weston, Evans, Lange) all defined their own criteria and thumbed their nose at existing standards, just as Tina Barney and Charles Bukowski did. In fact, I sometimes look at history of art books with the idea that, as I turn the pages, each is doing something they weren't supposed to do. A curator from from MOMA once said, "Art should make you think and feel, and hopefully take you to a place you haven't been." Life is too short to be shown the same stuff over and over again. Let's break the molds.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Great and Vast
The Chinese character for ‘great’ can also be written with a dot. In Shinto they say, “Placing the dot in the center is the secret of Shint...
-
Some have asked how to post a comment on a blog. The secret is to click on the word "comments" which is circled in red above. ... -
I heard these sentiments in some recent health care discussions: •Everyone has the right to healthcare. •America is way behind other countri...
-
Kate asked if sounding like Karl Marx is good or bad. I've been thinking about that. And Mr. Obama will be talking tonight about how he ...
1 comment:
I am not certain about who said what, but I am pretty sure someone said something condescending and perhaps even fatuous. H.
Post a Comment