UPDATE 4/21: Missed it again! Today was a holiday in Massachusetts, so I was doing a little spring cleaning. Low and behold, I didn't check my email until later. Yes, Jeremias, I think we're not meant to have a Starn Twins print. Apparently, Colin and Luke missed the first one too.
So, I didn't check my "personal" email yesterday until after dinner because I was working on our newsletter. When I did, I found the 20x200 special email sitting there in my inbox.
Seeing that it was a Starns Twins Blindspot benefit edition, I knew right away when I clicked on the link that they'd be sold out, and of course they were. A month ago, somehow I did check my email at exactly the right time and was able to snag a Brian Ulrich, which is also totally sold out in all sizes. Alas, I missed this one. This is what I get for not signing up with my work email and attempting to keep work and home spearate...who am I kidding?!Congrats to those who did get one of these vellum prints, and a huge high five to Jen and Blind Spot!
Over on the Soth blog, there has been a hullabaloo about flickr. Earlier, Alec posted a comment Stephen Shore made about flickr and posed the question "where are the great pictures on flickr?"; today, he emailed and received Shore's response, calling for any ire to be redirected and for a truce to re-establish the "thoughtfulness and civility of debate." For me, as it always is on Soth's blog, it was the hope of higher discussion that inspired me to throw my 2 cents in. With 227+ comments and counting, I thought I'd highlight a few quotes, including my attempts to explain my fascination with such things, as both a form of introduction and closure. From Shane (not in comments, but on his blog): Venue aside, it’s really just a fact that all the greatest work is generally found hiding amongst everything that’s not; how could a single piece of art be particularly moving or especially nice to look at if all art was? ...It can be rather tragic to witness any previously tangible practice go digital (as Flickr is, for many, a replacement to a dusty photo album) and perhaps this is part of Shore’s frustration? From me: As has been echoed by now hundreds of times, flickr is a tool. Some use it for marketing, some for games, some for documenting, some as a diary, and some for art - just like photography itself. It’s not so much individual images for me, but the great uses that are so brilliant, much like an amazing archive or a powerful database. This is also similar to the purpose, function, and now renewed interest in vernacular photography. With the patina of time, will all flickr images gain such collector status (that is, if they can be retained later and perhaps become physical)? Flickr for me is a giant box of photos at a flea market that I can dive in, sort through, and take what I want from it and perhaps use or think about images in new ways...Signing off - WWST (What would Stieglitz think?)
From Ryan A: Being someone who is in the process of studying cultural anthropology, i think flickr and other online sites like it are amazing–and yes, i think they are fascinating insights into people’s lives. im not sure about the images gaining some kind of artistic collector status though. i like your flea market comparison though. it seems to me that photographers, writers, and many others are always going around trying to understand humanity and life. well, sites like flickr (whether art, vernacular shoebox nonsense, or what) give pretty amazing views/slices of SO MANY lives that it’s mindblowing really. when have we ever been able to access so many people? anthropologically, flickr is a gold mine. i dont really care how much great art is there. great art is so personal anyway. who knows.
From me: Hi Ryan! I think we’re coming at this from similar angles (from art history and anthropology). What I meant by collector status was really the fascination of an image divorced from its original use. i.e., if someone came across a shoebox full of some neat square photos that had circles in them (a group on flickr) but didn’t know about its origin, man would it draw a lot of interest, both money wise and in a museum! We showed a great documentary film a while back in conjunction with a show. Other People’s Pictures followed snapshot collectors and dealt with why people collect what they do. In a way, flickr allows folks to both photo and collect, groups and pools take that one step further. And yes, it is fascinating. This weekend I will go to Home Movie Day at the Harvard Film Archive (to find where and when in your city, go to http://www.homemovieday.com/). Will I see stunning art films? No. Will I see some glints of art and brilliance in someone’s old super 8 kodachrome? Yes. Will I see some amazing pieces of history, culture, and windows into people’s lives? Most definitely!
And lastly, from Ryan's blog, this comparison is apt: To me, it's a great tool, and it's incredibly fascinating to see the multitudes of ways that people employ it. Fine art be damned; I like Flickr. Speaking out against it is like coming out and saying you don't like paper. It's a tool. Some people use it to mail off their bills, some people use it to write the Grapes of Wrath.
Anyone who know me knows I love stuff. My apartment looks like a Victorian parlor. I am also an Antiques Roadshow geek. I was thrilled when a friend started working for them and got Bruce and I behind the scenes at a show in Philadelphia. I was disappointed that our stuff wasn't worth anything (and the appraisers weren't as excited about them as we were), but my heart beat fast when we were allowed to hang out in the green room where those who were chosen for taping were being prepped. We got to see their objects up close and hear even more stories. I keep hoping that I will discover a treasure someday, something that the shop owner won't recognize. So, I read with a mixture of horror and glee about a new Chinese television show in my latest Kovel's Komment's e-newsletter (seen below). What's next? Antiques Roadshow survivor? Wait, they've come close."'Collecting Everything Under Heaven' is the latest hot TV show in China, according to Reuters. It starts out like the Antiques Roadshow -- bring in an antique and get it appraised. But this is literally a "hit" show. If the piece is deemed a fake by the experts, it is smashed to bits with a hammer by Wang Gang, host of the show, famous actor, and collector. Since China is the largest source of fakes in the world -- everything from DVDs to medicine -- the show claims to be symbolic. Wang says, "We must eliminate the false and retain the true. I want to shock people with a smash." We bet this is one show that won't be copied in the U.S." - from Kovel's
