On its visual merits alone, this show could have conceivably earned my first zero star review in the history of this site, which pains me severely given my love for Gursky’s previous work. That said, after much reflection, I think it jumps just barely to the one star category, mostly because I would recommend seeing this work to consider for yourself how one of our most shining stars could swing and miss so egregiously.
via DLK COLLECTION.
{ 4 comments }
“…if these pictures were 20×24, we’d all say ho hum and think they were intriguing if forgettable scientific shots from National Geographic……”
Thank God somebody said it! I walked through this thing in 5 minutes and marveled at how many people were ‘Oohing’ and ‘Aahing’ about the genius they had just witnessed!
Did they know they weren’t from Nat Geo?
I have to poke a bit of fun at this because if am dumbfounded by his words. based on what I can see of the work. You get what you deserve, genius or no genius.
Fear not, small photographers, your sniffy hate will eventually make you a better and more successful person than at present.
(cross posted to dlk) I must confess I had no idea there was an emperor of contemporary photography. That said, the inability of photographers to understand photography and its application never ceases to astound, especially when it comes to fine art.
Great art never does back flips and sells once. It is a body of work. I can easily see how this (new) work is just as astounding as a vast room of wires or crowded beach. You can see an overview here: http://www.matthewmarks.com/artists/andreas-gursky/
If you don’t understand a piece, keep looking. You will.
Or just keep flipping through the pages. And you won’t. As far as the snide cracks and attempts to diminish this artist go, it also appears to me the lack of curiosity by banal critics is hardly making a dent.
Thanks for making me look at Gursky.
Comments on this entry are closed.