4 hours ago
Throw Me A Line : Somebody missed a trick when they were naming the new dog breeds, didn't they? I mean, surely the Cocker Spaniel/Poodle cross should be a cockadoodle? With the added bonus of when it relieves itself in the garden, it's onomatopoeically produced a Cock-a-doodle-poo. - What? Nobody promised you exclusive high brow commentary here. Huh? Oh, alright. Any high brow commentary here. Ahem. - As a more cerebral aside. [Yes please, some say with blessed relief and a desire to cleanse their mental palete. The majority have already left.] - Artistic criticism. I visited a profile this morning - of a body of work I enjoy very much - and they were bemoaning a critique of their recently produced book. It's a difficult one, eh? By putting work out there, you invite reviews; if you invite reviews, you invite criticism. Of course, there's a certain irony, then, that in highlighting your teeth grinding it provokes your followers - by definition, people that appreciate the work - to line up to critique the critic. - But, to play devil's advocate, I could even understand the criticism ... albeit, in isolation [they didn't post the entire review, just what I presume to have been a single lifted sentence], the wording did appear a wee bit harsh; arguably, the reviewer was potentially pigeonholing what they feel street photography should be, or in this specific case, equally arguably, lacked? Ultimately, all art is subjective. Egos less so. However, my own definition and desire for street photography isn't restrictive. Photography, whether it be street or any otherwise, certainly shouldn't be about wearing a creative straitjacket.