Art? Junk?

I've got a thing about Holgas, Lomos, Dianas, Lensbaby's etc. I think they're junk, I think what they produce is junk. If you want to use one as a bit of fun, then go ahead. Its not what I would consider as having a good time but who am I to stop you?


What really gets my blood pressure going is that certain people try to describe their blurred, out of focus, faulty mistakes as "art". This verges on the criminal. The idea that these pathetic attempts to justify incompetence, lack of imagination and creativity as artistic beggars belief. 


I'm currently engaged in a forum debate with a "fine artist" (his description, not mine) who seems to think that I'm some kind of Phillistine because I can't appreciate the "uniqueness of these cameras in their abilities to communicate the artists vision" What is this rubbish? Is there a manual somewhere that gives you a list of meaningless phrases like this with which to justify your ineptitude?


You could I suppose attempt to play Sketches of Spain on a vuvuzela and call it art. Indeed these "fine artists" seem to think that any of their activities can be considered "art". We already have to put up with the likes of Tracey Emin, and I've always wondered if the amount of money that she earns is enough to compensate for the ridicule and derision that she gets. 


Of course if you don't appreciate junk art, you're a moron, a neaderthal, or an Archie Bunker as my "fine artist" described me. Well actually its these "fine artists" themselves who are the morons and the neanderthals. Indeed since cavemen (and women) were producing works of art far superior in their execution, vision and social relevance than anything these purveyors of the ordinary can come up with, they are probably not even at that level.


In the film of Jules Feiffers Little Murders Elliot Gould plays a depressed apathetic photographer who ends up taking pictures of dog turds. His work becomes the height of artistic chic and he is celebrated by the "art elite". 


Satires like this demonstrate the pretension, the embracing of the perverse and shocking, and the glorification of the ugly that dominates much of what passes for art these days. We have "artists" too concerned about making a reputation (and making money) to even make any pretence about actually learning any skills and critics too frightened about being seen as old-fashioned or "fuddy-duddys" to actually exercise any judgement about what is put before them.


The sickening thing is that there are actually people who take this nonsense seriously. They actually seem to believe that taking pictures on a useless piece of equipment somehow turns them from a humble photographer into an artist. Just what level of self-delusion do you have to operate on to believe this? What incredibly small circle of fantasists do you inhabit that actually gives your "work" the seal of approval? Does a little voice ever trouble these people in the middle of the night? Do they ever have the slightest concern that what they are producing and attempting to justify is actually what the rest of the world thinks it is? 


Many of the people who promote this "grunge photography" get very defensive and aggressive in their reaction to criticism of their efforts. Doesn't this indicate that somewhere lurking in their brains there is a notion that they have something that needs defending? When the vast majority of people who look at "images" created by these worthless pieces of junk think of them as indicating that the camera is in dire need of repair, isn't there a message there? Looks like a duck, walks like a duck etc.


Much of what is presented to us as "artistic" these days is unfortunately treated with contempt and incredulity, as a result of this perverse point of view. In the rush of the untalented to get their noses in the trough, I wonder how many genuine creative people with important things to show us, get trampled and left by the wayside? 

The Enigma that is "The Photographer"

Several things have puzzled us about photographers:-

Why do Photographers call lenses "glass"? Lens is a perfectly good word, shorter too. In answer to the phrase "I've got some great glass" reply "Well put a double scotch in one and pass it here"

Why do Photographers take landscape pictures in dull light and then convert them to black and white? Usually accompanying them with the phrase "I was interested more in the tones and textures" Translation - "I know its rubbish, but its black and white, so I can pretend its art"

Why do photographers think pinhole cameras are interesting? Instead of just another way to make a rubbish picture.

Why do photographers think Lensbaby's are interesting? Instead of just another way to make an rubbish picture.

Why do photographers think Lomo cameras are interesting? Instead of...... you get the idea.

Why do photographers think Holga cameras etc. etc....... See above.

Why do photographers buy security camera lenses that the company who made them has been trying to get rid of for years and then say something like "I love the vignetting" ?

Why do photographers buy some beaten up old camera at a car boot sale for a few pounds and then spend £7000+ having hand tooled replacement parts made only to find the camera when restored to pristine condition takes pictures no better than a pinhole camera, Lensbaby, Holga, Lomo, Security camera lens (sorry, glass) etc.

Why do photographers post endless pictures of their cats in forums?

Why do photographers post endless pictures of their dogs in forums?

Why do photographers pack two bodies, 6 lenses, teleconverter, 2 flashguns, spare batteries, extra memory cards and tripod into a rucksack and then go off into the garden to take a picture of their cat (or dog) ?

Why do photographers think HDR images look "great"? Or does it stand for Horrible Disgraceful Rubbish?

Why do photographers take a rubbish picture then rather than delete it start looking down the Photoshop filter menu? "Mmmm.... Mezzotint looks interesting"

Why do photographers answer a forum post saying "Which of these lenses do you think is the best" by saying "Well I have never used either of those but......."?

Why do photographers answer a forum post about absolutely anything at all by saying "Well I use (long list of equipment) and I find that serves me well?

Why do photographers walk around photographic shows carrying equipment that would take a picture of an ant from 3 miles away?

Why do photographers trample each other to death to get a photograph of a girl in a bikini at a photographic show? Or is this the answer to the previous question?

Why do photographers put black tape over their cameras names to fool muggers and burglars into thinking that their cameras are worthless, when in fact muggers and burglars walk around looking for photographers with black tape over their cameras name in order to "pay them a visit later"?

Why do photographers walk up to another photographer who is using a tripod and say "What are you photographing? The answer of course is "I'm shooting in black and white because I'm interested in the tones and textures" Translation - "Well bugger all actually!"

Why do "wildlife" photographers dress from head to toe in army surplus? Do they know something we don't or are sparrows really dangerous?

Why do "wildlife photographers" shoot from "hides" ? Is it because they don't want the wildlife to see their army surplus?

Why do "street photographers" take pictures of down and outs who are usually too weak from lack of food to tell them to "go away" or words to that effect. Why don't they take pictures of 18 stone bald guys in Doc Martins with a swastika tattooed on their forehead instead? Maybe if they wore the army surplus.....?

Why do photographers who roam the streets taking unflattering pictures of people and annoying them beyond belief then howl "Its a police state" when said people complain about being bothered by a "Nutter with a camera" ?

Write your answer to this last question on a postcard and send it to Martin Parr.