Rainer Maria Rilke
Im Jardin des Plantes, Paris
Sein Blick ist vom Vorübergehn der Stäbe
so müd geworden, daß er nichts mehr hält.
Ihm ist, als ob es tausend Stäbe gäbe
und hinter tausend Stäben keine Welt.
Der weiche Gang geschmeidig starker Schritte,
der sich im allerkleinsten Kreise dreht,
ist wie ein Tanz von Kraft um eine Mitte,
in der betäubt ein großer Wille steht.
Nur manchmal schiebt der Vorhang der Pupille
sich lautlos auf -. Dann geht ein Bild hinein,
geht durch der Glieder angespannte Stille -
und hört im Herzen auf zu sein.
In Spanish it sounds like a love poem….
Thank you for your compliment.
I don’t consider myself as an artist, not even a very good photographer.
There are many, many great photographers around here, that have much better pictures and higher skills in photography than I do.
But this is not about self-evaluation.
The point is merely, that everybody finds it very important nowadays, that their work is considered as an “Act of Art”.
As if everything else isn’t worth anything.
Photography itself is a very important craft, which has a wide range of reaching people, be it thought-provoking or southing or informing.
Art can do that to. Music can do that too. Poems or novels can do that too.
But they all are different things.
Otherwise we wouldn’t have a different word for each…
Does it make any difference to you, if I were a kid or stupid?
Well, some say, kids and stupids always say the truth. :)
But, I reassure, I have had my share of life experience…
Anyway, the more interesting question is,
WHY is it so IMPORTANT for you, that “Photography” is considered as “Art”?
Is something less important, beautiful or meaningful, if it is called “Photography” instead of “Art”?
The problem is, that too many people nowadays consider themselves an "Aritst", using Art as an excuse for their shitty anti-social behaviour.
First of all, Photographers are No Artists.
Some of them might have a gift to see and take beautiful or interesting pictures of special moments, or know their craft very well by putting it into the right light or shape. I'll give you that.
However, if photgraphers are honest to themselves, they just take pictures of other people's or nature's art and creations.
Real Art means creating something.
Photography is just taking a picture of something that already is there, which somebody else or nature did.
What do you think?
It’s so easy to criticize art, and far more difficult to understand why someone likes something that you don’t. When I see something I don’t like, I try to understand why I had the negative reaction. The answers can be pretty telling. In that way, even the art that I don’t like can tell me something about myself, and it has served its purpose.
Just a thought.
Oh, this is one of the posts where you were to hit the ‘Like” button, because you first go “Yeah,yeah, the man is definetly right:”
But, on second thought: NO.
I am allowed to dislike something, because it is too violant or too disgusting. Especially some photographers give up every responsibility, and just present violant or morally questionable picutures to society and say: ‘Here, deal with it.’
But they themselves are doing NOTHING except taking these picuture, leaving the others alone with something, they didn’t want to see in the first place.