“Writers always envy artists, would trade places with them in a moment if they could. The painter’s life seems less ascetic, less monkish, less hunched. Instead of the austere mess of the desk there is the chaos of the studio: dirty coffee cups, paint-smudged cassette decks, drawings of the artist’s girlfriend, naked, on the walls … In the age of the computer the writer’s office or study will increasingly resemble the customer service desk of an ailing small business. The artist’s studio, though, is still what it has always been: an erotic space. For the writer the artist’s studio is, essentially, a place where women undress.”—Geoff Dyer, Out of Sheer Rage (via erasing.org) (via caseyagollan)
At first it put me off. I thought, why won’t he just answer the question? But the more I read, the more refreshing Erwitt’s attitude was. Here was a photographer who wasn’t afraid to say “I don’t know”. It seems the perfect counter to today’s culture of specificity, in which photographers are expected to plan out their projects top to bottom and be ready to explain them in a concise three paragraph spiel. For many photo projects nowadays the explanation often takes precedence over the images. You read the artist’s statement and you don’t even need to see the photos.
Erwitt is the antithesis. Photographs before theory. Can you imagine any of today’s hot young photo stars being brave enough to give answers like this?
Diamonstein: What are really saying [in your photos] about the whole question of personal identity?
Unlucky people often fail to follow their intuition when making a choice, whereas lucky people tend to respect hunches. Lucky people are interested in how they both think and feel about the various options, rather than simply looking at the rational side of the situation. I think this helps them because gut feelings act as an alarm bell - a reason to consider a decision carefully.
Unlucky people tend to be creatures of routine. They tend to take the same route to and from work and talk to the same types of people at parties. In contrast, many lucky people try to introduce variety into their lives. For example, one person described how he thought of a colour before arriving at a party and then introduced himself to people wearing that colour. This kind of behaviour boosts the likelihood of chance opportunities by introducing variety.
Lucky people tend to see the positive side of their ill fortune. They imagine how things could have been worse. In one interview, a lucky volunteer arrived with his leg in a plaster cast and described how he had fallen down a flight of stairs. I asked him whether he still felt lucky and he cheerfully explained that he felt luckier than before. As he pointed out, he could have broken his neck.
“It seems where feelings really get hurt is if I exhibited this picture and sold it. The intellectual argument stops fast and the commodity one begins there. Plagiarism begets ownership and so forth…. But I can’t help but wonder why this isn’t different than the Shore picture. Is it OK to re-photograph a Shore, Jackson or Atget because they received their accolades and Flickr user eyeseeyou hasn’t? With content based photography the issue is a tough one irregardless and like the readymade will always be rife with arguments.”—
Brian Ulrich on his photographs ‘strongly influenced by others’
“When we talk about creativity, we’re talking about ideas that are novel, that are good and that are appropriate for the task you need to do. With creativity, with intelligence and with wisdom there’s always a big decision. The big decision with creativity is to defy the crowd. It’s to buy low and sell high in the world of ideas. A creative person is someone who decides to produce ideas, to support ideas that go against the crowd, and that is like buying low, doing the opposite of what other people are doing.”—Leadership Is Something You Decide To Do - Forbes.com
“I feel like so many are caught in the bind of admiring, and seeking to emulate, what someone else has created. Seeing success, and thinking it takes only a set of procedures to accomplish it. A sequence, set and named, more than a bravely, unwittingly followed interior agenda, something moving you forward that can hardly be identified, quantified, or labeled.”—From RWE’s “Self-Reliance.” « LITTLE BROWN MUSHROOM BLOG
“The purpose of the installation, Mr. Sims went on, is to stimulate social interaction, encourage people to re-examine their preconceptions and start cross-cultural conversations on the order of one he had in 1992, shortly after moving to Ulster to study art. “We were having a party in the house where I was living,” he explained, “and this guy said to me, ‘What’s an English bastard like you doing in my country?’ I said, ‘What’s a Fenian bastard like you doing in my kitchen?’ ””—Olympic Overload? In Vancouver, an Artwork With Barkeeps - NYTimes.com
Public limited companies are amoral. They’re driven purely by their constitutional requirement to turn as large a profit as possible for their shareholders. People can be good or evil, ambitious or lazy, angry or fearful – plcs are none of these things. They unthinkingly, unswervingly, pursue money – that is their programming.
To this end, they’d murder or steal if it weren’t for the risk of prosecution, and do so in its absence. People are different. While the law is a disincentive, the main reason most of us don’t kill, punch or burgle is that we think it’s wrong and consequently prefer not to. Corporations have no such moral sense.
““I’ve been banned for life from Pearl Paint for shoplifting, and I can’t complete my graduate degree without access to the store,” she explained breathlessly to Waters after the lecture. A long line of students waiting to get his signature behind her already seemed impatient. “Can you write me a letter explaining that I’m rehabilitated?” A slight pause…”Are you going to do it again?” asked Waters. “No,” she replied. “Sure.” He shrugged his shoulders and wrote his letter on the program press release.”—
“The sad thing is photography - galleries, magazines, academia - favour that kind of ego and the endless self-promotion that go with it. Endless proselytising of one’s self, to the point where one actually believes it, is not consistent with a well-balanced, loving personality. Is there a middle way, or do you have to be an egomaniac to get ahead? Or just rich? Or well-connected? Or just capable of getting things finished and done? Or just capable of being able to put a few sentences together, or a few pictures, or stick to one idea and not wander off on a massive digression? Or all of the above?”—Colin Pantall’s blog: Figjam - I would sell on personality alone
“What the World Needs Now is the theme of this conference. … What the world really needs now is for us all to get off our asses and do something to try changing the rules of the game. The rules that let agribusiness companies shove their crap into our schools and make our kids obese (in a nod to Jamie Oliver), the rules that create global poverty every day, by perpetuating the same old rules of colonialism in glitzy modern garb, the rules that mean that malnutrition vastly outranks any other disease as cause of mortality in the developing world. And there’s no vaccine for malnutrition, and mosquito-zappers won’t do a thing about it. It’s only by changing the rules of the game that any substantial change can possibly occur.”—TED Conference, TED Talks. All about great ideas, technology - Salon.com
“ALEX WEBB: Saying “run an anatomy of the scene” makes the process sound highly analytical. Nothing could be further from the truth. My process is not about thought, not about analysis, but rather about feeling the totality of a scene and responding intuitively, emotionally, non-rationally. I have sometimes used the word “smell” in this context (and I think I am paraphrasing Cartier-Bresson) specifically because smell is sensory, not rational. The process can be a bit mysterious. When I photograph, I sense the possibility of something — something about the feel of a place, the situation, some impending moment, the light, the color, the space, the shapes — and I often hang out and wait, hoping that something will happen, something will emerge. But I’m never sure quite what this something is.”—TWO QUESTIONS: On Framing and Philosophy; On Multimedia and Text/Image Synergy «
Now, I ask you—the publisher—whether you’re devoting enough corporate energy, resources and financial backing to your editorial staff in order to actually produce an indispensable editorial package? If the answer is yes, then why are you charging so little for such a valuable product? Ask the Economist how it feels about its edit and its worth. Why do you think it can charge a premium and you can’t? What makes it so special? You guessed it—its edit is worth that price, or so the reader believes, and that is all that matters.
The answer to the publishing industry’s woes is to provide something worth paying for. For far too long we have been lured with the easy money and wicked ways of our advertising mistress. Well, in the past few years we got dumped. And it hurts. But I say we pick ourselves up out of the gutter and find our self-worth once again. Stop firing the editors and writers, and start paying for the production of excellence. There is no other choice. - Robert M. Sacks
“The point of having dreams in the first place isn’t just so you can zone out the next time your significant other starts whining about having to unload the dishwasher again (although no one will fault you); the point of having dreams is so that you can propel your life toward an ideal you’ve envisioned for yourself. You’ve got to protect that vision, or risk letting it fade into the noise.”—The Smart Ass Guide to Dealing with Dream Zappers