Re: [Leica] Photo whores {was Life magazine}

["Dan Post" <dwpost@email.msn.com>]

May I?
Troubled here. Just read an article in "Smithsonian". I found too many
sentence fragments. I had always admired Sir Winston's stating that there
was nothing quite as powerful as a simple declaritive Enlish sentence. I am
finding the constant misuse of words, like 'enormity', and shoddy writing to
be hand in hand with photographs that say nothing. There also seems to be a
concomitant phenomenon happening to published photographs. I supposed one
might describe them as the visual equivalents of sentence fragments. Like
the teacher's exam answers that had sentences without nouns or verbs, the
photos are predicated on nothing and show or declare very little. I am sure
it is difficult to compose a really good photograph; I been trying off and
on for over thirty years, and only occasionally do I come up with a
photgraphic statement I feel is 'good'. If I had depended on my talent to
eat on during that interim, my ample avordupois would have dissipated ages
ago!
I truly think that there must be something of the masochist in Marc to want
to be an editor! Having to disentangle fractured writing and fracture photos
into some semblance of order doesn't seem to be so much a career move, as it
seems an excercise in futility.
As might be said today, ' I don't hardly never read no newspapers nomore; I
used to be able to read readin', but I c'ain't seem to be able to read
writin' anymore!'
Can it be that fair to blame "bean counters"? I am constantly appalled at
the level of education hitting the job market now. It is hard to say that an
image is worth a thousand words, when a lot of youngster are hard put to
come up with a thousand words that make sense; how can they be expected to
create an image that says anything?
Just my opinion.
dwpost@msn.com