Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re:Nachtwey was Sally Mann, digest V17 #195
From: ARTHURWG@aol.com
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 13:07:49 EDT

Howard. As a journalist by profession I agree that pictures like these are a 
necessary record and proof that these events occured-- evidence that could or 
should lead to a "solution" of some kind or even help to prove guilt when  it 
can be located. . I don't have a problem with looking at them, exactly. I 
"love" great war photography like Capa and (my favorite) Don McCullin. What I 
was trying to say about Nachtwey, as opposed to some others, is that I see 
something intangible in his photos that I distrust and dislike. Unlike 
McCullin, for example, Nachtwey seems to hold himself superior to his 
subjects; like one critic said, it's difficult to distinguish the living from 
the dead. He seems a cold fish who might even enjoy, in some sense, his 
grizzly work. Perhaps this is unfair; but I don't buy into his self-described 
sainthood.  He may be doing the Lord's work, but I think he may be working 
for the devil. I will agree, however, that he is a great photojournalist.  
Arthur

Replies: Reply from "Gerry Walden" <gerrywalden@cwcom.net> (Re: [Leica] Re:Nachtwey was Sally Mann, digest V17 #195)