Martin Parr, love him or hate him?

Martin Parr love or hate?

  • love

    Votes: 48 63.2%

  • hate

    Votes: 28 36.8%
  • Total voters
    76
Status
Not open for further replies.
I meant on Warhol.

I can't help enlighten you on Parr as I am probably feeling the same about him as you are. I can use a 3 letter word to sum up my feeling "meh"

However I do like a lot of what the likes of Warhol, Hirst, Rothko etc, have done yet they seem to be unpopular on this thread so there we go.
It doesn't do for me what a Turner does, but I still like some of it.
 
Just wondering, how many people here have seen a Rothko in person? Or any famous photographer's work for that matter? Even with photographers I didn't really like seeing the images as prints definitely made me appreciate them more than if I was viewing them on a screen.
 
Yes, I spend a bit of time in galleries and agree that the art needs to be seen in person. I would say more so for paintings than photographs due to the sheer size of some of them and the paints used that give the various textures and strokes that cannot be appreciated in a picture.
 
I hadn't heard of Martin Parr before this thread, but having looked at his website, it's quite good. Some people won't get it, or will get it but just don't like it. Personally, I like to see a bit humour in street photography. Many of the images are not individually fantastic, composition wise etc but as a group of photos, they tell a story and paint an interesting picture of modern society. He also spots things most people would miss - he has a good eye.

Reminds me of http://www.mattstuart.com/ a bit

The Barry Island project sounds good, but I wouldn't even bother with the renovation stuff. Just seeing it as a run down old town makes for much more of a compelling story if you shoot it and tell it right.
 
Last edited:
I think hes pretty good, I find his stuff is packed and simple in the details, great stories individually many of them, and as a whole true honest documentary and far harder than it looks at being such simple looking snap shots, which only adds to the reality for me. He inspires me to shoot loser and more openly, look harder, notice other stuff and get my bloody head out of my bottom. ;)
 
Last edited:
Can't vote on this as never heard of this Parr fella before.

I suppose he is as famous as the last fella there was a thread about (can't remember his name but supposedly famous?).

Hopefully I will forget this bloke's name soon too, don't want any influences on my humble masterpieces ;)
 
you do realise people don't have to "get it" to either like or dislike something :wacky:

ernesto said:
Well done to all those who rather than accepting that they "don't get it" would rather brush it aside as crap and justify it to themselves.
All tastes are different and nobodies tastes are crap. Worth quite a few of you watching a three parter that Grayson Perry did last year expoloring tastes across the classes. He showed a really open mind and the series actually changed my view of why people like certain things but most importantly there is no right or wrong.


And before you ask who Grayson Perry is, he is one of those artists you would no doubt think is crap!
Click to expand...
 
DG Phototraining said:
If we don't get it - we're unlikely to like it and hence its pretty certain to be crap
Click to expand...

So that's the way these things are measured? If you don't like it it's crap.
Well.. I don't like your work.. so it's crap then.

Ok.. I get how that works now .. thanks :)



DG Phototraining said:
We are NEVER going to not 'get' it and not like it and yet think its brilliant :D
Click to expand...

There's loads of stuff I don't like, but I still think is brilliant. Maybe I just have an imagination.

DG Phototraining said:
But being fair minded we don't mind you arty-types liking it and (in many cases) paying huge sums of money for it, gives us something to laugh at, so thanks (y)
Click to expand...

It's OK.. we've been laughing at certain types of work for years... I suppose it's only fair you get a look in :)
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
So that's the way these things are measured? If you don't like it it's crap.
Well.. I don't like your work.. so it's crap then.

Ok.. I get how that works now .. thanks :)

There's loads of stuff I don't like, but I still think is brilliant. Maybe I just have an imagination.

It's OK.. we've been laughing at certain types of work for years... I suppose it's only fair you get a look in :)
Click to expand...

Be very careful how you post Pookeyhead otherwise you will be having some time off.
 
Sorry.... just thought that the popular consensus around here was that not liking something means it's crap. Was I wrong?
 
Bit of a shame though Colin, don't you think, that a logical fallacy can't be refuted by an "I refute it thus" type statement, and has to be negotiated as if walking a tight rope through fire.

I can see how Pookey could have phrased it in a way that would not have caught your attention, but surely this is not the Oxford Debating Society with it's expected linguistic standards.

I agree that outright insult should be dealt with, but.......

And I know the mods have a difficult job and I wouldn't argue any decision made. This is a question in the context of no decision having been made - yet.

Just a thought.
 
How can one person in a thread say they don't like Parr's work, and therefore it's crap... and that's fine... then if I say I don't like someone's work... and therefore determining it must also be crap by those same standards be not?

Have you ever considered that I DON'T think DGs work is crap at all (even though I don't like it), and I was actually highlighting the stupidity of his statement (that not liking something makes it crap)?

No.. didn't think so.
 
Love how some of you take almost everything posted on here so very personally. I don't think I've ever been on a more uptight forum.
 
ernesto said:
Hope that is not aimed at me
Click to expand...


It is, you and a few others who cannot just accept other's opinions. So what others think it's crap? No reason to call them ignorant for it, is there?

Again, I'm on the fence with this one, but I don't get why you , or anyone, get upset/defensive when others express an opinion. I can see why some would deem it as "crap" tbh. An up close view of some fat American chewing on fried chicken does nothing for me, but then some of the other images are interesting.
 
not for me... can't say i hate his work, but i'm just of the opinion that if someone is making this 'genre' their full time vocation.. then it should be more thought provoking and inspirational to me.. and it isn't.
 
If a reasoned argument can be put forward why you think something is rubbish, that is an opinion. "I don't like it, therefore it's crap", is an expression of personal taste.

The confusion between the two is probably why some people get 'worked up'.
 
ernesto said:
Yes, I am well aware that a lot of people are that ignorant.
Click to expand...

It's the alacrity with which you feel able to hand out this kind of broad-brush insult that I find extraordinary.

Someone up-thread likened attitudes like yours to religious zealotry. I am beginning to think they're exactly right. I would liken you to a medium or a homeopathist - Both implicitly and in some measure explicitly, you suggest that if someone is not open to the experience or touched by some ethereal meaning being communicated, they're in some way deficient. The great unwashed.

This gnostic attitude towards art diminishes it. You make it laughable.

I think good art "speaks", in precisely the same way that a good book flows. But if someone doesn't like a book or a photo, or a painting or sculpture, it is NOT a deficiency in the reader/viewer. It MAY be a deficiency in the communicator, or the medium, or it may simply be work that does not MESH with the reader/viewer.

But the first duty is with the communicator to communicate clearly. If they don't do that, or if they expect to communicate by means akin to telepathy, then the deficiency certainly is not with the reader/viewer.
 
Ed Sutton said:
If a reasoned argument can be put forward why you think something is rubbish, that is an opinion. "I don't like it, therefore it's crap", is an expression of personal taste.

The confusion between the two is probably why some people get 'worked up'.
Click to expand...

Are we not allowed to express personal taste then :cautious:

I still see no reason why anyone would get worked up over what someone else thinks about someone else's work, be it their opinion or their personal taste, no amount of arguing/debating will change that persons mind
 
rpsmith79 said:
I still see no reason why anyone would get worked up over what someone else thinks about someone else's work, be it their opinion or their personal taste, no amount of arguing/debating will change that persons mind
Click to expand...

A common signal of a failing argument is that it collapses into insult or derision. :shrug:
 
rpsmith79 said:
Are we not allowed to express personal taste then :cautious:
Click to expand...

To say 'I don't like that', 'it does nothing for me' or 'I don't get it' is fair enough. If you can say 'that's crap because....' is also fine. But to say 'I don't like that, it's crap'', is where the ignorance lies.
 
People saying "I don't like it, it's crap" are just omitting the "to me" - I don't see the big deal. I bet Parr himself wouldn't bat an eyelid if he read such posts. He'd shrug it off.
 
Ed Sutton said:
Then they ought to add 'to me'. :)
Click to expand...

There really is no need though, anyone who can't work out that that is one persons opinion without needing to be told it's their opinion needs to stop reading internet forums, IMO :LOL:
 
Pookeyhead said:
So that's the way these things are measured? If you don't like it it's crap.
Well.. I don't like your work.. so it's crap then.

Ok.. I get how that works now .. thanks :)





There's loads of stuff I don't like, but I still think is brilliant. Maybe I just have an imagination.



It's OK.. we've been laughing at certain types of work for years... I suppose it's only fair you get a look in :)
Click to expand...

You should chill out and give the insults a rest mate, because you called me "shallow" in post 59, and now you are calling someone else's work "crap".
Why bother to put "smilies" when it is obviously meant to offend.

Its just a pity that the mods don't have a closer look at your posts.
 
A 70's playground themed crit week would be fun. No reasoned crit allowed, only playground terms can be used, e.g. "crap", "ace", "brill", "fandabbydozey" (ok, maybe not that one) and they must be used as though presenting absolute fact and not the contributor's opinion.

Ace idea or what? :D
 
Last edited:
SimonH said:
It's the alacrity with which you feel able to hand out this kind of broad-brush insult that I find extraordinary.

Someone up-thread likened attitudes like yours to religious zealotry. I am beginning to think they're exactly right. I would liken you to a medium or a homeopathist - Both implicitly and in some measure explicitly, you suggest that if someone is not open to the experience or touched by some ethereal meaning being communicated, they're in some way deficient. The great unwashed.

This gnostic attitude towards art diminishes it. You make it laughable.

I think good art "speaks", in precisely the same way that a good book flows. But if someone doesn't like a book or a photo, or a painting or sculpture, it is NOT a deficiency in the reader/viewer. It MAY be a deficiency in the communicator, or the medium, or it may simply be work that does not MESH with the reader/viewer.

But the first duty is with the communicator to communicate clearly. If they don't do that, or if they expect to communicate by means akin to telepathy, then the deficiency certainly is not with the reader/viewer.
Click to expand...

Brilliant post, very succinct:clap:
 
Cagey75 said:
It is, you and a few others who cannot just accept other's opinions. So what others think it's crap? No reason to call them ignorant for it, is there?

Again, I'm on the fence with this one, but I don't get why you , or anyone, get upset/defensive when others express an opinion. I can see why some would deem it as "crap" tbh. An up close view of some fat American chewing on fried chicken does nothing for me, but then some of the other images are interesting.
Click to expand...

My comment was made in jest - taking a comment you made about taking things personally, personally.

However, I never get upset or defensive about anything on a forum. I have a tendency to gently prod at things to get disussion going as I find it a good way of getting different views that may or my not lead me to change how I think about things.
As for uptight people, they are the ones who react badly to my "style"
 
Last edited:
SimonH said:
It's the alacrity with which you feel able to hand out this kind of broad-brush insult that I find extraordinary.
Click to expand...

99% of what I say is tongue in cheek so nothing extraordinary about it whatseover. This is the fundamental problem with internet forums as a communication device, the intent or tone of what I write is missing - unless I go down the smileytastic route of course.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top