SHOWstudio

Blog Comments

All your replies and responses to SHOWstudio Blog articles here

'Films for SHOWstudio #02:' by Jez Tozer

Showing messages 31–40 of 46
Karl Fuler
Karl Fuler
United Kingdom
In reply to Brooke Taylor:

Nonsense! one of the great things about showstudio is that we can air our views honestly in a way we may be scared to in 'real life'. Clearly Showstudio does present some pretentious and poor work and it is a good thing that, maybe for the first time, the authors get some honest feedback.

Reply to this >



Galileo's Universe
Galileo's Universe
Greenland
In reply to Karl Fuler:

Man Ray
1922, Kiki de Montparnasse.( ALICE PRIM)

It is true that one of the great things about SHOW studio is that viewers can express their 'honest' opinions while hiding behind the veil or curtain of privileged anonymity ... and perhaps among the viewers basking in such a 'glory' we could even have among them éminence grises or real and true eminences such as the Pope ... or even the enigmatic Anne Wintour ... but it would be absolutely false to believe that while using the blessings in disguise of being anonymous that that in itself would automatically constitute a carte blanche to be vile, malicious, insulting and to degenerate into stupidity in order to express all the well hidden feelings of animosity anyone may have against anyone and became vindictive ... and believe me that the human kind is not exactly .... Mother Theresa !

It is in the end not what you say but how you say it ! ! For example, what is the point of having a discussion with someone in person while spitting all the time on our opponent's face ? Is it really cool and corageous to be vicious and malignant when expressing our differences ? I don't think that someone who has certain level of ' intellectual' capacity validates his/her arguments by punching someone in the dark. If the motivation is honest then show courtesy and respect the same way we expect from others ....
There are certain unwritten rules to be followed if we want the discussion to become interesting and lively ..... anonymity shouldn't be misused to charge hyena like attacks or to ventilate an state of hidden bitterness with life because of personal or professional failures , should that be the case !

Yes ! ... I totally agree with Brooke Taylor ! . He made absolutely highly intelligent remarks and the use of common sense worthy of consideration and whether we agree or not with him that is another matter ...and yet that is exactly the shiny beauty of living in a DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY .... and last but not least can anyone mention a website that can equal or surpass SHOW studio ? Mr. Nick Knight, Penny Martin and Alex Fury have always shown courtesy to their viewers and I absolutely believe that they should get the same, because after all we are their guests, but that does not necessarily mean that we should agree on everything about the results of their projects ... and yet that doesn't also mean that we should act like little gods from down below from the centre of the earth !!
Just use the privilege of anonymity with true intelligence and be cool surely !... but that is always far more difficult to do than most people may ever think !

No one owns anything to anyone and we should never take anything for granted even if we happen to be the Pope or Anne Wintour !

PS: I must say I enjoyed the Kiki de Montparnasse reference ... Alice Prim would had certainly appreciated the humour !

Reply to this >



Brooke Taylor
Brooke Taylor
United Kingdom
In reply to Karl Fuler:

Maybe you're right Karl...Just re-read my rant and 85% of me still agrees but 15% thinks of the grim scene that was my first (non-alcoholic) school disco; 50 odd desperately self-conscious 12 and 13 year olds seated around the school hall, their backs to the wall, paralysed by hormones watching two kids from the karate class perform unspeakably camp kung-fu moves to the rhythms of Wham!. Maybe the dance-floor of an entirely accountable forum devoid of the inebriant of anonymity would look similarly bleak.

If you look near the end of what I said it wasn't criticism I had a problem with (in fact anyone that has studied creatively will know that your ability to advance exists in almost exact ratio to your ability to digest criticism). My objection was to the often arrogant and vicious approach, sometimes leveled at the contributions but often leveled at fellow posters, which personally I find pointless and detrimental to the coherence of the debate and attribute to the anonymity afforded those commenting.

Either way, as you can probably gather I find it a fascinating topic, though if I don't get off this thread soon I may end up owing Jez Tozer a ‘rant voucher’ which we he may well redeem one day should I unwisely step on something spinning.

Thoroughly enjoyed this film by the way.

Reply to this >



'dull-witted, aspirational thirty-something snobs (wrong age)'

Marko has made a political decision not to participate in this forum anymore.

Reply to this >



I agree entirely with Brooke on his broader point, but also Karl's paricular point of being able to make feedback that is anonymous. Anna Wintour is only realistically going to comment under a name like "marko" than her own. I suggest the forum is roughly split into 3 groups;

Those who work in "the industry" but only those who personally know or are the contributors.

Those who aspire to but will get no closer to "the industry" than this.

Those who have tried and failed in "the industry" and/or are cynical through their own experience of it.

I think it is the nature of criticism (though not the definition) to be negative. Though I have allowed myself to be drawn into this debate on this forum, I dislike the faux democratizing that forums promote. I am not interested in viewers comments on BBC Radio 4 news, I want expert analysis by the John Humphreys. In the same way I feel participation in a forum really rather pointless. A good example is the "Death of Photography" thread posted by Nick. I am most interested in his statement and would be interested in those who responded if I thought their comment's any more relevant than those asked of the man walking past my window now. I have much to say on the matter, but enjoy discussing over drink more.

I guess my point is that the forum on which I am writing is the weakest part of SHOWstudio. Jez Tozer's film stands tall over all mine and others subsequent waffle. I sometimes think SHOWstudio irrelevant and other times I think it is the only relevant venue. I could pick apart the content, but never draw a parallel with any other work or website. I love it and I hate it.

Sorry if I have gone off thread.

Reply to this >



In reply to mopar:

There are laypeople, such as myself, who are not in the industry, have never been in the industry and don't have any desire to be in the industry.

Reply to this >



In reply to Landon:

Then I'm encouraged. I have feared that the fashion industry increasingly caters for itself and not for the layman.

Reply to this >



Galileo's Universe
Galileo's Universe
Greenland

Credit : www.art.com/asp/sp-asp/ _/pd--12728064/sp--A/A...

Mopar you are not only constantly rude, condescending and lack the ability of self soul searching, self criticism but however 'incredible' it may sound your feeling of superiority in the matters of ' fashion and photography' is really hard to understand when as a matter of fact no one in this site really know what you photograph in real life ? Did you really read Brooke's Taylor post ? .... Forgive me the unforgivable sin of being BLUNT .... but how on earth can you write that you agree with Brooke Taylor's post ? ... unless that is if your intelligent ability to communicate is beyond anyone's understanding ( that includes of course the men walking past your precious window through which you see ' your' world ) and only the John Humpreys can read and analyse what you really mean beyond your factual words ....

Your statement ' I agree entirely with Brooke on his broader point ' not only sounds funnily-ironic but incredible naif if you think you can fool us the totally 'common' and 'uninteresting' viewers, and mind you I don't fit in any of your well 'researched'....' Show studio' viewers categories' simply because I live in a an igloo far way from the hazards of fashion and we are never here well informed for obvious reasons ... living in an igloo is not easy at all, tv doesn't run on batteries unfortunately ! ::) ....

I do hope that you will one day become a a very successful and self fulfilled FASHION PHOTOGRAPHER .... but believe me don't underestimate people ever ... sometimes you will only be able to pass through that door ... only if the ' butler ' opens it for you ! ....
This is all written with a good intention and hoping that you will indeed one day will understand Brooke Taylor's post and will then not give a rather childish response ... or to say sorry, because that is not enough and totally pointless if you keep committing the same sin over and over again!

Have a nice time at Showstudio .... It can be very enlightening ... if only you are prepared to be tolerant and respectful even towards the loo attendant who may unforgivably post here if only because of the 'faux democratizing that forums promote ' which by the way also benefits you... unless you happen to be of aristocratic stock ... then certainly ... that doesn't apply to you !

It is all about POSITIVE CRITICISM .... always remember that !

ADIEU

PS. No I don't think Marko will ever be Anne Wintour ........ I dare to assume that she is to busy having a good time to care about expressing pettiness.... life is to short to be bitter or to look resentfully of others people's work and success..... :):):)

Reply to this >



In reply to Galileo's Universe:

I think you may need to see someone.

Reply to this >



Galileo's Universe
Galileo's Universe
Greenland
In reply to mopar:

No comment !

Reply to this >



Showing messages 31–40 of 46

SHOWstudio © 2008 Terms & Conditions