is photography just escapism?
and a worse form of it than vidya or movies?
I used to think stuff like this. People out snapshitting, not paying attention to the real lived experience before them. Obsessing over mere reflections on a paper surface.
But no. Photography is the master visual art. Image making has been essential to humans from the cave painting days--and painting is a primitive attempt at photography. Fixing essential moments in time out of the maelstrom of impressions is essential to contemplation and growth, runs parallel to the storytelling tradition as our most vital form of expression.
Movies and vidya are fun but inferior combinations of these modes. Their force and meaning is too much constructed a priori, leaving only a narrow interpretive space for the viewer. Vidya in particular are more of a manufactured experience than art.
As gross amounts of prefab 'content' (slop) are now churned out daily, it's crucial that we engage with original artforms of a grassroots conception to ponder our truth and nurture a saving power.
But no. Photography is the master visual art. Image making has been essential to humans from the cave painting days--and painting is a primitive attempt at photography. Fixing essential moments in time out of the maelstrom of impressions is essential to contemplation and growth, runs parallel to the storytelling tradition as our most vital form of expression.
Movies and vidya are fun but inferior combinations of these modes. Their force and meaning is too much constructed a priori, leaving only a narrow interpretive space for the viewer. Vidya in particular are more of a manufactured experience than art.
As gross amounts of prefab 'content' (slop) are now churned out daily, it's crucial that we engage with original artforms of a grassroots conception to ponder our truth and nurture a saving power.