Photos

 It occurs to me that photos are not art. I have had people show me photos to convince me they are art or perhaps that they are artists I'm not sure. I have had people take me in a car to a building to look at photos. Not once have I ever not thought that here I am staring at a photo.

It occurs to me that the young girl smoking a cigarette on the cover of Dinosaur Jr's album Green Mind is one of the few photos I liked as maybe art. I did not find out until 30 years later that the photo actually is art. Five seconds later it occurred to me that the photo on the cover of Tad's first album had to be changed because the people in it did not want to be on a Tad album. Tad or one of his band mates or friends had found that photo at a garage sale or something. These two photos are at opposite ends of the art spectrum used for the same thing and having the same impact. The fact that an art critic could argue persuasively that one or the other is better is hilarious.  

I think a clue might be that actual art can get you into a lot of trouble if you attempt to take a photo of it. At least 2 people agreed that the art would be turned to shit if captured by a camera.

I've seen some pretty atrocious even offensive art in my time but at least it was created.  Framing is not creating.  I like that setting up a shot can use the same word as nailing wood around a painting. I've seen frames that took my eye off the painting. Congratulations you total knob.

The fact that I don't actually believe any of this and could have my mind changed with a 10 second well reasoned or even well intentioned argument should not detract from whatever point I started out trying to make.

This is why I like ideas.  Belief is where ideas go to die and rot.