 |
|
 |
Can Photography be regarded as a valid Artform?
This entire article is © James
Wakefield 2002.
Reproduction Prohibited. All Rights Reserved.
Section Six: Photography and Art Today; Conclusion
In this exploration of both photography and art, I have
examined many aspects of how photography has changed the way
that we live in terms of advertising, recording the past, seeing
how other people live, viewing momentous historic occasions,
cinema and more; but it has also had a significant effect on
the art world, restructuring every possible angle, from the
type of art being made to how art is broadcast to the rest of
the world.
In conclusion, I believe that photography can indeed be interpreted
as an art form, and the only reason that this argument still
exists today is down to the fact that many ‘staunch’
artists refuse to touch a camera, simply because they have the
stereotypical view that it is too quick, and a lot more effortless
in comparison to other methods. This may be true to an extent,
but it does not exclude the photograph being an excellent way
for an artist to express form and aesthetics. Such a view is
also very backward in a time where both photography and art
are advancing at such a rate, in their own right and together.
As I was writing this dissertation, probably the most prestigious
art award in the world, The Turner Prize, was awarded
to a photographer (not an artist) - Alfred Tillmans -
for a photographic image, proving that, while some people still
believe the camera is incapable of producing ‘art’,
the harshist art critics in the world believe it can.
[Currently seeking permission to INSERT WINNING
TURNER PRIZE IMAGE]
Discuss
this article
View Bold
Type in detail
|
|
|
|
