Ed - I was in a bad place myself when I wrote it - and
sent it before I realised it went public -- then it seemed
it should stay that way
just to clear the air. I didn't think I'd get pummeled for
it. I was not the first
to respond, either. My original response was "IF you really
mean that it is very sad" I really didnt think he did mean
it, and he did clarify the "perfect" stuff.
I had no idea how sensitive he seemed to me to be in his
responses. Then it became
a "what is art bit" and I thought my extended title would
lighten the whole thing
up a bit.
Why would anyone start a thread that was not meant to
provoke some kind of response
or debate, Ed? I do feel passionately about one issue,
which,I don't think is
beside the point in this forum, which is simply that making
art is a very subjective thing. I don't think Paul, even
though we disagree on some stuff, would consider
that it was inappropriate to discuss it - but maybe I'm
wrong.
I'm in a horrible place right now, so perhaps it isn't good
to write.
annsan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In a message dated 8/28/2001 2:18:02 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > Yup - but you sounded angry - guess we both did. sigh.
> > Happy shooting.
> >
> > annsan
> >
>
> Since the original request was for one-liners stating a personal reason for
> photography, why did you or anyone else critique his statement? His reason
> need not be yours; neither does it need your approval (or mine). A modicum of
> respect for a different attitude/approach would have removed the need to
> respond.
>
> Ed Matthew
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
