Re: [OM] Comparing 50 mm lenses

Subject: Re: [OM] Comparing 50 mm lenses
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 13:23:28 -0800
On 11/21/2011 9:46 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
>> Everyone ...........John Cleese would be downright furious if he thought
>> that Basil Fawlty was not being taken seriously :-)
> The biggest crime against humanity is that there were only 12 episodes.

Not so sure I agree. It seems to me that way too many TV shows go on way too 
long. Most of them have what you might call 
a story to tell of a view of the world to express. Often, if they are 
successful, the economic reasons to keep going are 
powerful, but the creative energy has all been expended. So they go on, and on, 
and on, but the original brilliance is 
long gone, and only a shadow remains.

There are endless examples. Rescue Me was breakthrough, brilliant TV for the 
first couple of seasons, and quite good for 
1-2 more. Then they ran out of gas. They'd told their story, what to do next? 
If they let Tommy continue to move toward 
actual adult maturity, as he had been doing, the series changes into something 
completely different than what it had 
been, losing all the edge its creators wanted.

So they chose to have him regress, and started telling the same story over 
again. But now it wasn't new, the edge/shock 
value was gone, and we soon stopped watching. House has the same problems. The 
Simpsons stopped doing anything new 
years, maybe decades, ago.

Part of the smarts of UK tele is that they often do limited series, with all 
the creative energy concentrated in what is 
intended to be a 'limited edition'. Of course, I don't see the weakest stuff 
over here.

Think about Fawlty Towers a bit. What is there for them to have done in another 
series of 12 shows? It seems to me that 
they concentrated comic genius fully in what they did. Anything further was 
almost certain to be weaker.

Just last night, I fell into watching part of an Austin City Limits show with 
Randy Newman. It soon became clear that he 
has been writing and singing the same handful of songs for his whole career. 
All the later stuff he did was just 
rehashes of his early work. I very much liked his early work, so the show was 
pleasant enough. But really, one needs no 
more than his first 2-3 albums to hear what he has had to say. I'm happy for 
him that he is still working, but it's 
redundant for me.

I've found the same to be true of many famous photographers, painters, etc. Go 
to a large show of their work and it all 
starts to look like the same thing over and over again.* Mike on TOP was just 
referencing Elliot Erwitt again, so I 
looked up some of his famous work. Some interesting, some OK, some
passé, to my eye. But is immediately becomes apparent that he used the same few 
tropes over and over again.

This is not to discount those relatively few artists who continue to grow and 
change and create amazingly new stuff for 
most or all of a lifetime.

Back to my point. It seems to me to be enough to have the privilege of fully 
enjoying a great work of art. Rather than 
asking for a repetition of the same thing, enjoy it fully and be open to the 
next great thing. If your eyes and ears and 
heart are open, it will surely show up.

Philosophical Moose


* Yes, I recognize that my own work, though on a less exalted plane, suffers 
from the same problems. But I so much enjoy 
making the same sort of images over again - and once in a long while, I do 
manage something new. :-)

What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>