Topic: Take a walk on the wild side

[Fluminian]

Lou Reed - Walk On The Wild Side

Lou Reed died at the age of 71. 

[Fluminian]

Lou Reed was a photographer too.
 

[Ed Wenn]

http://www.loureed.com/rimes_rhymes/

[jharr]

I may be the dissenting opinion here, but I find it a bit self-indulgent. The art isn't better than what I see here or in some Flickr groups by people who would never be considered for publication because they don't bring fame with them. Lou Reed didn't get published purely on the merit of his art. I don't know though... maybe no one does.

Just my $0.02 worth.

~J

[Verian]

Saw Lou Reed last year in leamington spa, probably 7-800 people there.  Here's a clip of it, good gig.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CB_9uONt4QQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

[Fluminian]

I may be the dissenting opinion here, but I find it a bit self-indulgent. The art isn't better than what I see here or in some Flickr groups by people who would never be considered for publication because they don't bring fame with them. Lou Reed didn't get published purely on the merit of his art. I don't know though... maybe no one does.

Just my $0.02 worth.

~J

So, you don't like his photographs. I don't like photos of some prominent photographers. We are compelled to take photographs.
We feel the urge, the drive to create something. That doesn't guarantee us the results will be of gallery quality or even good at all.
So, are people who produce bad photographs photographers?

[Late Developer]

I detested (still detest, actually) The Velvet Underground's music, Andy Warhol and all of that - but found Lou Reed, as a solo artist, okay-ish. That said, he was undoubtedly influential and original - and, let's face it, the music industry needs all the originality it can get as an antidote to the formulaic bilge that Simon Cowell and his like pump into mainstream culture.

Never knew he took photos. I'll check them out.....

[jharr]

So, you don't like his photographs. I don't like photos of some prominent photographers. We are compelled to take photographs.
We feel the urge, the drive to create something. That doesn't guarantee us the results will be of gallery quality or even good at all.
So, are people who produce bad photographs photographers?

I probably wasn't clear. It isn't that I don't like his photos. They are fine, but I wouldn't pay to see them in a book or a gallery. I applaud Lou Reed's efforts in being photographically creative. I just find it a bit off-putting when the famous are treated like everything they do is better than others. I'm sure he will sell plenty of books. That doesn't mean his art is worth the price.

~J

[Fluminian]

So, you don't like his photographs. I don't like photos of some prominent photographers. We are compelled to take photographs.
We feel the urge, the drive to create something. That doesn't guarantee us the results will be of gallery quality or even good at all.
So, are people who produce bad photographs photographers?

I probably wasn't clear. It isn't that I don't like his photos. They are fine, but I wouldn't pay to see them in a book or a gallery. I applaud Lou Reed's efforts in being photographically creative. I just find it a bit off-putting when the famous are treated like everything they do is better than others. I'm sure he will sell plenty of books. That doesn't mean his art is worth the price.

~J

I see. Do you feel like that a priori, or after studying that person's work?

[jharr]

I see. Do you feel like that a priori, or after studying that person's work?

Well, if by "studied" you mean "looked at the free samples offered on the web site", then yes I studied his work. 

It was really meant as more of a general observation. I would say the same thing about Eddie Murphy getting a record deal (for singing) or Miley Cyrus getting a spot on a prime time sit com. They get the 'shot' because their fame in another arena opens doors, not because they are multi-talented. Whether or not Lou Reed goes on to be a significant positive force in the visual arts is sort of irrelevant to me. I have my opinion which coincides with the kind of photography I am personally drawn to. I don't go to gallery openings, nor am I on the cutting edge of the art form, so I am not saying any of this as a qualified critic, just as an interested observer. If I were a famous Olympic bungee jumper and also interested in photography, I would probably do the same thing and use my fame to grease the wheels at the publishing house. It's not evil, it's just self-indulgent.

[mcduff]

Lou may not have been everyone's cuppa tea, but he sure was mine. Brian Eno once said that the first pressing of the first Velvet album only sold 30,000 copies but everyone that bought a copy started a band. A bit of an exaggeration, but not by much. I did not get one of first copies of that album (I was only 8 when it came out) so that is why I did not start a band! ;-(

Regarding being "put off" by artists that do stuff outside their established domain: I am put off when an artist (or their fanbois) imply that everything the artist does is genius.  But I see no evidence that Lou was saying he was god's gift to photography. He could put out a book of photography so he put out a book of photography.

I also do not have a problem when an artist generates a disproportionate amount of interest when they produce art outside their normal domain. It does not have to be rabbid fanboyism. If you relate to the work of an artist you may want to see how they see the rest of the world. It is like reading a biography about them. I see this as legitimate. I have bought books by musicians (eg nick cave, party smith), seen art exhibits by directors (Tim burton), etc. Not all of it has been great if it stands on its own, but most of it has been worth experiencing as it had helped me understand their vision.

So I will at least have a look at his book. And more importantly, My wife and I will raise a glass to him at dinner and bore our kids with why he matters.

[Fluminian]

I like your post, mcduff and agree with what you're saying 100%. I started this thread because I liked some of
Velvet Underground and Lou Reed music. As music is very important in my life so the death of an artist so influential
as Lou Reed who was, by the way, a photographer of dubious quality, but a photographer nevertheless, was an impulse
to share this event with other filmwasters. I was offended with the "Very OT" label and wanted only to explain my motives.

[tkmedia]

not necessary a reed fan, don't really like his songs as a whole, but do enjoy his wide variety of various styles of sounds to his music. Strange, i know.

[FiatluX]

Altho I didn´t really get into Velvet Underground and some of his music was a bit, well.. I´ll have to say that he´s been there, in the background ever since I was 14 with Transformer, the later "punk" years and on!

[Ed Wenn]

Hi Fluminian. "Very offended" isn't what I was going for when I edited the title of your post, so apologies for that and - now that I have a few spare minutes - here's a brief explanation of why I edited it in the first place.

While this is clearly a photography forum and while we generally require the posts here to reflect this, we are more than happy for active members to go off topic every once in a while if something moves them to do so (http://www.filmwasters.com/forum/index.php?topic=5047). The general convention in those cases is for posts to a prefix of "OT" their title. Now your original post didn't mention photography in any way, it just contained an embedded music video. At that point I had no idea that Lou Reed was known in any capacity for his photography, so the post struck me as odd to say the least. Because you're such an active member I decided not to delete the post, but to add the 'OT' prefix instead. Including the word 'very' was overkill on my part, but I guess I was trying to make a point. Not very grown up of me, sorry.

Thank you for replying with a link to the article about Lou Reed's photos; much appreciated. It definitely would have been worth including that in the original post. However, we are now back on track.

I will remove the 'very OT' from the title.

[Fluminian]

Thank you for removing the "Very OT" prefix from this thread, Ed.  The "Very" part bothered me.
I wasn't "Very offended", just offended enough to start defending the creation of the thread.
You can put the "OT" prefix back if you feel like it, I won't mind.
 

[Ed Wenn]

You're right. You were just 'offended', not 'very offended'. I clearly have 'very' on the brain today. What a doofus. Anyway, aside form this excursion into my temporary fondness for the word 'very', the thread is mainly about photography, so let's leave it as is...

[Fluminian]

Thank you. Ed. Thank you very much. 

[KevinAllan]

Lou's second solo album "Transformer" was the first album I ever bought, aged 13, and I've been a regular listener ever since. Of course I retain my critical functions and don't like it all. I find it difficult to listen to the song "Heroin" but recognise the power of the words and music. The fact that I have a phobia about needles doesn't help.

Very sorry that Lou has passed on, but quite surprised that he survived so long.

[Miles]

Funny isn't it, I'm a huge VU and Lou Reed fan but the photos aren't great :-)

Sad passing ...