Of course, feel free to blog about the funtasticus blog or the lj blog post :-)
All any artist can hope for is that their work gets seen by people who'd like to see it. I've been very lucky, not just in this, but in everything. It's been a good life.
*** EDIT ****
* Scalzi's blog picked it up too
* Cynical blog picked it up
* Josh Kamler's Tiny Gigantic picked it up.
* Al Power picked it up. and says that "you can immediately see the photographer was aiming to shock viewers by portraying gun owners as nut-jobs" -- which I sadly take exception to.
* Sinnick on LJ picked it up
* Johnsenclan picked it up.</a>
* Trader Eyal picked it up.
* Toby Central
* g-lide on livejournal picked it up (in Russian)
* picked it up (also in Russian)
* Pieterb's blog picked it up
* Blogsdon calls it "some really great portraits"
* Angry Indian picked it up.
*** EDIT ***
My amazon.com sales ranking just jumped from 50,000 to 7,907
March 14th, 2008 - 5:08 pm e
If the purpose of Art is a “springboard for spiritual contemplation” these are highly successful photos.
If you’re anti-gun, a picture of toddlers “toddling” with guns will shock-and/or-incite action in you, if you’re pro-gun you’ll note how the majority of these folks are practicing decent gun safety (unloaded, pointed down or up, finger off the trigger) and also note how many of these folks have a LOT of “dangerous” guns and seemingly no issues…
If you don’t know or have mixed opinions about the issue, these images will compel you to dig deeper for your own understanding of the subject… this… ladies and gents, is art’s highest purpose.
March 14th, 2008 - 5:20 pm e
Way to select the most white-trash-looking people possible! Almost everyone I know owns firearms, but not a single one of ‘em looks as white-trash as any of these folks. I would question the selection process here–definitely looks agenda-driven.
# Drewon 14 Mar 2008 at 12:37 pm
Quote from above:
“While gun nuts that feel the need to own enough gear to equip an infantry fire team do scare me a bit, I can kind of understand the mindset…each item has it’s own purpose and its own appeal.”
That’s it. For what it’s worth, I’m a die-hard liberal/constitutionalist who votes for Democrats almost all the time — and I vote almost all the time. I’m also a gun owner.
I think that gun violence is a major problem. I actually think that the gun ownership/gun control debate is a lot more nuanced that the NRA and the gun control advocates make it.
I don’t see any conflict between gun ownership and belief in Christianity either. I’m positive there’s nothing in the bible that prohibits hunting, target shooting, or other peaceful (to the humans, at least) uses. Now, murder with a firearm (or any other implement) is pretty well prohibited in both testaments — not to mention local, state, and federal laws.
For me, the more interesting aspect of the book is how people read it — the semiology of it. What do the guns in the picture signify? What do the other features signify? What does that say about the people interpreting those signals?
Maybe Umberto Eco will drop by and contribute.
they're really good "straight" portraits, they pass no judgement, the models look as if they posed themselves, and they came to him. it's super interesting work about the culture of masculinity and to a lesser extent jingoism of some americans.
[snip] ... this photo spread is ten kinds of cool, and I'm liberal six ways to Sunday!