I have just three final things to say, and then I\'ll leave you boys to the substantive critiques you\'re so skilled at and so eager for, such as \"you killed the set, dude,\" \"mind blowing,\" and \"Sergio is a pimp.\"
First, I would like to point out that the number of words does not a valid critique make. For example, no one needed to ask for more after reading Dorothy Parker\'s one-line review of a performance by Katherine Hepburn: \"She ran the gamut of emotions from A to B.\" The minimal language of my initial critique could be taken as a challenge to explore what I might have meant, to discover gimmickry if present, and to figure out how to take one\'s attention-getting techniques and mold them into a personal style.
Second, I find it very telling that it was not I who felt the need to resort to ad hominem attacks. I had no idea of Sergio\'s age, nor had I looked at his posts in the past. I spend a lot of time looking at the wedding forum, but I usually look no further than the first few photos in a set to decide if I want to see the rest, and I post responses very infrequently. I made this comment only because It was so illustrative of the conversation I had on the weekend. I have never mistaken personal attack for reasonable disagreement.
Finally, I was amused by the references to Picasso and Dali as examples of painters who didn\'t follow the rules. In fact, both of these men underwent extensive classical raining in art. Thus, they knew the rules and therefore understood what it meant to break them. I believe this idea was the point behind Reason\'s comments, which he posted before this thread devolved into a forum on me as a bitter schoolmarm.
Dec 15, 2009 at 07:47 AM
Previous versions of VickiB's message #7891721 « VANITHA + RAJAN // THE DAY BEFORE »
