Morrissey on Guardian

What you say is quite true. Photography is not and never was "real". Every photo that has ever been taken is a construction. As for whether the cat was really on the head when the photo was taken is neither here nor there. Although it looks like it was all done in camera to me (look at the lighting... it's obvious. To take two separate images and keep the continuity of the lighting would be harder than just doing it all at the same time), it's the idea and final image that counts. Not how easy or difficult it was to construct. Just enjoy it for what it is. Otherwise, you're missing out.

I don't really disagree with any of this, but the Guardian photo is less effective for looking somewhat unreal. Compared to this, there's no question which one is more attractive and interesting:

moz120204.jpg
 
So, the letters page in the Guardian today has three letters criticising Morrissey, one criticising the quality of Armitage's band (as if that's relevant) and (for pity's sake) one pointing out that Fanta has fish gelatine in it.

(The three critical letters weren't making any particularly valid or original points. (Don't meet yor heroes, etc) One was rudeness for its own sake.)

(Well, yeah, okay, one did say that the article was very well-written, which I agree with. But it also said that M. is trapped within his egotistical contradictions, which I thought was a bit naive, to judge such a thing from that selection of information.)

(And anyway, aren't we all?)
 
Last edited:
So, the letters page in the Guardian today has three letters criticising Morrissey, one criticising the quality of Armitage's band (as if that's relevant) and (for pity's sake) one pointing out that Fanta has fish gelatine in it.

(The three critical letters weren't making any particularly valid or original points. (Don't meet yor heroes, etc) One was rudeness for its own sake.)

no suprise that they printed those then, :rolleyes: *sigh*
 
Tags
scans
Back
Top Bottom