arts and photography

OK, think for a minute what it means deep down to chronical AMERICAN music.
That would be music that comes from the Delta and from Chicago and spread from there as essential Blues, Jazz, Rock and Roll and later forms of Pop. Classical came to us from Europe, what these artists represent are the outcome of truly American born music. I'm staggered that anyone would not make that connection..
And yes, we know that some may find Iggy Pop "ugly", but American Music isn't all about chicks that look like Britney Spears..

Gee. I've never heard that poor aesthetic quality is an essential element of art. I'm not even sure what "poor aesthetic quality" means. But if it describes the heartbreaking, iconic portrait of Johnny Cash and June Carter, then I surely want more of it. These are beautiful, sometimes funny and often emotionally moving pictures in which the subjects collaborate with the artist to present a certain face to the world. Maybe not all the faces are completely honest ones, but they're interesting and beautifully photographed.

A few of the pictures here are very good, but for the most part, this presents Pop Music in the same manner that "Sunset Boulevard" portrayed the movie business. Most of the photos are dull (scores to choose from), moronic (The White Stripes, Eartha Kitt), or just plain ugly (Iggy Pop, Joni Mitchell, Johnny Cash,at least another dozen).

While some peeople argue that poor aesthetic quality is an essential attribute of "art", there is no excuse for the lack of technical competency shown here. Most of the photos here look like the work of a person who has no camera skills. If the bad aesthetics are deliberate, then it seems clear that the photographer regards musicians with great contempt, judging by how she portrays them here.

Pass on this, and just get copies of your favorite rock music magazines if you want a collection of good pictures.