# Political Forum?



## MarcusM (Jul 9, 2008)

I just wanted to toss this out there. I have seen (as I'm sure many have) more than a few threads in the recent past either go completely political or be just on the verge of going there.

I know politics is really against the rules here, but I do like to talk politics and I think it could be done here civilly.

I am wondering what everyone else thinks? Would it be possible to have a political thread here in the Off-Topic section where we could go to debate when we feel like it?

I know, there are dedicated political forums, but if I go there I get too immersed; it would be nice to have a little variety for when you want a break from looking at photos. Plus, I already waste (I mean 'spend') enough time here, I don't want to register for another forum

I know this will probably get shot down, and even if people are for it, who's to say the rules will get changed, but I just wanted to give it a shot.


----------



## EBphotography (Jul 9, 2008)

It's definitely a sensitive issue here.  In the past it's gotten a big no, the main argument being that this isn't a political forum and that things can become quite personal when issues that sensitive are discussed.  Yes, most people here are mature enough to discuss these things, but it only takes a few to start a forum-wide battle that leaks into the areas that are traditionally tension-free. Thats another big concern, containing that debate.  Yea, it's in a dedicated thread, but no, the harsh feels won't remain isolated in that particular thread.  I'm really just spitting back out what the mod's have said in the past, but I personally would be hesitant to put it in effect.  I understand your desire though, I'm a lover of politics and if you ever want to PM with someone about it I'm your guy. 

PS. It was once said that within the subscriber forum more topics could be discussed such as this, as it provided minimal supervision.  You could try there?

Eric.


----------



## MarcusM (Jul 9, 2008)

EBphotography said:


> It's definitely a sensitive issue here.  In the past it's gotten a big no, the main argument being that this isn't a political forum and that things can become quite personal when issues that sensitive are discussed.  Yes, most people here are mature enough to discuss these things, but it only takes a few to start a forum-wide battle that leaks into the areas that are traditionally tension-free. Thats another big concern, containing that debate.  Yea, it's in a dedicated thread, but no, the harsh feels won't remain isolated in that particular thread.  I'm really just spitting back out what the mod's have said in the past, but I personally would be hesitant to put it in effect.  I understand your desire though, I'm a lover of politics and if you ever want to PM with someone about it I'm your guy.
> 
> PS. It was once said that within the subscriber forum more topics could be discussed such as this, as it provided minimal supervision.  You could try there?
> 
> Eric.



Yea, you have some really valid points, and I fully agree that spillage is a potential unwanted effect.

It's especially true right now I think in this point in time - the whole world is extremely tense right now, and politics are really bitter in the U.S. especially.

I just may take you up on your PM offer sometime. Thanks for the response.


----------



## Overread (Jul 9, 2008)

Very few forums can take political discussions and survive the fallout which almost always happens at some point ( though some can keep going for a long while before a fallout)
Of those that can the reason they can is often because its a small forum where everyone knows everyone - hence its mostly a friendly atmosphere and arguments are forgiven. A large place like this I can see horrible fallouts, arguments, rants and in bad cases suspensions and baning. Its also a lot of work for mods as they have to monitor the threads constantly to keep them from wavering off topic or catching fire - I think it a lot simpler to let politics be left out.


----------



## MarcusM (Jul 9, 2008)

Thanks for the great responses so far! I can't say I disagree with any of the points. 3 against and 2 for it so far, keep the votes/comments coming!


----------



## kundalini (Jul 9, 2008)

I don't say no..... I say Hell NO, not here.

It gets too political as is at times.  In a previous life, I managed pubs.  There were three topics NOT open for discussion inside the walls of my house.  

Politics was #1 and continued discussion of it would get you banned.


----------



## Overread (Jul 9, 2008)

out of interst what were the other 2?


----------



## astrostu (Jul 9, 2008)

This was brought up just a few months ago.  I repeat what I said then:  No.  If you want to talk politics, there are plenty of other forums out there.  Don't bring it here, there is absolutely no need.


----------



## Hawaii Five-O (Jul 9, 2008)

Yeah politics can get some people stir crazy


----------



## kundalini (Jul 9, 2008)

Overread said:


> out of interst what were the other 2?


 Religion and any disparaging comments on why a Yank was running an English pub.


----------



## Mav (Jul 9, 2008)

Heck no.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 9, 2008)

Religion and politics are the two things liable to cause the most heated debates and the flame wars.

Take this as an example - are paedophiles sick individuals that need treatment or hideous monsters that should be executed? Two opposing viewpoints with no meeting anywhere in the middle. That kind of this would be debated ad nauseum. It's a bit like the film v digital or 35mm v 6x6 or Canon v Nikon debates that rage ad nauseum although the latter is less likely to be so bitterly fought.


----------



## Hawaii Five-O (Jul 9, 2008)

I'm the only one that voted for maybe. lawl


----------



## MarcusM (Jul 9, 2008)

Lots of Nays so far...I can't say I'm really surprised. Politics is definitely a touchy subject. But at the same time, Americans especially don't talk politics enough, which I think is why we keep getting shafted!


----------



## invisible (Jul 9, 2008)

I think TPF has seen enough animosity in the recent weeks as it is, and we are only discussing a tame issue like photography. I commend you for the idea, but a political forum would kill the friendliness of the site &#8211;and once you get there, there's no return.


----------



## Corry (Jul 9, 2008)

Without reading the responses, I will just have to say, I will raise one HELL of a fuss against a political forum here.  Not that I, even as a mod, have last say in anything, but I certainly will fight it to the end.  

I will admit, on another, non-photography forum I'm on, I spend a lot of time in the politics forum, but it is also the most heated area of the forum, and where the most non-spammer bannings happen (by far).  

I'm far too close to people here to start letting political views cloud things.  As much as I'd like to say it's easy for people to separate political views from other parts of life, it's just not true.  People are passionate about thier political views, myself included, and things like that can change a persons view of another, unfortunately.  I don't want that happening here.  

It's late, and I'm tired, and I don't know if I'm making sense, so I'm gonna shut up now.


----------



## Mitica100 (Jul 9, 2008)

No, no and no. Just my humble opinion.


----------



## bigalbest (Jul 9, 2008)

Normally I might say yes but after spending a little time on this forum I can see why not. I am on another forum where there is a spirited longtime debate going on some hot topics. I enjoy the argument very much, never taking serious offense either way. Guess it's not for everyone (an acquired taste).


----------



## Senor Hound (Jul 10, 2008)

I said maybe, but I can understand why people would say no.  Human nature has this HORRIBLE tendency to want to FORCE opinions on others.  I have very rarely seen a person be okay with someone disagreeing with them, to the point of being able to keep their mouth shut after someone rebuts their argument.  They have to go on and on and on and on and on and on...about how their point makes more sense than the other person's.

Piaget says people gain the ability to see things through other people's eyes around the age of six, but I have to disagree.  It seems like most people lack even the most simple perspective, even enough to understand that another person can believe something entirely different than them, and still be right in their belief.

I love to discuss, but not debate.  And unfortunately I have yet to find someone who does the former without doing the latter.  So, although I voted maybe (and would partake in discussion of religion and politics), I will say no, because I now remember how futile it is to try and teach tolerance and understanding to others.  We'd be better off trying to fly with our arms then get a person to see both sides of an argument, and to help them understand there is no right or wrong opinion.


----------



## Corry (Jul 10, 2008)

Senor Hound said:


> I love to discuss, but not debate.  And unfortunately I have yet to find someone who does the former without doing the latter.



For the most part, I refuse to discuss politics with friends, but I do have a small group of friends with whom I can discuss issues, even when we disagree.  It's possible, and it's nice . . . but it wouldn't work here.


----------



## Phazan (Jul 10, 2008)

The problem with this, is the fact that people won't discuss politics...They will just insult eachother's beliefs.


----------



## Corry (Jul 10, 2008)

Phazan said:


> The problem with this, is the fact that people won't discuss politics...They will just insult eachother's beliefs.



Very true.


----------



## Senor Hound (Jul 10, 2008)

Phazan said:


> The problem with this, is the fact that people won't discuss politics...They will just insult eachother's beliefs.



You should be talking.. Mr. DOODYHEAD!!!  

Sorry, I couldn't resist.


----------



## lostprophet (Jul 10, 2008)

guess you have never heard of Google?

its great! you type something in a box, say for example '_political forum_' and then press search and then this appears http://www.politicalforum.com/


----------



## Alex_B (Jul 10, 2008)

i like to discuss politics ... but seeing how personal people already take photography discussions, I would guess every second post would be a serious insult in the end. 

To make this work, we would need 10 extra mods, who have to be neutral on everything political (hmmm ... where could we get them?  ) .. and we would need an extra banning list from that political forum.


----------



## nynfortoo (Jul 10, 2008)

I do like to discuss politics, and religion, but I don't think it has any place here.

I'd rather keep this forum about photography, where I'll judge you for your photos and contributions, rather than letting political or religious views subconsciously cloud everyone's vision.


----------



## Chris of Arabia (Jul 10, 2008)

I'll pass if you don't mind


----------



## Arch (Jul 10, 2008)

Not gonna happen im affraid!.... still, you can talk about photography as much as you want


----------



## PNA (Jul 10, 2008)

This forum does not need the divisiveness that any form of political discussions would bring. Photography is the principal subject here and should remain as such. Any, and I mean any deviation from the established format would create disastrous consequences for all.  Too many of us do not know all the facts regarding specific local much less worldly issues to offer half-way intelligent political arguments.

Forum members have minor disagreements regarding cropping, tones, too much of this or too little of that and that, in and of it's self, creates just enough uneasiness.

Need I say that I vote "no"????


----------



## Battou (Jul 10, 2008)

This forum is way too diverse, so many political structures to argue about and twices as many religions.


----------



## Helen B (Jul 10, 2008)

MarcusM said:


> I know politics is really against the rules here, but I do like to talk politics and I think it could be done here civilly.



You think so?



MarcusM said:


> This isn't a political forum as has been stated, why don't you do yourself a favor and not show your ignorance by leaving moronic comments.



Best,
Helen


----------



## MarcusM (Jul 10, 2008)

lostprophet said:


> guess you have never heard of Google?
> 
> its great! you type something in a box, say for example '_political forum_' and then press search and then this appears http://www.politicalforum.com/



Nope, never heard of it. Thanks! I'll have to check it out.

-As I stated in my original thread, I know there are dedicated political forums, but I get too immersed and it takes up too much time - This forum already takes up enough time! But I figured as long as I'm here already, I'm mostly looking at photos but it would be nice to take an occasional break every now and then.



Helen B said:


> You think so?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks for making your point - now I will put those quotes into context so everyone can see what I was responding to.

Original quote from 'phototard'



phototard said:


> I like those pictures! I tried going to Iraq but they won't let me.. oh well. Thanks for what you do man, stay strong and take care of yourself. *Don't let the left wing wacko's get you down*, your doing good!



Completely uncalled for and a flat out insult to a particular group of people, which is why I replied:



MarcusM said:


> This isn't a political forum as has been stated, why don't you do yourself a favor and not show your ignorance by leaving moronic comments.
> 
> To OP: Nice shots, can't add much other than what's been stated. Thanks for your service, and for sharing your shots. It's hard for us to know what's really going on over there.



I really hate when people take things completely out of context.


----------



## Mav (Jul 10, 2008)

Exactly, Helen. :roll:


----------



## MarcusM (Jul 10, 2008)

Thanks for all the input. After reading the replies it's obvious it won't happen, and I think I agree - everyone's right, it would probably turn ugly.


----------



## Chiller (Jul 10, 2008)

:thumbdown::thumbdown:  I disagree.  It is a photography forum.  You want to talk politics, go find a political forum.


----------



## lockwood81 (Jul 10, 2008)

MarcusM said:


> I really hate when people take things completely out of context.


 

Even in context...it shows that things would get ugly quickly.

Yes to Photography
No to politics.


----------



## PNA (Jul 10, 2008)

Chiller said:


> :thumbdown::thumbdown: I disagree. It is a photography forum. You want to talk politics, go find a political forum.


 

DITTO!!!!


----------



## terri (Jul 10, 2008)

It's a photography forum, and we keep an off-topic section where certain off-topic subects STILL aren't allowed: politics and religion top the list. 

We also have a Subscribers-only forum where a bit more freedom _is_ allowed: this forum remains hidden from the public so more off-color jokes, pictures and, yes, other topics can be discussed. You wanna try to engage in a friendly political discussion, you gotta "pay to play", so to speak.  In TPF, this will remain your only option.

That said - even in there, you must remain on your best behavior; though we strive to keep this hidden section largely un-moderated, we can and will intervene if anything gets out of hand - and then the usual TPF behavioral guidelines override everything. 

Bottom line: nothing like the more tolerant attitude of the Subscribers forum will ever be acceptable in any other area of TPF.


----------



## ferny (Jul 10, 2008)

Except in PM's. Or are you forgetting those photos?


----------



## terri (Jul 10, 2008)

ferny said:


> Except in PM's. Or are you forgetting those photos?


I'm sure I don't know what you mean. :sillysmi:


----------



## Miaow (Jul 10, 2008)

I don't think a political forum's a good idea either.  From a few sites I've been on - nearly every political discussion ends up turning nasty - One particular site people were getting banned because they tried to debate some points one specific person believed in (an admin with access to ban people etc) if anyone else supported the people that disagreed they in turn got banned or warned off.


----------



## Hawaii Five-O (Jul 10, 2008)

Discuss photography on a photo forum how preposterous! Why I never in all my years!

 I say good day!!!


----------



## dEARlEADER (Jul 10, 2008)

there is already enough heat in this forum with Nikon vs Canon and RAW vs JPEG and you want to bring George Bush into the picture???

damn marcus..... that's hot...


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Jul 10, 2008)

I believe it all depends upon what you mean.
There is Politics and there is politics. And not forgetting good old Politics.
You can discuss Politics as in the Politics of sex, race, religion... So I can discuss Photography from a Marxist view, a Capitalist view, a Feminist view, a Homosexual view... 
Then I can discuss Photography in terms of politics - that is to say, the interaction between people as in 'political correctness'.
Or I can discuss Photography in terms of Politics as in 'if a**hole politicians didn't keep putting up taxes because they want to embezzle money out of the Country by one means or another then my camera wouldn't have cost so much and I could afford to get drunk every night'.
Option 3 is strictly forbidden here because, as we all know the truth of it, it is a pointless discussion. 
The other two are much more interesting anyway.


----------



## Senor Hound (Jul 11, 2008)

Hertz van Rental said:


> I believe it all depends upon what you mean.
> There is Politics and there is politics. And not forgetting good old Politics.
> You can discuss Politics as in the Politics of sex, race, religion... So I can discuss Photography from a Marxist view, a Capitalist view, a Feminist view, a Homosexual view...
> Then I can discuss Photography in terms of politics - that is to say, the interaction between people as in 'political correctness'.
> ...



This is an awesome post.  You are really smart, did you know that?

I don't think this being a photography message board is a strong argument against having a politics thread, as I've seen MANY message boards of all shapes, sizes and colors incorporating a political section.  However, the arguments of not being able to prevent spillover to other threads and also creating bad blood are quite valid, IMO.

Hertz, how do you argue photography from a Marxist view?  I know its possible, so I'm not questioning that.  But I do find myself intrigued as to how a Marxist would view photography.  I think they'd be okay with it as long as every single person had the same exact brand of camera to take photos with, you know?    And then the Marxist would probably mention something about the, "Bourgeoisie," and the, "Proletariat revolution," when all you really want to know is if the depth of field in your portrait photo isolates the subject adequately. 

I'm sorry I'm ranting.  But this is funny to me, and I was hoping it may be to someone else.  Probably not, though.


----------



## LaFoto (Jul 11, 2008)

Senor Hound said:


> You are really smart, did you know that?


 
Pssst! Señor!!! No need to TELL him! He DOES know he's smart! He sure does!


----------



## PNA (Jul 11, 2008)

Senor Hound said:


> Hertz, how do you argue photography from a Marxist view? I know its possible, so I'm not questioning that. But I do find myself intrigued as to how a Marxist would view photography. I think they'd be okay with it as long as every single person had the same exact brand of camera to take photos with, you know?  And then the Marxist would probably mention something about the, "Bourgeoisie," and the, "Proletariat revolution," when all you really want to know is if the depth of field in your portrait photo isolates the subject adequately.


 
Now you've gone and done it.....somewhere in Marxist town, there's Ivan jumping up and down shouting "not true, not true" and he's ready to take on the most intense mud slinging political debate your Capitalistic ass has ever seen!:lmao::lmao:


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Jul 11, 2008)

Senor Hound said:


> Hertz, how do you argue photography from a Marxist view?



Quite easily. You do a criticism of a photograph from a Marxist point of view (that is to say, examining it from the viewpoint of Marxist political ideology).
For example, even a cursory examination of any advertising photograph would reveal that it attempts to promote and maintain various Capitalist myths, such as _the Dream of Plenty_.
This approach to Photography and photographic criticism was a fad of the 70's and 80's. Us intellectuals have now moved on to post-Marxism. Haven't you read Habermas and Adorno? :mrgreen:


----------



## Rhys (Jul 11, 2008)

Miaow said:


> I don't think a political forum's a good idea either.  From a few sites I've been on - nearly every political discussion ends up turning nasty - One particular site people were getting banned because they tried to debate some points one specific person believed in (an admin with access to ban people etc) if anyone else supported the people that disagreed they in turn got banned or warned off.



Hmm... I found a couple of forums like that. I remember one debate started on aviation security and photography then developed into a debate as to how effective/ineffective security was before anybody that disagreed with the site moderator's view that security was just peachy got banned. And yes - that included me and subsequently my views have been proven correct.


----------



## Senor Hound (Jul 11, 2008)

Hertz van Rental said:


> Quite easily. You do a criticism of a photograph from a Marxist point of view (that is to say, examining it from the viewpoint of Marxist political ideology).
> For example, even a cursory examination of any advertising photograph would reveal that it attempts to promote and maintain various Capitalist myths, such as _the Dream of Plenty_.
> This approach to Photography and photographic criticism was a fad of the 70's and 80's. Us intellectuals have now moved on to post-Marxism. Haven't you read Habermas and Adorno? :mrgreen:



I was thinking more along the lines of something which would be more difficult to find any Marxist ideologies in, like a macro of a flower or something.  But I'm sure someone with enough creativity and intelligence (like you) could think of it. 

As far as reading post-Marxism, that's a no.  I have some issues with ADD, so a lot of books I just cannot read for the life of me.  I'll read one whole chapter, only to find out I have no idea what I just read.  Maybe some Habermas (isn't that a chili pepper?  ) by means of book-on-tape would suit me. 

Most of my info I digest by means of second source.  I know its not as accurate, but the condensation it provides is crucial to me.  But it shows whenever I talk to someone who knows their stuff.  And since I'm only 24, I still have a lot more reading to do.  I just recently learned about Marxism, so my mind hasn't evolved to post-marxism yet. 

Thank you for your comment, sir.


----------



## Josh66 (Jul 12, 2008)

The only forums I go to where political discussions work out are the ones where everyone shares the same political views.  It's not really arguing, more like sharing news and then talking about it.

On a forum as diverse as this one it's probably never going to work.


----------



## Senor Hound (Jul 12, 2008)

O|||||||O said:


> On a forum as diverse as this one it's probably never going to work.



I can see it now...

During a critique:

"This photo is soft, much like your stance on immigration."

"Your subject has strong definition, unlike the US's definition on cruel and unusual punishment, which is too vaguely defined."

"This shot needs some serious re-framing, just like our constitution does."


----------



## bigalbest (Jul 12, 2008)

Senor Hound said:


> I can see it now...
> 
> During a critique:
> 
> ...



Oh man that is a crackup great post.


----------



## Trenton Romulox (Jul 12, 2008)

I haven't read many responses, 'cause frankly I don't have the time to read all of them...

But I will raise this: what makes politics so different than our photography? 
And what I mean by that is this; we all hold our photography to a certain personal level, as some people do with their political views, so why are the two so different, with one being forbidden in discussion? Am I the only one that'd be more offended by someone hating a piece of art I created (which certainly happens on a photography forum) than with someone disagreeing (or hating as it may be) with my views in the political spectrum? 

I'm not even sure exactly what I'm trying to say, haha, hopefully someone gets what I'm getting at, I'm tired. But basically, I just wanna talk politics, and I don't see why we shouldn't be able to.

Oh, and one more thing; so basically people just don't want to have everyone get all heated or whatever, which I guess I can understand, but if that's the case, then we might as well ban people critiquing, 'cause we know what can happen there. And we can forbid other things too, like disagreeing on anything. I don't see why politics should be forbidden in the off-topic section. Basically it seems like this forbidding of politics is just a way to control the masses and prevent 'arguing' or something. Thanks mom and dad, haha.


----------



## PNA (Jul 12, 2008)

Trenton Romulox said:


> Basically it seems like this forbidding of politics is just a way to control the masses and prevent 'arguing' or something. Thanks mom and dad, haha.


 
In the scheme of life you statement is true, control is the basis of everything. That's we all have strong feeling and opinions about politics and religion.

However, within this particular forum, Photography and the art associated with capturing unique subjects is the foundation which it's built upon. Any serious deviation from this objective would be a distraction and eventually collapse of the forum. Also, the forum owner and associated mods would have to be _GODS_ to control the magnitude of dissention.



Frankly it's refreshing to see the younger generation take up governmental issues.
PM me and I'll discuss all the political points of view you offer.....


----------



## Trenton Romulox (Jul 12, 2008)

PNA said:


> In the scheme of life you statement is true, control is the basis of everything. That's we all have strong feeling and opinions about politics and religion.
> 
> However, within this particular forum, Photography and the art associated with capturing unique subjects is the foundation which it's built upon. Any serious deviation from this objective would be a distraction and eventually collapse of the forum. Also, the forum owner and associated mods would have to be _GODS_ to control the magnitude of dissention.
> 
> ...



I might have to take you up on that offer, 'cause politics are quite interesting to me. And most of the views I encounter up here in Maine are rather frustrating. I guess any state I go to will offer me frustration though.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Jul 13, 2008)

Senor Hound said:


> I was thinking more along the lines of something which would be more difficult to find any Marxist ideologies in, like a macro of a flower or something.



It is not difficult at all.
You merely look at the forces working to produce that image.
All images (at least those produced in some way by 'real' people) are the product of the sub-conscious. That is to say, the reasons why you take an image - and that make you take that particular image in that particular way - are the result of influences outside of yourself that in general you are not aware of.
Often you take a picture merely because you think you should or because you feel it is 'expected' of you. The way you take it and the style in which you take it are usually dictated by your aspirations ('I want my picture to look like a similar picture I once saw that I admired so that I can emulate the photographer of that picture and therefore pretend that I am like him').
This means that there is always a _social_ dimension to every picture and this dimension can be analysed - or 'read' - from a Political viewpoint.
As we are surrounded by Capitalist culture obsessed with wealth and material goods our images reflect this and so lend themselves nicely to a Marxist reading.
This is a very, very simplistic view. Our sub-conscious is complex and the influences on it many and varied so an individuals reasons for taking a picture can be complex. A critical reading of an image can only be done in general terms - and because of the complexity of the subject allow of multiple interpretations. And there is no way to verify the correctness of your assumptions.
If you want to see a good example of Marxist reading at work then read Roland Barthes or his followers. :mrgreen:


----------



## ferny (Jul 13, 2008)

> 'I want my picture to look like a similar picture I once saw that I admired so that I can emulate the photographer of that picture and therefore pretend that I am like him'



I always feel guilty about admitting this, but I don't follow photographers. Certainly famous ones. I could only name Adams if asked and that's through comments about them on here, not seeing any photos. I used to follow all the posts on this site and admired and felt inspired by many. Now I don't have time to view photos (I know...) so my only inspiration comes from what I've seen in the past. Films, books, advertising, etc. I like to think I'm doing everything out of my own head, my own ideas. But as you say everyone has a subconscious. That being said, we all have a different personality. So any photograph not taken with the aim to emulate one you've seen is your own work.

Although I'm embarrassed to make the above statement and am aware it may make others looked down on me as a unlearned fool I'm equally proud of it. Happy to know I'm not following a trend of fashion as a result of direct influences or peers. 

I assess myself (analyze) too often and if I start to notice I'm becoming a sheep and following the crowd without thinking - not being myself - I hate it. The thing is (and I'd expect you've noticed this yourself), when you do things differently to others you start to notice them falling in behind you. Leaning your way and taking on your traits/thoughts/hobbies/ideas. And if you start to do something new or think along a different plane to what they expect they get grumpy. No-one is completely independent, but some more so than others.


Wow, what a load of rambling ********.



As for discussing politics? I don't give a rats about politics. It's not something which interests me. Although I find it amusing that some would rather not discuss such things with their friends for risk of falling out with them. Surely if you can't talk openly with a friend then either they're not a friend or you're incapable of surrounding yourself with people who have thoughts independent of your own. IE, very closed minded and boring.

So, how's the weather? 
Yeah, cakes are nice. 
Do you like my new shoes?


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Jul 13, 2008)

ferny said:


> So any photograph not taken with the aim to emulate one you've seen is your own work.



But you do not know if this is ever the case.
Sub-conscious means below the level of our conscious perception so although we may _think_ we are not influenced by anything this is never the case.
And the influence does not have to come from a famous photographer.
It can come from any image we have seen.
If, for example, you go through a lot of family albums from lots of different families you will be amazed by how many 'standard' images appear in all of them - that is to say, the same general situation appears to elicit the same pose and result in pretty much the same photograph.
It happens way to often to be a coincidence.
Again, wedding photographs could all be pretty much the same because of the photographers all working the same. But given the choice most couples would select pretty much the same images as every other couple (in general). This is because there are certain iconic images that we expect to come out of a wedding shoot (signing the register, the family group on the church steps, etc), not because we particularly want them but because we don't want to appear different to our neighbours and it is comforting to be the same as everyone else.
Everything that we do is the result of influences outside of ourselves and we have very little control over it (no matter how much we would like to think that we have).


----------



## ferny (Jul 13, 2008)

> It happens way to often to be a coincidence.


 What about human nature? Embedded into our DNA.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Jul 13, 2008)

ferny said:


> What about human nature? Embedded into our DNA.



Ah, the old 'nurture or nature' argument.
It is always a mixture of both - some responses are inherited and some are learned.
But I do believe DNA occurred in it's present form a long time before we invented Photography - otherwise birds and frogs would have cameras too :mrgreen:


Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that we can't be original, only that any originality is just the result of a combination of influences. 
Think of rolling two dice. There are only a finite number of combinations and the odds of rolling each can be calculated. Throwing a double-six has exactly the same chance of happening as throwing any other double - so why do we feel satisfaction when we throw a double six, and disappointment when we throw a double one?
And all things being equal we believe that we can affect the outcome by talking to the dice.
Why?


----------



## usayit (Jul 13, 2008)

I voted no... Even though I like talking hot button topics and am certainly guilty of participation here.  I wouldn't want to wish that responsibility on any moderator.

I think the current way is fine.... allow them to emerge but lock it down when it over shadows the topic of photography.


----------



## ferny (Jul 13, 2008)

Hertz van Rental said:


> Ah, the old 'nurture or nature' argument.
> It is always a mixture of both - some responses are inherited and some are learned.
> But I do believe DNA occurred in it's present form a long time before we invented Photography - otherwise birds and frogs would have cameras too :mrgreen:
> 
> ...



I'm interested, do you beleive in fate and that our laves are mamped out and we are simply actors. Or do you think what happens happens and that the future is untold? Or perhaps something else.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Jul 13, 2008)

I think the way we behave and how we respond to things come from forces outside ourselves so in some ways I think our lives are partly mapped - a bit like a computer program: we can only function within it's limits but we still have a degree of freedom.
This is how it is in animals - but unlike animals we humans can observe and assess our own behaviour and then, through a conscious effort, change it.
Nothing is written - but we do have to observe the rules of grammar


----------



## ferny (Jul 14, 2008)

I'd spent all day walking in the hot sun and on some rather vicious rides. I was asleep by 7pm last night. Go easy on me!


----------



## hourglass (Jul 14, 2008)

Hertz van Rental said:


> If you want to see a good example of Marxist reading at work then read Roland Barthes or his followers. :mrgreen:



Cultural Studies, anyone? Just in case: there is an essay by Stuart Hall called "Cultural Studies and its Theoretical Legacies", in which he also reflects upon the influence of Marxist ideas on various theories developed in the 20th century and to which extent they might be still valid or "useful" today. Maybe that's a good starting point, but I'm not too sure, actually.

Sorry to interrupt, just my two cents.


----------



## Senor Hound (Jul 14, 2008)

Hertz van Rental said:


> I think the way we behave and how we respond to things come from forces outside ourselves so in some ways I think our lives are partly mapped - a bit like a computer program: we can only function within it's limits but we still have a degree of freedom.
> This is how it is in animals - but unlike animals we humans can observe and assess our own behaviour and then, through a conscious effort, change it.
> Nothing is written - but we do have to observe the rules of grammar



I've always wondered if we looked deep enough biologically whether or not we'd find what makes us self-aware.  Everything mental can be explained, IMO, except for that.  Its the one thing that really is unaccounted for, yet makes all of the difference.  Anyway, your post got me thinking about that.

And cultural studies is the genre I enjoy looking at.  I didn't know what the name of it is, so now when I go to the library, I can look in that section to find the viewpoints and opinions of others.  As I believe with politics (segway), I think we would all be better off by turning off our mouths, turning up our ears and eyes, and *just attempting* to understand the mindset behind other people's opinions.  So many horrible things happen around the world (wars, murders, affairs) because people are incapable of, or unwilling to, see things through others eyes.  If everyone on this forum were willing to take on some different perspective and question their own belief system, and then respond to others by means of civil questions rather than arrogant, stubborn rebuttals, a political forum would work on here.  This, is really my only complaint against other people, as someone who values empathy greatly.  But I guess when it comes to complaining, I should just get in line or take a number.

*Senor hound takes a tag with number 234,461,523 out of the red dispenser, only to hear the intercom sound, "Now serving complaint number seven... number seven..."

Edited to add:  I do understand the irony of my statement by saying others lack perspective, and then going on to say that wars, murders and affairs are horrible.  Although _almost_ mutually agreed on, I understand that even these points can not be agreed upon totally.  But I have taken that into consideration (perspective), questioned it, and come to the conclusion I still find them horrible, which is all I'm wishing others to do for certain events in their lives.  A true conclusion can only reached after a period of research, that's all...


----------



## Ben-71 (Jul 14, 2008)

Senor Hound
I was thinking more along the lines of something which 
would be more difficult to find any Marxist ideologies in, 
like a macro of a flower or something. ​ ​Well... &#8211;

"Taking this Macro of a flower is a waste of the country's resources, 
which belongs to all of us, because you wasted time that you should 
have used for work for the benefit of all (you shot it at 09:32AM!), by 
PP you wasted electricity which belongs to all, and you caused some 
wear to the Nikanon camera that you use. 
This means that another Japanese camera would have to be imported
sooner, so you've just made us poorer and the capitalists richer, and 
this leaves me no choice but report you.
I do like the shiny, deep red color of the flower though." ​


----------

