<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Talk With: William Eggleston</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/10/30/a-talk-with-william-eggleston/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/10/30/a-talk-with-william-eggleston/</link>
	<description>Reflections on art and architecture by TIME critic Richard Lacayo.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 15:49:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Follow Ups &#124; 12th Press</title>
		<link>http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/10/30/a-talk-with-william-eggleston/comment-page-1/#comment-411</link>
		<dc:creator>Follow Ups &#124; 12th Press</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 11:22:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lookingaroundtime.wordpress.com/?p=56#comment-411</guid>
		<description>[...]  In addition to the W article I nitpicked with earlier, Time&#8217;s Richard Lacayo conducted a much meatier interview with him (split over several posts; here, here, and here) as well as a review.  From the review: Eggleston [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...]  In addition to the W article I nitpicked with earlier, Time&#8217;s Richard Lacayo conducted a much meatier interview with him (split over several posts; here, here, and here) as well as a review.  From the review: Eggleston [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: On Shadow &#187; Follow Ups</title>
		<link>http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/10/30/a-talk-with-william-eggleston/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>On Shadow &#187; Follow Ups</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 20:17:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lookingaroundtime.wordpress.com/?p=56#comment-10</guid>
		<description>[...]  In addition to the W article I nitpicked with earlier, Time&#8217;s Richard Lacayo conducted a much meatier interview with him (split over several posts; here, here, and here) as well as a review.  From the review: Eggleston [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...]  In addition to the W article I nitpicked with earlier, Time&#8217;s Richard Lacayo conducted a much meatier interview with him (split over several posts; here, here, and here) as well as a review.  From the review: Eggleston [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Digest. 11.03.08. at C-MONSTER.net</title>
		<link>http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/10/30/a-talk-with-william-eggleston/comment-page-1/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>The Digest. 11.03.08. at C-MONSTER.net</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 16:54:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lookingaroundtime.wordpress.com/?p=56#comment-8</guid>
		<description>[...] I wanna hang out with William Eggleston and his white suede shoes. More here. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I wanna hang out with William Eggleston and his white suede shoes. More here. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Levin</title>
		<link>http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/10/30/a-talk-with-william-eggleston/comment-page-1/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Levin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 03:12:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lookingaroundtime.wordpress.com/?p=56#comment-4</guid>
		<description>No, no, no, not &quot;maddeningly.&quot; Wondrously. Christ, Levin, can&#039;t you get anything right the first time?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, no, no, not "maddeningly." Wondrously. Christ, Levin, can't you get anything right the first time?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Levin</title>
		<link>http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/10/30/a-talk-with-william-eggleston/comment-page-1/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Levin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 03:01:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lookingaroundtime.wordpress.com/?p=56#comment-3</guid>
		<description>On re-reading, &quot;deceptively inimitable&quot; is fuzzy. I meant they are deceptively simple--more complex psychologically than structurally--and therefore maddeningly inimitable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On re-reading, "deceptively inimitable" is fuzzy. I meant they are deceptively simple--more complex psychologically than structurally--and therefore maddeningly inimitable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Levin</title>
		<link>http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/10/30/a-talk-with-william-eggleston/comment-page-1/#comment-2</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Levin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 02:52:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lookingaroundtime.wordpress.com/?p=56#comment-2</guid>
		<description>I think you&#039;re right about Eggleston&#039;s sincerity and his &quot;valorization of the commonplace, carried to a level of intensity that can curl your toes.&quot; Yet the sincerity is so understated it&#039;s almost a secret pact between the photographer and his subject matter. Which may be why it&#039;s easy to miss or to interpret differently. 

For example, If I remember correctly, David Byrne said he liked the quality Eggleston&#039;s pictures had of admiring something and making fun of it at the same time. Eggleston would probably deny he&#039;s doing either. The making fun may be in the eye of the beholder reacting to the Southern subject matter. 

If you look at Eggleston&#039;s pictures of, say, Dunkirk, France, the visual style is the same but the cultural triggers fall away, leaving you with an eerie stillness, a sense of watching things transcend themselves while remaining exactly what they are. Which is just another way of describing the spirituality you point to at the end of your piece.

Byrne invited Eggleston to the set of True Stories and, in the book that accompanied the movie, published some of the pictures Eggleston made in the vicinity. You have to hand it to Eggleston--he seems incorruptible. None of this brush with movie glamour or the hippest egghead rock star changed his pictures in the least. He just went out and found Eggleston pictures. 

He&#039;s like a savant that way. Wherever you put him on the globe, he picks up his camera like the Energizer Bunny on &#039;ludes and starts reeling off casually brilliant, deceptively inimitable pictures. 

What we&#039;ve seen over the years is not even the tip of the iceberg. Which is why I hope the curator has stocked the Whitney show with lots of pictures we haven&#039;t seen before.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you're right about Eggleston's sincerity and his "valorization of the commonplace, carried to a level of intensity that can curl your toes." Yet the sincerity is so understated it's almost a secret pact between the photographer and his subject matter. Which may be why it's easy to miss or to interpret differently. </p>
<p>For example, If I remember correctly, David Byrne said he liked the quality Eggleston's pictures had of admiring something and making fun of it at the same time. Eggleston would probably deny he's doing either. The making fun may be in the eye of the beholder reacting to the Southern subject matter. </p>
<p>If you look at Eggleston's pictures of, say, Dunkirk, France, the visual style is the same but the cultural triggers fall away, leaving you with an eerie stillness, a sense of watching things transcend themselves while remaining exactly what they are. Which is just another way of describing the spirituality you point to at the end of your piece.</p>
<p>Byrne invited Eggleston to the set of True Stories and, in the book that accompanied the movie, published some of the pictures Eggleston made in the vicinity. You have to hand it to Eggleston--he seems incorruptible. None of this brush with movie glamour or the hippest egghead rock star changed his pictures in the least. He just went out and found Eggleston pictures. </p>
<p>He's like a savant that way. Wherever you put him on the globe, he picks up his camera like the Energizer Bunny on 'ludes and starts reeling off casually brilliant, deceptively inimitable pictures. </p>
<p>What we've seen over the years is not even the tip of the iceberg. Which is why I hope the curator has stocked the Whitney show with lots of pictures we haven't seen before.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
