Who it be

For almost a month old now, the anonymous NYC photography director of a national magazine writing aphotoeditor.com has stirred up a lot of interest and speculation. I think I started reading just after the first post (funny how every single write up in Pop Photo or PDN mentions this editor's love of Seal) and have been excited to see it grow. A couple of bloggers have gone ahead and declared the writer a female (many others are not so sure). My buddy Andrew made the keen observation that both in voice and perspective, plus the link to veteran Kurt Markus, seems to point to the editor being a veteran themselves (which could make the creation of a blog all the more noteworthy).

One of the things that I find interesting is that it seems obvious that the blogger is not trying to write anonymously for personal reasons, but instead are trying to break through all of the bullshit of the publishing world and photography industry and speak candidly and directly to their opposites, which sadly means that this writer needs to (or feels they must) remain professionally unknown. Even as they talk about office visits with prominent photographers and leave little other clues (which means that certainly there is a growing community of people who know the true identity), they seem to be more focused on the exchange than the personal thrill. I'm reminded of a photo editor I met recently who was pretty excited to tell me again and again about a couple of the very popular photographers who they really hated and thought were completely overrated. Ultimately we are all much rewarded by the class of this blogger, whomever they are.

And I don't really want to know. Gay guy or woman (the leading guesses from my research, though you don't have to be a brain surgeon to realize that the majority of photo editors are women), whatever the case may be, I hope that those who do know don't cut the conversation short. Unmediated, honest, and open discussions between creatives and editors are far too uncommon to turn this into an unveiling campaign a la the Steve Jobs impostor blog.

« Go to previous entry | Home | Go to next entry »

Comments (3)

I too have been following that blog since it's inception, or at least since AH posted about it. It's very much the education. The Everyone takes bad photos post really struck a cord with me. It confirmed the idea or principal or good sense to always shoot "your way" or develop your own vision to the best that you can. A portfolio that pleases one editor is sure to displease another. So why bother? If an editor really likes Terry Richardson or Chris Buck, does it mean that photographer's should shoot in that vein in the hopes that they will be liked by that editor as well? Obviously not. Anyway, forgive my rambling.

Good weekend.

-Sherman

Yeah Sherman -- I agree with you, but I guess what is turning me on more about the blog is the simple fact that this anonymous photo editor is copping to some of the craziness of the business. They've posted about NYC's strange provincialism and how they need to feel like the photographer they are picking is super busy and loved at other publications too. A strange confirmation, but a good one in a sense. Know thy enemy... just kidding.

i hands in agree. that blog is dope and i cant get enough. the only downer i've had is that im am completely not into terry richardson. most every other thing he/she says either puts a big cheesy smile on my face or makes a light bulb go on above my head.
three cheers for him/her.
hip hip hooray!
hip hip hooray!
hip hip hooray!

© 2006-2008 John Loomis. All Rights Reserved.