Beauty treatment

To the Editor:

I'm writing in praise of Carol Armstrong's beautiful article on Craigie Horsfield and her defense of aesthetics in contemporary art ["The Dilation of Attention," January 2004].

Armstrong attributes a "yearning" to be "singular, original, canon-enshrined and museum-dignified" to the work of Jeff Wall and other "big picture" makers; I thought that applied equally to Horsfield's unique prints but after reading the article it occurs to me perhaps I was wrong. I do take issue with the way Armstrong seems to differentiate photography from other new media by basing her discussion on the physicality of the photographic surface (physical scale and surface need not be the issue when the meditative space can be infinitely small). But mainly I want to thank her for cutting to the heart of the matter. Armed with honesty, clarity of argument, and the beloved OED, she has sliced through a century of stratified photographic discourse to look carefully at Horsfield's work.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

I admit to being emotionally moved by the beauty and the meaning of Armstrong's prose--definitely a first for me while reading Artforum. Horsfield is indeed fortunate to have his work be the object of Armstrong's attention.

--Bill Jones, New York

COPYRIGHT 2004 Artforum International Magazine, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group