Anne Geddes or Aint Geddit? Litmus test for Mush
-
Are u .. intolerably mushy? Are you.. irrepressible romantic and fanciful?
just a litmus test to warn other people mush alert.
so tell me honestly. do u find stuff like this. cute.
-
I prefer works from Kim Anderson.
-
no... overkill...
-
Same here!Originally posted by Kismet:I prefer works from Kim Anderson. 
I don't like Anne Geddes' works I'm afraid. -
The background color reminds me of Van Houten chocoloate.
-
Actually, I appreciate Anne Geddes' work for her creativity and not so much for the mush factor. I mean, she has come up with some incredibly artistic shots! She's also a pioneer of sorts in this field and she has created a genre of her own. That alone is applaudable effort.
I also think babies are cute and I applaud the fact that she's able to make the babies quiet and restful in those awfully uncomfortable costumes.
I have my moods though and sometimes, I think that Anne Geddes' works are too saccharine-sweet.
Overall though, I like them. I own an Anne Geddes book - bought on special offer from Borders.
-
-darkly-
that's exactly what i do not like about anne geddes. i dont mind her more recent black and whites of babies but...
i find it most disturbing when they put babies or animals in costumes
its very macabre why anyone wants to put their babies in a peapods or fruits (to eat them), or look like plants or animals (dehumanise them).
Artistically speaking, i think there is a very dark suggestive undertone despite the superficial saccharine sweetness.
Very Macabre. -
Originally posted by ShrodingersCat:-darkly-
that's exactly what i do not like about anne geddes. i dont mind her more recent black and whites of babies but...
i find it most disturbing when they put babies or animals in costumes
its very macabre why anyone wants to put their babies in a peapods or fruits (to eat them), or look like plants or animals (dehumanise them).
Artistically speaking, i think there is a very dark suggestive undertone despite the superficial saccharine sweetness.
Very Macabre.
Wah... never thought of it that way... 
I guess she puts them in vegetables / fruits because babies are 'fresh-faced' and she's just making use of the vibrants colors of the fresh fruits and vegetables? It's definitely not because she wants to eat them!!!
And dressing them up as animals is just an attempt to make them look cute, not to dehumanise them. For instance, we often view teddybears as cute and cuddly so to dress a baby up as one ups the 'awwwwwwwww...' and subsequent heart melting factor.
It's just like the Japanese Sanrio company has this line of products called 'Nyan Nyan Nyanko' where they have cats dressing up as food for the fun of it. I thought it was all cute until a friend commented, 'Yipers... live cats as food?! You must be insane!' I mean, I never ever thought of it from that perspective prior to his comment. 
-
never saw it like that either. but had not liked her pictures .. she's just trying too hard. looks so artificial to me.
-
i liked the one with the baby in a pile of rose petals..... and the baby is grinning.... very cute.
-
i tot is a new brand of chocolate~
-
no offense, but that made me thought of valium first.Originally posted by Rhonda:I also think babies are cute and I applaud the fact that she's able to make the babies quiet and restful in those awfully uncomfortable costumes.
anyway. i don't like baby photos... or anything human on photos.... probably i'm a sceneic person. -
Chocolate I can handle anytime.Originally posted by Danisdead101times:i tot is a new brand of chocolate~
Baby Photos on the other hand... are much much harder....yeah its funny. I like babies.. i just... feel weird abt baby photos. -
I like Anna Geddes work, some of them are just simply so adorable.
-
Hey, yaya!!!Originally posted by YA.YA:I like Anna Geddes work, some of them are just simply so adorable. Good to see you here! Hang around! -
heeehee, Thanks Rhonda.Originally posted by Rhonda:Hey, yaya!!! Good to see you here! Hang around! 