Mike,
At major retrospectives, curators will even include many pictures, mere "snaps" taken at the beach or in a supermarket window or at a family barbecue, that for sure where never intended as anything but personal mementos. Artists normally carefully hone their skills at presenting a coherent body of well-0executed creative expression. A lot of ideas, of necessity, therefore, fall to the wayside if they are not obviously strong enough to carry their own weight and survive as art in a competitive environment. Likely as not, we're deprived of a lot of new ideas ,at the edges of expectations, that are self-censored by the photographer's need for maintaining appearances.
The established artist, however, gets the freedom eventually to step out of a strict mode of assassinating one's offspring, (and actually shows of work they know that the unknown photographer could not be forgiven for). The work now only has to be a satisfactory export of creative ideas that satisfies the artist sense of worth, as it will be grabbed feverishly by avid supporters. It could be that some of us are are not sufficiently attuned to the coding and esthetics in the new work. After all, many photographs, do indeed, require some understanding to the homages and references to previous art that the circle of aficionado really understands and appreciates.
My role, when I meet such work, especially knowing the command and talent of the photographer, is to ask myself what of it do I understand and hold my judgement until I learn more. I'm hesitant to assume that because this picture seems to be what someone else would discard, that this photograph has lesser value than the obviously accomplished works of Opie that anyone can easily admire. Of course, always there is the nagging concern that the photographer could have become delusional.
Asher
