"I told myself that I was not experiencing life, that I was looking at it through the lens of the camera. But what really happened was, after a few years, things stopped being bright and shiny and new and exciting. It was pretty clear that we were going to have a career, that this wasn't just a 15-minute Warholian burst of fame. I just moved on to other things."
"Well, I'm not sure I was being entirely honest with myself; I think that was a convenient excuse [to stop]. But also, the rise of digital photography killed off my interest to some extent. One of the joys of photography was making something. Using film affects the way you take photos, because every time you press the shutter there's a financial penalty involved! Whereas digital photography seems much more about the equipment."
"Once upon a time I was looking at my setlist and I didn't recognise the name of the next song. That's not one of ours, is it? I thought someone was playing a joke on me. I called my drum tech over and said, What the hell's that?! He gave me this really weird look and said: That's one of your songs! Well, sing it to me then! And he sang it into my ear and I went, Oh yeah! That one! Oh my God."
The musician-photographer stopped taking photographs after feeling he experienced life through a lens rather than living it. The initial allure faded as the band's success made the future seem established rather than a brief burst of fame, prompting a shift to other interests. A later admission acknowledges that the stated reasons were partly excuses. The arrival of digital photography further reduced interest because film required deliberate creation and imposed a cost for each shot, while digital emphasises equipment and abundance. A live-performance anecdote recounts forgetting one of his own songs from a setlist. Parliamentary politics would demand leaving the band, which he is not ready to do.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]