News Bruce Gilden “I’ll be broke in a year”

Location
Central Ohio, USA
Name
Andrew
I’ve never been shy on my opinion about Bruce Gilden.

I think he is a pretentious dickhead. I’m available for debate on the subject if you wish.

However, he stated that he feels that he will be broke in a year. Can’t say I’ll be sad.

 
Last edited:
Now, now, Andrew, Bruce just can't help himself for the way he shoots. o_O

For what it is worth, he is one of my favorite street photographers. His tactics on the street can be offensive, but his results can be astonishing sometimes.

For those not familiar with him, watch one or two of his videos of him shooting on the streets of NYC. You may find yourself fascinated and repulsed at the same time. Whatever the case may be, he is different and unique in his approach to street photography. In other words, the man has balls of steel. :cool:
 

His interaction with the woman midway through is so cringe. "I'm famous!" "He's famous!" What exactly is fame if you need to tell someone that you are famous? Not to mention the tactic of using your "fame" as an excuse when someone feels you've invaded their privacy. Call this whatever you want, but when he's also positioning himself as an arbiter of who is or isn't a street photographer... you can go on without me. I'm good.
 
I can’t say I approve of his approach to street photography, but I feel sorry for him with a detached sort of theoretical sympathy for a fellow human being that I will never know in person because I think he’s kind of a jerk. Theoretically, of course.
 
Now, now, Andrew, Bruce just can't help himself for the way he shoots. o_O

For what it is worth, he is one of my favorite street photographers. His tactics on the street can be offensive, but his results can be astonishing sometimes.

For those not familiar with him, watch one or two of his videos of him shooting on the streets of NYC. You may find yourself fascinated and repulsed at the same time. Whatever the case may be, he is different and unique in his approach to street photography. In other words, the man has balls of steel. :cool:

I’ll admit that I’m not always the nicest of people, but those times I’m not, I’m provoked.

Maybe it’s a NYC thing that is rubbing me wrong with him. There just seems to be an entitled to do whatever I want and braggadocios attitude that just turns me off.

At the end of the day, I’ll stand behind anyone wanting to shoot street or in public to my dying breathe. What I don’t and won’t back is the “assault” with the flash inches from people’s faces.

I don’t think I can ever be convinced to change that position, although I am open minded enough to debate.
 
From memory @Petach has come across Bruce Gilden while they were both shooting in the same patch in London, I think the story was after doing his "do you now who I am" routine, he turned out to be not that big an a-hole, although everything's relative.
 
After some reflection - I probably should not have said what I said in my OP. Those kinds of thoughts are probably best left in my head. I may have broken some forum rules, and if so, let me know and I will either correct the original post or remove the offensive sections of it completely.
 
After some reflection - I probably should not have said what I said in my OP. Those kinds of thoughts are probably best left in my head. I may have broken some forum rules, and if so, let me know and I will either correct the original post or remove the offensive sections of it completely.
I don't see any problem at all, Andrew. You simply have a strong opinion about a controversial photographer. While I admire his results, I do not like his current methods. There is no way I would shoot like that. But, he does. To be honest, his best stuff was the early years and his work with Magnum. His Coney Island book is one of my favorites and is very different from the way he shoots now, however he has always been an up-close kind of documentary photographer.

He is very creative and passionate in his photography, which sometimes can be a gift as well as I curse, I think.
 
After some reflection - I probably should not have said what I said in my OP. Those kinds of thoughts are probably best left in my head. I may have broken some forum rules, and if so, let me know and I will either correct the original post or remove the offensive sections of it completely.
If you're "famous," I think you are open to rather harsher criticism, as long as it's not completely unwarranted. Which I don't believe your post was.
 
After some reflection - I probably should not have said what I said in my OP. Those kinds of thoughts are probably best left in my head. I may have broken some forum rules, and if so, let me know and I will either correct the original post or remove the offensive sections of it completely.
He'll probably argue that we're talking about him now which we wouldn't be if he didn't carry on the way he does. The biggest problem he or people like him have? If they're ignored. Different circumstances, but there's a very prominent artist over here atm whose public works apparently keep getting stolen to be sold on to private buyers for the thief's own financial benefit, always in full view of tv cameras with the predicable level of outrage. Gets an awful lot of publicity you know.....

All seemingly part of the game in the world of "Art".
 
He'll probably argue that we're talking about him now which we wouldn't be if he didn't carry on the way he does. The biggest problem he or people like him have? If they're ignored. Different circumstances, but there's a very prominent artist over here atm whose public works apparently keep getting stolen to be sold on to private buyers for the thief's own financial benefit, always in full view of tv cameras with the predicable level of outrage. Gets an awful lot of publicity you know.....

All seemingly part of the game in the world of "Art".
As far as Andrew calling Gilden a "pretentious dickhead"- I think Bruce would wear that as a badge of honor. :)
 
My two cents: he had a good run and through his work and style became the dominant force in his niche. He certainly was not the only photographer working this way. Has anyone heard of Marc Cohen?

 
He'll probably argue that we're talking about him now which we wouldn't be if he didn't carry on the way he does. The biggest problem he or people like him have? If they're ignored. Different circumstances, but there's a very prominent artist over here atm whose public works apparently keep getting stolen to be sold on to private buyers for the thief's own financial benefit, always in full view of tv cameras with the predicable level of outrage. Gets an awful lot of publicity you know.....

All seemingly part of the game in the world of "Art".

Much like an attention starved dog - any attention is good attention.
 
If anyone is interested, check out Gilden's website. In particular, his new stuff, which is at the bottom of the page. Apparently, he is now shooting in color with some digital gear donated to him from Leica. His new projects are quite interesting with some dynamic images. Bruce Gilden
 
Back
Top