They Were an Item #22


Marina and Lee Oswald

4 comments:

swac said...

Great photo, I hadn't seen it before!

I wonder how the wife and kid are doing...

Matthew said...

Thanks for engaging my notes on film photography.

I see 'If Charlie Parker...' not merely as a 'series of cultural and personal observations' but from a formal perspective as a loosely curated digital gallery of images that originated in the physical form of the photographic image, a medium now in decline and marginalized to specialists and enthusiasts. That decline in mind, these same kinds of images today -- especially candids -- are more than likely captured digitally. I feel that the instant-review and lightweight-media features of the digital process have changed how paparazzi work -- firing at will to get the right shot instead of using film economically and trusting the viewfinder instead of the LCD screen -- enough to noticeably change the aesthetics of photography between film and digital. 'If Charlie Parker...' seems to me a celebration of the waning former, rather like a wake.

My intent is to develop this much more extensively, and I'll keep you posted on that if you wish. In the meantime, I hope this explains my initial reference.

Tom Sutpen said...

Stephen:

Little, if anything, is known about Oswald's daughters. They're both in their 40s now and probably aren't all that eager to wax nostalgic about their dad (among other things, Rachel Oswald was only weeks old when he assassinated Kennedy; and June Oswald would doubtless be hard-pressed to remember much more). According to Vincent Bugliosi . . . who just published a massive 1,600 page, tactical nuclear assault on the Kennedy Assassination conspiracy industry . . . Marina is still in the Dallas-Fort Worth area (she never moved far away apparently); and if the photos I saw of her from the late 1980s are still operational, she's still a knockout.

Matthew:

Thanks for getting back to me here at 'Charlie Parker' Central, as I've forgotten the URL for your blog and wasn't able to see if you'd followed up on my question (feel free to post a link here).

For those who may be scratching your heads (not the least of whom being my confederates), Matthew posted an observation, part of a larger point which he's elaborated upon in this comment, to the effect that Our Own Blog constitutes a "wake for film". I left a comment asking him to develop the point a bit.

I have to confess that my cinephile make-up is such that I assumed you meant cinema when you said film; and that's what got me confused. I can't say you're wrong, because I generally avoid posting digitally-captured images, and our labors here implicitly harken back to a time when conservation of resources were a kind of handmaiden to craft (no still photographer could churn out images in quite the same volume as is standard now).

BUT . . . that's only a theme for this blog (one of many) which hasn't been articulated until now. Far as I'm concerned it's just as valid as any.

Thanks!

swac said...

Marina was on the Oprah Winfrey show a few years back, and even then was still a striking woman.

But what a weird existence to lead...