I mean, she's smart, she's artistic, she's gifted and takes the art of photography seriously. All of those are reasons to feel that happy mama feeling.
But it's the quality of moral discernment in her writing, added to all the rest, that makes me feel a little bit awed to have played a part in launching this human into the world. In an examination of the distinctions we make between art photography and photojournalism, she writes,
How can a photo taken to raise social consciousness have intrinsic artistic value? Its value is related to the issue, the subjects, and whether it accomplishes it's goal, which is usually to outrage society into action. Art may outrage at first, but it is gradually accepted because we believe that ART is MEANT to outrage us, to push our boundaries. As if pushing the boundaries on moral issues like voyeurism and war is a good thing. To call these journalistic photos which document violence art is to condone, rather than condemn their subject.
I can't do justice to her argument in a snippet, and I'm not going to reprint the photographs she posts. Instead, I'll just urge you, if you have an interest in photography, or art and the ethics of art or journalism, to read the post for yourself.
You know what? She's my kid!