i agree that it's very interesting architecture, but it seems like the eco claims are at least a little snake-oil too. in nyc, those shipping containers, although sourced locally still make quite an energy consuming trek to get to the pier where they're stacked with heavy machinery. and then back again. then repeated for each location. seems like a waste when there are dozens of great museums within a couple miles already built. and wasn't that vinyl, environmental enemy number one, covering the entire roof and side-spaces? aside from borrowed containers, just what is recycled here? decorative sono tubes? this exhibit most likely made a much larger environmental footprint than had they opted for a traditional venue. but to your point, not many museums would exhibit colbert's cheese so he was probably forced to create his own. can we say that bad art is bad for the environment?

I am guessing the latter?

Wow, and we New Yorkers are accused of being jaded! When THE GATES were up in Central Park the comon refrain was, "Do you know how much good they could have done with $36 million? It's a disgrace for that selfish, narcissistic Cristo to waste it on a bunch of orange gates when people are starving.!" And I would respond, "Oh, really. So, tell me: What are YOU doing to help the starving. Better yet, what in god''s name are YOU creating?" I saw Ashes and Snow in NYC, and although I get some of what the posts immediately above mine are saying, i want to scream at their writers: "Can't you see beyond your own criticism and pull from the images the meanings, the potentials, the myriad things with which they are damn near bursting? All you can cull from those remarkable images are your nasty comments? Have you ever heard the axiom: 'We do not see the world the way IT is; we see the world the way WE are'?'" My heart nearly stopped when I saw a couple of those prints. They had meaning to me beyond who Colbert is. They made me think of what we are doing to the planet, what we have lost, will lose, and what we may still save; they made me wonder and imagine and hope and long for something greater. I had an absolutely enormous experience as i walked through that show. Transformative. Am I a pushover, am I simple minded, am I uneducated and easily suckered by bad art? No. In fact, I've studied art, I suspect my IQ outranks yours, you jaded LA poo-poo-ers; and as far as the snarky, not impressed attitued... believe me, my road through this incarnation, more than likely, has been rougher than yours --the book will come out soon (if that damn James Frey hasn't blown the menoir market for us all)-- so save your arguing for later, and I saw a great deal that was of signifigant value in the show. I don't mean for my coments to sound nasty or mean spirited; it's just that... this Colbert guy may be an ass... I don't know, i've never met him. Some of the animals may be tamed... i don't know, i never met them. Some of the pictures (like the one of him swimming with the elephant the guy in a message above mine mentioned snarkilly [how's that for a word?])may have been taken by another person or by a timer... i don't know, i wasn't there, and photographers nearly always have assistants by the way. What I do know is THE IMAGES WORK. jon read

I WAS going to see the show (my son saw it and +/- liked it), but after reading some of the commentary from people who have seen it, I'll save my $.

I will go to see with my own eyes the beauty I believe lies within this creation. How many opportunities do we have to even say that?

One word that comes to mind to all of Gregory Colbert's knockers is JEALOUSY on all levels. The images that I have seen on his site are just AMAZING. Do I care about all the processes that have happened to get to the end result - NO. I love what I see and more importantly how it has touched my heart. His images do make me feel more about our close relationship with animals, and how much they are like us. This has to be good for society. How could anyone complain about $15.00 entry fee - what a joke, I would pay $1000.00 to see his exhibition. ( regardless of what donations go to the elephants). WELL DONE.

You would pay $1000 because you have $1000... and maybe because rather than actually going to experience the life that Mr. Colbert depicts - however facing one true reality of that cat actually clawing and eating you - is something that you might not actually do, if that actual offer came up. $15 is steep for my people who make only $6.75 per hour to slave in your capitalist system which destroyed natural environments, reaped havoc on indigenous people and the animals that inhabited the land....only to be forced to seek a "safer" slave system in this one. i'm sure you all artsy fartsy people don't give a damn about people's real experience...or the actual degradation of land, and the death of the millions of species on this earht because of "expansion" "globalization" etc. in the name of ART - Science - DESIGN....ooooo..... but it's okay isn't it?... you experienced a beautiful thing with Ashes and Snow...it makes it all better doesn't it? That you can disregard any sense of criticism that that show can generate... you can detest any sort of criticism to that show because in a sense, it is a criticism ..to ...you? my.. oh, did that show make you FEEL good? Did it do something for you? Personally? Individually? oh, how nice. now you can continue writing for Art Review or working in your nice office corporate job....and continue buying sweatshop Eddie Bauer, Prada, Gap, Nike, Guess, Banana Republic, Esprit, Express, Abercrombie, Walmart, whatever...clothing.... drive across town to the beach in your nice Mini coopers, Hybrids, SUV's, or whatever oil-consuming you've got... consume, consume, consume... meet up for drinks after work or whatever and down your social life as people in those countries depicted in colbert's images are starving, dying frmo AIDS, or dealing with some political situation that your taxpayer dollars are supporting.. consume, consume, consume...... and then, you can go to another art event to fill your wallowing being for the destruction you continue to participate in. good for you.

"If a heart opens"????? give it up with the fluff. colbert's work didn't do shit except give people reason to have mind masturbation. you don't need colbert's ashes and snow to engage people in an artistic debate...all you need to do is look around you and see the filth that blocks our view fromthe sky....look at the billboards with endless advertising, the walking billboards on people's teeshirts, shoes, the infatuation with celebrity life, the homage to people like Trump or the way people say they are against the war, but then say, "support our troops." the world is in chaos - and then designers try to capitalize on that chaos...because they're not focusing on getting to the root problem ot make systemic change. if readers are offended by these comments, i'm glad that at least someone is challenging someone int he artworld to think about ETHICS and MORALS and REPERCUSSIONS. Do you recall how the image of "Mammy" came about?And how that image consolidated white america's image of black people and further degraded them. Or how "Chinks" became a stereotype for asians and how American classified all japanese americans as potential threats and interned them... NO. WHITE America - in all it's privilege - even disguised as "with intellect" or "ethical" seems to still feel it doesn't ahve to respond to ethics...or their role in perpetuating stereotypes, racism, sexism, paternalism, etc. NO. WHITE AMERICA needs to snap out of it - I'm so SICK and TIRED of white america getting away with exploiting other nations, the people, other species, the land... STOP going to other countries and FIX your OWN goddam land. Stop sending my brothers and sisters to fight your damn war....or going to my brothers and sisters homelands to use them as props for your own art's masturbation. WHITE AMERICA still has a whole lotta shit to deal with and it is still refusing to do it - and people don't seem to see it. There's only a handful of people who have seen colbert's show and can actually discuss the work and the significan or lack of that it accomplishes while most people walk away easily blown by the disneyland experiece hearkening the People Mover...lights, film, moving withthe herd, gaze, wow! We're no longer living in the time of ooo's and ahh's. colonization and imperialism is reaking havoc all over the world...just like in iraq, afghanistan, bosnia, somalia, philippines, shit, everywhere....and all you all can say is wow...great artg experience, it openedmy heart?! SHIT...people are dying because WE AMERICA are letting it happen....with our tax dollars, with our perpetuation of images, of stereotypes, our dwindled water-downed analysis of blatantly stereotypical, exotofying images. Wake up. Hitler was an artist. He used art to do a lot of the world good.

peace is a good thing, i think. i think, also, that ashes and snow could have worked out a lot more issues on its part so far as how it contributes/or not contributes to ecological destruction when one considers how much energy, resources, and money are use in transporting and reconstructing the entire exhibit. doesn't it cost a lot to move all those crates from city to city across teh country. i was thinking about how much energy, fuel (oil) it consumes to do the job. i'm particularly interested in environmental issues connected to art. i ama bit puzzled with why rolex was chosen to be the primary [corporate] funder for the exhibit and why there is very little information anywhere regarding where and how the profits from the show will be used. i went to some website that described a "flying elephant foundation" of some sort that will be getting proceeds, but the work that this organization is doing is questionable with a big question mark. if there's any critique i could offer this show it's that it leaves a lot of issues unresolved. it's unsettling for me. i'm uncomfortable because i think that the artist actually has not considered certain perspectives and if he has, he has chosen not to address them head on. that bothers me for some reason. i can't exactly pinpoint it.

it is so good to read critical comments of ashes and snow. every single person i know has not only loved the exhibit, some have even been brought to tears. so i've wondered, how is it that my reaction was so different? i am not an artist, nor did i have any predisposition to like or dislike the exhibit. i wish those who were moved by it would not be so dismissive of those critical. at first, i was merely bored by the images and irritated by having paid $15. then, i slowly started to become angry. if nothing else, art must be honest. it is a form of communication and no one appreciates being deceived. the greater the lie the deeper the resentment -- what do you take me for? we are told that the artist's aim - indeed what he believes he has achieved - is the portrayal of the spiritual, eternal, oneness of life; the essential connection that we and the animal world share. But this is no where on display. Like others who have commented on this sight, i, too, saw nothing but contrivance. pretty children arranged like corpses, animals made to pose like fashion models. fashion models complain that it is not so easy to pose all day... i wonder how these animals felt. These photos and films were no better than the circus in which animals are made to perform for our amusement. the artist boasts of "expeditions" around the world, but in not one photo could the viewer discern the location. he might as well have taken the pictures in the california desert using little white children - though i suspect there are laws here that would prevent parents from signing the wavers necessary to work with wild animals - trained or not. Vapid, insipid are words that come to mind. the pictures tell us nothing of the truth of these animals lives nor of the truth of the lives of the people in the photos. neither live or act as they are portrayed. nothing of any true essence or nature is revealed at all. this is fashion photography - which can be great and beautiful and reach the level of fine art only if it is first honest about what it is - then it can reveal something of value - some truth. art without truth has no value. the emperor has no clothes.

I came out of this exhibit feeling soiled. I felt like I had been violated and assaulted. I wanted to feel peaceful and at one with the earth but instead I felt manipulated, deceived, and sold. I am so thankful to have done a quick search and found that I was not alone in these feelings.

i was on the guest list for the first night of the NYC installment of this traveling exhibit, so i got to see it for free. i was thoroughly impressed. maybe seeing it for free changed things, but i felt like i had been given a gift. i felt like i had been able to travel to places that i will never see with my own eyes, and observe human/animal interactions that are rarely seen by people living in North America. whether the animals were tamed or not, remember that many animals in many parts of the world are not afraid of humans, because they've never had to learn to be afraid of humans. on a purely aesthetic level, the quality of the photography was extremely high. say what you will about the geopolitical connotations of the images, but lugging all of that medium-format gear around Asia and the Middle East was probably no easy task; to have come back home with such sharp, impressive images (not to mention the video) is nothing short of a miracle. on an architectural level, Shigeru Ban's Nomadic Museum is made of materials that were reused or recyclable. leftover shipping containers, raw steel beams, paper columns, cloth. sure, it took big trucks to move the pieces, and big cranes to put them together... do you cynics think that architecture grows out of the ground? likewise, do you think that your computers, which you've used to discuss matters of sustainability, are free of ecological implications? we all take from the earth, every day -- from the New York commuter who spends three hours in a car, to the most indigenous of indigenous peoples, taking from the earth is the only way we can survive. nature can be brutal and violent, as many here have stated. it can also be nourishing and beautiful. if you want to see the former, turn on the Discovery Channel and watch cheetahs tear a wildebeest to bits. if you want to see the latter, check out Ashes+Snow. we all know that we have to take something from nature in order to live — i think that Gregory Colbert simply wanted to remind us that there is a way to take less.

WOW! Guess A&S touches a nerve with a lot of people! I am happy the nerve it touched in me was a blissed-out nerve. The critical reviews are so full of hostility and loathing… way beyond “this didn’t appeal to me.” I wonder why? Many talk about the “unnatural-ness” of humans and animals interacting is those ways. Eg: <“the cheapest, most insidious anthropomorphizing of animal behavior I've seen, a multi ring circus of "what you can get animals to do"> Were these folks upset by Dali because real clocks don’t melt? Um, this wasn’t Mutual of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom (though I’ve heard that was often staged as well) – it was somewhat surreal ART. Animal handlers may have been present! SO WHAT! Must photographic art be literal, spontaneous? Did A&S ever claim to be? TO ME: I didn’t see the animals as anthropomorphized, nor the closed eyes as emblematic of the white man’s blind abuse of nature. (and believe me, I’m ultrasensitive to the latter.) I saw the “human with eyes closed + animal” shots as having a sort of shamanic significance. Now, hear me out, not all Shamans are created equal. Human cultures generally reek of hierarchy, and the Shaman has often rivaled the Pope in that regard. But there is – folks – a modern neo-Pagan movement afoot. Some branches use the “neo” element as a way to examine the possibilities that might exist if culturally-imposed power structures were set aside. In such circles (ahem) elements of nature would never be “commanded” to appear for a ritual – their presence would be INVITED. In these photos of a person sitting closed-eyed with a wild animal hovering about, I saw a person in shamanic-type meditation, inviting the spirit of the animal, which appeared. This effect was intensified in many photos when viewed at an angle: the human image would recede, and the animal image intensified in bold, ethereal, totemic splendor. It felt as if the animals might disappear if the meditator opened his/her eyes. Is this what Colbert had in mind? Who knows? Who cares? But can you really miss that sort of nuance and say it's the exhibit that's "Vapid, insipid" or "vacuous" or such? (and hold up - I AM aware of the irony here, that I'm saying images of animals who were there to be photographed by command (rather than "invitation") yet spoke to me of a spiritual sense of non-coercive shamanic summoning or connection between these animals and the humans they were near. But unless you were there or have first-hand knowledge of these already-tamed animals being poorly treated by the photography crew, do you honestly have ANY right to compare this to the well-documented abuses suffered by trained circus animals? not everyone who "tames" a wild creature - or interacts with tame ones - does so malevolently...) TO ME: I didn’t see the choice of using local persons in the photographic subject as degrading or – as one self-described feminist put it: <"his white man's gaze on the "other" (meaning, brown-skinned children, women, and an older person) as inactive objects">. No. I understand this phenomenon of designating & denigrating the “other” exists…as a feminist myself, I’m no stranger to such notions. But as regards A&S – how would it have served the art to insert non-endemic (i.e., white) people into photos of endemic animals in distant non-white lands? Wouldn’t such an insistence be gratuitous at best, blatantly white-supremacist world-conquering racist at worst? TO ME: I didn’t see <"colbert's self glorification and male masturbation in the underwater scene with a woman implying foreplay"> and neither did the two senior-citizen women standing next to me during the film. The elder one (in a wheelchair) expressed my sentiments perfectly: “It’s so beautiful – like an underwater ballet”. (Arguably, she may have been unfamiliar with foreplay, but I’m not, and to me this was DANCE…which…come to think of it…some versions{including parts of ballet} have long existed as ritualized enactments of foreplay…) TO ME: There seems to be this rabid tendency to vilify an artistic device simply because you can spot it: eg: <"Spirituality was signed by slow motion, by crossed hands - I saw Tutankhamen's sarcophagus cover when I was eight years old, alright already! - and closed eyes imitating serenity."> <"this also rings of the corporate inspiration school. maybe because of the sepia coloring"> TO ME: just because you can spot the mechanism used to impart spiritual tones, or the color pallet you can name reminds you of a Nike commercial, doesn’t render those devices BAD! Colbert's photo project goes back longer than ten years – are you sure Nike’s ad people didn’t get the idea for their photos from him, rather than vice-versa? TO ME: There hasn’t been a criticism I’ve read that didn’t sound like

I have to admit, I left the exhibit feeling confused. . . and after reading this entire blog, I have to say that I felt both wonder and disappointment after viewing Colbert's show and the Nomadic museum. I am glad I went, although I think it was a bit overpriced. I wish more of the money raised was going back into helping global ecosystems and indigenous peoples. I was expecting more spiritually from the work, but instead, I was admiring artistic composition and manupulative mood-setting. Perhaps I set myself up due to the "hype." I was expecting the photographs and films to capture not only "harmony between humans and animals," but "wilderness" and "primeval being." This did not happen for me. But then again, I was emotionally touched by some of the images. Unfortunately, my analytical and educated thoughts robbed me of a seamless experience, as I kept wondering if the beautiful human and animal models were exploited to capture this imagery. Also, the exhibit was very crowded, and I could not help but wonder how many of these spectators, including me, attempt to have a sustainable lifestyle. The other problem was that my seven-year old kept telling me "he was bored." My 10 and 12-year old girls also lost interest rather quickly, and we could not sit through the 60-minute movie. This is not a good exhibit to attend with children unless yours are fairly mature. To some degree the artist did succeed to create a "timelessness"; this illusion was succeeded with the sepia tones, the music, and architecture. However, for me, he did not succeed to "rediscover the common ground that once existed when people lived in harmony with animals."

I stood in line for 2 hours on Saturday too, and I expected good things. I found the images on the website really beautiful, but then when I saw them all together they seemed contrived and corporate. I am not sure its helpful to complain about the art in terms of how he staged the photos, where the money goes etc.--I think analysis should at least start with the images themselves. He is trying to evoke a shamanistic feeling, an animistic universe, and I think some of the best pictures in the collection succede in that. But when you put them all together, especially with the annoying film, you just think limp attractive non-white model+water+gnarled tree+animal...I think I got it. Why was it so important for his formula that the human models looked nearly dead? I suppose he is trying to evoke non-violent relationships, 'interiority' etc. but it started to get weird.

i am shocked at such negative comments. not only did i find it moving, and mesmerizingly beautiful,....i saw it a second time the same week. both times, i was moved to tears. i believe it was art. and i, am an artist. perhaps those who criticized it were unable to "see" it properly....with the heart. i guess that is not so shocking that some could not get it afterall, just very, very sad. too bad for them.

What a shock to run across this thread and discover the cynicism, judgement, jealousy and the numbness of heart in so many comments. I truly feel pity for you people who could not simply be open to experiencing something truly grand without (your) vehement predisposition for criticism; criticism of every detail. Obviously there was no "experiencing" going on during the exhibition at all since it is obvious that throughout your time there your had a tape running thru your head of what was "wrong." People like you only find joy in life by telling what is wrong with someone or something which is the only thing that makes you feel superior. It is a pathetic a way to gain the feeling of "personal power" and so shallow. Your hearts are closed, your mind is numb from watching too much violence in our world, in films and television; too full of materialism and shallow values. How do you know about Nike or Calvin Klein "Eternity" adds if you're not looking at them? You're such fools. Look at your life in the mirror — what is magnificent about your life???? When have you ever moved one person to tears thru beauty? Your are probably afraid of beauty and anything truly deep. You are always the kind that finds the glass half full. It is a sad to find that this is the nature of so many people in this country — too many. It boils down to hatred and jealousy; certainly not the elements that will change our world for the better. How many of you critics can even really done anything great or at all to change our world for the better? Can conceive of being gone for 10 years in search of a deeper truth in life? You probably haven't even spent 30 minutes contemplating the subject. And regarding the complaining about $15.00!!! This is the most ridiculous complaint of all! How many mocha-latte-poofty coffees have you had in the past few months? $50 bucks a month? More??? One such beverage is $3.50 and I see people drinking them all day long. How many movies have you seen for the price of (now) $10 -12? Video rentals? Name it and you spend that without thinking. So, for those of you who had a beautiful un-jaded experience, as I also did, I applaud you and count you amongst the fortunate. Of course it is of no use to try to share this kind of deep experience with someone who cannot feel it. It can only be shared with those who were elevated by it. It is a language that cannot be taught. For me it was an epiphany and a spiritual experience. There was a beauty in the faces of the people and naturalness to the animals that cannot be posed and can only come from a harmony and a relationship and personal bond formed with the photographer. I am a photographer and know. I shall go on savoring the joy of Gregory Colbert's work for years and save the novel for quiet moments in the garden in meditation. He has touched my heart. I'm thrilled for his having been in Venice (Italy) at the perfect time to launch this show and create a venue that will travel the world and that I was fortunate enough be live in L.A. and be a part of the experience of it. It made me weep in a deep profound way and I went back several times spending 5 hours at a time and I met other people there who were equally moved. I hope in other venues around the world that hearts are opened. So if only a few were so deeply moved then the show is a success. This world needs to weep and weep without control for beauty and thru compassion as our modern world is wiping it (beauty, the native peoples, the animals, etc.,) out at an unprecedented pace. Weep while you can.

Is really a shame to read all this rather narrow and poor critisim of a daring and beautiful work of art. No comments about all this people complaining about money; it gaves a very small and rigid image of American people. I use to see Gregory swimming every single day in Paris, finally we becane friends, now I Know he was getting ready to swim with whales, and that is fantastic... please, stop critics and try to do the same thing, jus try!.. bad and nasty critics , you are just JEALOUS and sooo poor.

When I was handed the Ashes & Snow book by a dear friend who happened to be at the oppening in NY, I was striken and moved! I could'nt let go of it, every picture has a message, a surprise, a feeling, a dream, even a long forgotten memory ... I have also study and practice applied arts/photography in US, France, Holland, Greece..But I have never seen such a complete work/project full of "atmosfair" as we say in Greek. Reading all these comments I couldn't help thinking for you cynics who critise art in such a negative way: Why do you object the fact that serious art projects and architecture installations NEED wealhty support/sponsors...How far Mozart would have been if he had refused the support of his donnors? Does that fact undervaluing his work??? After all, we praise photography in fashion, in gossips, in fealthy magazines and newspapers,reduculous movies, were trillions dollars are spent...and you are bothered when such a concept arrises! Do you realise the amount of effort, discipline and strenght one has to maintain in oneself in order to complete such a long project??? E-witched you are great, thank you...

i dont know if my comment is going to follow behind this previous one, Vanessa's simple beauty - but having been introed to & shown quite a large part of this work debated here only this afternoon: by a good friend, who likes it very much (the animated computer project, here in Amsterdam).... then looking for it on my own screen and by chance stumbling onto these comments, i can't avoid the notion that many if not most of the critical comments are overwhelmingly correct and justified but so are most of the ('non-attacking')'positive' comments, by which, however, i feel compelled to comment myself (first time): How beautiful simplistic so many of my predecessors wiew their world (NOT a compliment) ...SMALL wonder there's that "Texan" in the saddle ... o dear !!!

It is the FEELING. which happens to be very strong. The intellectualizing is pointless. If the art stirrs your spirt and makes you dream even for a bit then he has done his part. For those who dont like it well some a covered soo deep in soot that even the brightest light cannot reach them.

I've read all of the above and find that, like spirituality and religion, there are the faithful and there are the others, like me, who just don't get it. In seeing the hour long film, it reminded me of deliberately obtuse student films I'd see at UCLA. You'd watch these films and, like Colbert's opus, would ask, "What the heck is this supposed to mean?" I suppose that artists, by nature, are supposed to be "artsy fartsy" but Colbert, in my opinion, seems egotistical in his contrived fantasms. I agree that animals in real life are vicious and that the long boring film seemed like fashion photography in sllooooowwww motion. Sure, the photos were often pretty but David Lean in "Lawrence in Arabia" chose to have understandable intellectual meat with the artfully crafted shots. I felt like the people who made this must be smoking something to make them hang on the shots for so long...cut already! At least, with the exhibit, you could walk through rather than have Colbert dictate the length of shots. My first query, after seeing the film, how the heck does someone afford to travel around the world with 35mm motion picture equipment for over a decade? And they talk, with pride, how they'd spend weeks not shooting a frame? Where do I get such a free ride? Last I checked, most of us have to produce something on a daily or, at least, weekly basis or we're canned. My first thought was that Colbert must be independently rich to spend such time...but I haven't found anything on the internet suggesting his personal wealth. All they say is that he had art patrons back him. My goodness. I haven't heard of that happening since the Medeci family. I suppose, as they say, art is in the eye of the beholder. I certainly wouldn't pay for a large painting of a Campbell's can of soup, either. I found the film slow and couldn't stop looking at my watch. I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong. From what I've seen of zen meditation, I'd probably be looking at my watch with that, also. Like some have mentioned in this post, I too felt I was somehow odd to not like it like MOST seem to. Most of the country seems to believe God listens to each of our prayers. I sometimes wish I could be like others... But I'm not.

I'm someone who hasn't seen the exhibition or anything.I've just seen the website and Gregory Colbert's talk on TED talks in which he showed 10 minutes of the movie. And it has touched me deeply, it has visualized what I have felt about animals all my life. I've seen a lot of national geographic and other documentaries on animals and nature, and I know and respect the fact that nature is not a peaceful place. I have 9 stray dogs who kill rats and eat dead puppies..and its all very vicious... but the fact is that there is truly something spiritual and magical about interacting with animals...when you feel yourself become the animal you're with. You understand each other in a way that can't be expressed with words and this emotion was so beautifully expressed in the movies and pictures that they made me sob uncontrollably. I really don't care about what Gregory Colbert is all about and all the politics involved. There will always be critics. And there will always be people who don't feel the way you feel because they have not experienced what you have....its Okay. But as far as I'm concerned ashes and snow is brilliant.

... what chilled me most was the moment i realised that Gregory Colbert is the Zalman King of "documentarians".

The running theme amongst the detractors of Ashes and Snow is that it is some how kitschy because the images are beautiful, sepia toned, and allude to a continuum between animals and humans. The hardened heart does not appreciate emotionalism or beauty for beauty’s sake nor the warm suggestion that animals are our distant relatives, strange yet near brothers and sisters in this coexistence on Earth. Dare I say that such jaded individuals believe that people who are actually able to be moved to joy by something as unfettered by the verbose banality of art theory as Ashes and Snow are “stupid” and beneath their superior university-fed world view. Ashes and Snow’s message is simple and sublime and for those steeped in Western-based art history, it’s too much to simply enjoy the work for what it is. It’s a trick. It’s a cheap shot. It’s racist. How about it’s simply the artist's vision of an ideal world where animals and humans exist in harmony?...Lighten up.

http://www.consciousnesscafe.org/2007/10/ashes-and-snow-new-age-porn.html Nicolas, thanks for inspiring me to get this off my chest.

ESTA MUY PADRE E INTERESANTE T RECOMIENDO IR A VERLO LO UNICO MALO ES Q NO T DEJAN SACAR FOTOS Y LOS POSTERS ESTAN MUY CAROS

Ahhh, bewildered... Dream on, of a happy place with pink unicorns and cheetahs and polar bears that want to cuddle... and buy a dictionary when you get a lucid moment. THEN let's talk about that definition of art that you appear to have picked up via Reader's Digest (sold at record level to that mainstream America you profess to be oh so ashamed of). See how simple it is to call someone else an ignorant? Give an opinion about the work, not about other people's opinion, you exemplary human being you.

Hi guys - i don't know how and why some of you didn't like the show, but i respect your oppinions. From my perspective, several years after it, i have to say that this was the most impactful, the most moving art show i have ever seen in my life. Once in the space, i became overwhelmed by it all, and was fighting back tears with all of my martial-arts breathing exercises and tricks that i could muster. It was only for the fact that i was with a girl that i somehow managed to keep my composure. I have never seen something so beautiful, sincere and insightful - before or since. The $36 million could not have been better spent. Imagine all the people that were deeply moved by this exibit - can anyone ask anything else out of Art?

Good post, but have you thought about Ashes and Snow, Smoke and Mirrors... before?

Awesome photography, haunting music. I believe if Heaven is anything resembling this tranquility, and how we should be living I will be most satisfied. It is possible for human beings and animals to co-exist in peace as this portrayed. You just have to be a very pure soul who is not afraid of animals.

I am game designer, a jar-head in the "art world"...This is by far a great lesson how to "fake" something...correspond with my line of work. I know guys that can model any of these images in Maya or 3D Studio Max...From a jar-head stand point, these images are great for Banana Republic or the Elephant bar. Congratulations to Gregory, how do I gig like this ??? Man I could use some of this technique to make a quick buck....