Louise Lawler's interview provided new insight and added to my understanding of photography as a form of art.  Reading the artist's intent as said by the artist herself gave me a new appreciation for this particular form of art.  I had trouble understanding and seeing Levine's work as art because I could not get over the idea that she is famous for uncropping and reprinting another photographers work.  I agreed with her critics, she was not producing art but replicas.  However, reading Krauss and Lawler's interview the meta-artistic aspect of the photograph struck me as a new dimension that we, as a class, have not yet explored.

I really liked Lawler's idea of the reproduction of a photo adding an index or a new layer of meaning to distort the original.  Taking a picture of a picture or a work of art does not seem conventionally difficult to do, I take pictures of works of art and I do not consider myself anything close to an artist.  Lawler plays with human memory in her photographs and our ability to recognize a work of art although it has been distorted.  Her photographs imply the emotions which viewers infuse into works of art making an interaction with art an individual experience.

Reading this piece helped me understand the Levine piece slightly better as well.  I misunderstood Levine as being almost sarcastic about Walker Evans' photos.  However, what I now realize is that she was bringing a new perspective, showing that each viewer interacts with photographs differently bringing different emotions.  An image should not be regarded as proof of anything because the context and frame (including the gender of the photographer) change the emotions of the photo.