The Lartigue Hoax?

Jim Lewis has an interesting article over at Slate about assertions that the early 20th Cent. child-phenom photographer Jacques Henri Lartigue was maybe not exactly the prodigy he made himself out to be. The new book Jacques Henri Lartigue: The Invention of an Artist claims he was not an amateur artist and was actually well versed in contemporary photography technique and themes when he made his earliest work at the age of 6 (or 8). Lewis discusses whether this really matters or not when assessing the value of the work. Though I'm only familiar with a smattering of Lartigue's photographs, I say it doesn't matter. The images stand on their own. Lewis writes:

Taking pictures is, in many ways, a kind of performance, and a camera is more like a musical instrument than a paintbrush or a pen. So, looking at a Lartigue print is very much like beholding, say, one of those brilliant child soul singers who come along every so often. You know they can't possibly have the wisdom that their work suggests, but it doesn't seem to matter.

Via Conscientious