itkin and Wegman surely were both chosen to serve double duty, as presumed crowd-pleasing major figures and as picturemakers whose work connects in various ways to this year's theme. Disappointment in their work or presentation thereof thus had nothing to do with irrelevance to the subject at hand. Yet the problem with these technically elaborate soirees goes beyond the failings of particular performers. Perhaps it is time to reconsider the very idea of these presentations. Sitting in a spectacular Roman ruin under the stars to watch a fancily organized slide show with droning voice has apparently ceased to represent anyone's idea of a good time. Nonetheless, the effort to provide a substantial menu was evident, and welcomed by all. This year's Rencontres also left behind itself a sizable catalogue -- the first in R.I.P. history -- with useful texts and fine illustrations, a genuine enduring trace of the program. So Fontcuberta can be said to have made some significant, positive changes in both the structure and quality of the festival's program and related activity. At the concluding press conference, he received a heartfelt, prolonged, and well-deserved round of applause for creating a benchmark against which subsequent Rencontres could measure themselves. Yet, a sense of entropy pervaded the town, nowhere more evident than in the Place du Forum, a small open square ringed with cafes which serves as the morning-till midnight rendezvous point for attendees. In the past, even in off-years the Place was action central, packed wall-to-wall for a week, aspiring photographers sitting cheek to jowl with masters of the medium, curators, critics, collectors, gallerists, editors, educators and historians. And things happened, serendipitously. next column

ou could stand on the edge of the space, as I sometimes did, and watch the energy jump from table to table like chain lightning -- introductions, recognitions, reunions being made. This year that spark was gone, and its absence could not be blamed on the program. There was a paucity of familiar faces, and the Place du Forum was half empty most of the time. In my report on the 1990 Rencontres, I asked, "What happens if you give a networking party and nobody comes?" 1996 provided the reply. Simply put, it seems to me that much of the old guard retired with former artistic director, Lucien Clergue, and no avant-garde -- not even just a new clientele --- has rushed in to fill the vacuum. At the moment, the festival is running on momentum only. What will bring the old crowd back or entice a new one to take advantage of the great opportunity it represents? The Rencontres has never aggressively pursued that wide segment of the public at large which makes photography shows among the best-attended events in the museum and gallery world. Nor has it worked hard at drawing photo and art students and teachers, or people involved in the numerous other media --- film, video, computer art - with which photography interconnects. Truth be told, it has never done much more for even its core audience than slapping some pictures up on the walls, putting some slides in the projectors, and just being there. For two decades, that was enough. No more. Now for the first time in its history, the R.I.P. faces the challenge of regenerating its magnetism, regaining segments of its previous audience and redefining its constituency. Considered, substantial programming is an important building block, to be sure, and must become an Arles tradition. Beyond that, however, what's called for here is imaginative, adventurous long-range planning -- and that, for the Rencontres, will surely prove the most radical idea of all.

(Note: for more information on the 1996 Arles Festival, and information on the '97 edition , check their Website: http://www.babel.fr/arles-festival/