Nan Goldin is a different photographer.
Her photographs are harsh.
they are autoral in a whole new level: the spectator is invited to her own personal life. he becomes part of her family for the slight duration of the frame observation. or even beyond this.
the main point is: nothing is staged. only real, sometimes painful (more often than joyful during her first moment as a photographer) situations.
Nan and her photographs are a whole. they can't (and don't want to) be analysed apart.
closest friends and love affairs are her subjects, caught in simple, personal moments that are made public by the images.
Nan's style doens't respect the classical conventions of photography, although many of her works align perfectly with that aesthetics.
Nan Goldin has no boundaries. not even death.
for being so sensitive and respectful to her friends, their confidence goes as far as their existence goes: images of the final days of her loved ones are some of her strongest works, many related to AIDS and its dreadness.
Nan suffered a lot. and her photos were both catartic and artistic in a way no one else would be able to achieve with such naturality.
Maybe the main question about nan's work should be: how much of us do we see mirrored in it? how much of Nan do we have?
Nan is the master of the intimate.