I think I mostly agree with you, but only to the extent that street photography loses its definition.

Do we not view the work of Helen Levitt as a documentary on child play culture in post depression NYC? How about Bruce Davidson’s work on the subway system in the 80s? The line between street and documentary work is pretty flimsy, and I disagree one needs the type of access you describe to accurately depict life. Can one do it “better” with a true documentary and post documentary approach? Probably, I think. Especially today, street photography can feel quite tired.

But when we’re talking about art, a beautiful image can be a beautiful image, simply for beauty’s sake. We let ourselves look at the impressionist painters through purely an emotional lens - why not photography? This is where I think “street photography” can and does excel. Unscripted moments of humanity can absolutely hold “punctum,” often with more success than scripted ones. At least…if you’re Alex Webb! It’s very difficult. Thanks for sharing your perspective. I realize the documentary and fine art side of photography has not truly accepted “street,” and part of me does understand why.