I had a profound interest in the subject matter, which I believe was one of his goals. The fact that he shoots in such large formats really assists the audience in micro-analyzing and observing these spaces, and in cases where people are involved, their interaction with or role in the space. In his “chapter” Retail he discussed the products shot in these stores as becoming just as important or just as representative as the public. Companies and manufacturers create these products that will appeal to the public, and they do-they sell. Looking at these images is like looking at a self-portrait. The fact that we buy into these manufactured, consumerist ideas tells us exactly who we are as a society or as individuals.
His work in Thrift did feel like it was missing something. He mentioned that he is not one to point fingers, and his images did no such thing, but there is some kind of disconnect from the images. While they’re interesting to analyze, they haven’t quite been taken to the next level where a clear statement could be derived. Perhaps, because I know the images of people are staged, the images are thrown slightly and they seem less legitimate. That may be a shallow observation but I feel like when he had a great intention to obtain these “street” photographs of people in places he may not have supposed to be in makes the work seem that much more worth it. I suppose in Thrift it’s because of a lack of struggle.
No comments:
Post a Comment