Is photography in need of text to explain it? Sometimes the image is too complex, abstract or vague to be left by itself. Occasionally, an image might not look "abstract" in the purest meaning, but so much on the abstraction level that makes it difficult to understand. It is said that the viewer should enjoy the image at the visual level and if there is no tangible content to hook on, then don't worry about it. I don't like that. I believe that after a viewer enjoys the first impression, on the visual level, an image must provoke a cognitive response. This is one such image. The title gives the viewer some clues, but one still needs to have some knowledge of what that title refers to. It is much more rewarding to know that this is a found image from the walls of a construction site in Los Angeles, composed with the highest respect for the work of a Russian artist and legend.
No comments:
Post a Comment