I’m pretty sure now why some photos shown yesterday work and some don’t.
Some images, like this one below, don’t work at all in offering a sense of disconnectedness. In fact some don’t even show difference and those that do show difference (in the sense that the subject matter shown is not usual) don’t offer the evocation I am after. In all these cases the sense of misplacement – the juxtaposition of something clearly out of sync with context – isn’t suggested.
Others like this below come somewhere near to what I want to evoke by, in this example, showing a cycle pump in a bathroom next to toothbrushes and other normal bathroom kit. So aside from the technicalities of this photo I feel is is getting nearer to what I want.
This photo achieves my aim. The image is clearly of a tie rack with a urine bag hanging over it. The image has a strong gestalt and is quite obvious in its subject matter and would hopefully evoke questions in the viewer’s mind. Yet it is puzzling why I think this works yet yesterday’s image of kit on the washing machine does not even though its close focus and strong form suggest it should work.
One last image also worked but in a slightly different way. Here I have appropriated some incontinence equipment and arranged it as a piece of art. Hopefully the installation is different enough to create questions in the viewer’s mind.
Conclusions
I think the last two images work well as part of a set. Jonathan made the point yesterday that the image of the ties is quite disconnected from place and so quite different to the others, and it’s too early to tell whether this will be a benefit (variation) or problem (out of sync with others in the set). But a variation in level of obviousness about the evocation could produce a sort of rhythm in a set and allow the viewer’s awareness to build up or be modulated. I think my challenge is going to be how to build a set that doesn’t repeat itself and where each photo contributes to a discourse. But I feel I have got somewhere now.
anomiepete 