Skip to main content

food for thought.

"i have a postcard on which i've become rather dependent in the making of this book. It shows five remarkably similar women sitting at a round table, each with a closed fan placed before her. Their gazes have a rather disarming way of just missing each other; they are together but apart.

If you look at this photograph long enough, you suddenly realise that the stripes that make up the wall behind them are in fact a series of mirrors. That this is a photograph of one woman, sitting with her back to us at a segment of the table that is completed, as is her company, by the reflections in the mirrors.
The relationship of interiority and exteriority is never simple. The exterior is already implied in the interior and vice versa. How many selves does the real woman in this postcard feel she has? Is the photographer trying to tell us something about her? And these reflections, are they surface woman only? Do they have an interiority?"

Francesca Hughes

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mr perfect/miss imperfect

Instead of waiting for the perfect one, work at being the perfect one instead. These words roll off the tongue with ease like a familiar jingle. Yet the former holds an appeal tt the latter can never achieve.could it be, that at the end of the day, we are, in fact, more aware of reality than we realise? The former, perhaps, more achievable than the latter?

pro-cras-in-a-tion.

one of those moments when i get distracted from the task at hand, oh the joys of the internet. i dont know what catches my eye more, the light, the subtle suggestions of melting shadows, or an unadulterated expression of love, that comfortable lingering silence in company?

the ego of man

so this caught my eye from the red center during studios today. The question of religion and God certainly never fails to draw the crowds: from a question of God's existence, one is defined.yet through it, I'm amazed yet again of how self absorbed humans can be. In our pursuit to find out who we are, theists, atheists, or nihilists, we got the order so wrong. For is the conclusion to this question even one tt is up to our disgression, or should it be that whoever we claim to be is inconsequential, for the question is really an answer that has to be accepted nonetheless..?