I can't claim the title, because this is swiped from a Slate photo essay, written by Caitlin DeSilvey.
Only in this country would be find a way to justify our trash, which we've got lots of as well as explain away how quickly we make and then throw away.
I don't deny that there is something artful (if composed by a good photographer when the light--and the camera's light filters--are adjusted just so, but are we that desperate for historical meaning that ruined shacks become significant?
2 comments:
Okay, I admit that my initial reaction was too hasty.
I should read the full essay before making a judgement.
There are some intersting things stated in this piece.
This isn't the 'history' of Great Men, famous battles, documents, and cathedrals, as recorded by the victors and fed to the masses for their edification, so it won't get funded. Although Caitlin DeSilvey does romanticize it a bit (The transience of human ambition is etched out in lichen on the iron of the former shaft works...), she raises some valid questions about the relative merits of restoring, preserving, removing, recording, observing, and letting things decay. Maybe the main question is when and where it's appropriate to do each of those 'histories'. Or we could convert them into gift shoppes.
Post a Comment