O, BRONICA

I am always intrigued by people looking out of windows. They look out, but most of the times they don’t see; they look outside but most of the times they actually look inside themselves… They are seeking something that they don’t even know... I planned to do this ‘Looking Out’ project with my family (I am not confident in portraiture with strangers.) via formulated portraiture using medium format, so I borrowed a Bronica ETRS and shot a roll Ilford HP5 ISO 100. I was so disappointed to find that half of the frames were exposed nothing. Equipment manager told me that it might have something to do with the camera’s battery. O’ Bronica. I will have to re-do this project.

I always found Photo Shop complicated so I had one session of Photo Shop 2 weeks ago. Again, I just found it is probably not my thing. I had another session of Light Room and it was amazing – intuitive, creative and straight forward. I have to use both of them to retouch and photomontage pictures this term. Bit worried as I am not technique fluent.

ON SEMIOTICS

(Courtesy: Lise Sarfati, ‘Canteen, Serbsky Psychiatric Institution, Moscow', 1995)

W.J.T. Mitchell (1994) introduced the phrase ‘pictorial turn’ (p. 11-35). It means that image oriented communication is getting more and more important in the language dominated world. Developed in early 1910s as a branch of structural linguistics, semiotics became widely applied in images from 1960s. This essay will apply semiotics tools, especially by the use of the connotation and denotation concept, to analyse an image by Lise Sarfati. It was originally published as the cover of Sarfati’s book Acta Est in 2005. The essay will firstly lay out the theory frame work, then discuss the image in terms of its denoted and connoted message and interpret the cultural meanings and ideologies embodied in the connoted message.

Before discussing the concept of denotation and connotation, it is first necessary to describe the nature of signs so that a semiotic theory structure is provided on which the analysis is based. Language and image are made up of ‘signs’ through which we make meanings.

F.Saussure defines sign as being composed of a signifier – the form which the sign takes and the signified – the concept it represents (cited in Chandler, 2004). The two elements are related by ‘signification’.

CS Pierce categorises sign into three types:

Index: a mode in which the signifier is not arbitrary but is directly connected in some way (physically or causally) to the signified.
Icon: a mode in which the signifier is perceived as resembling the signified.
Symbol: a mode in which the signifier does not resemble the signified but which is fundamentally arbitrary.

(cited in Chandler, 2004, p. 36).

Utilising these semiotics theories and devices, R. Barthes develops theories by structuring signs into two levels. He introduces denotation, connotation and myth. Denotation refers to ‘the literal meaning of a sign’ (Burgin, 1982, p. 128) and connotation refers to ‘meanings which lie beyond denotation but are dependent on it’. (Burgin, 1982, p. 128). After a sign is formed by signification as the denotation procedure, the meaning acts as a signifier of the second level – connotation. As the second level somehow directs ideology and culture meaning in the society, Bathes call this second level ‘myth’.

1. Signifier 2. Signified
3. Sign
I SIGNIFIER II SIGNIFIED
III SIGN

(Barthes, 1977b, p. 115)

While the first level is most of the times clear and literal, the second level will have a polysemic nature because of the arbitrary interpretation from different angles and context. Dyer (1986) raised the issue ‘concept of codes’ (p. 131). As codes are derived from social, culture and ideology knowledge, people in different context made meaning in the second level differently.

In the example of Sarfati’s image, verisimilitude of colour and abundance of detail instantly signifies to our minds that it is a photo. Index characteristic of sign is demonstrated by the causal relationship of the light reflected from the actual situation to the film or digital sensor of the camera. Our perception of the fact that this image is a photo rather than a painting instantly and naturally enable us to identify that all things depicted in the image are real at the time of the shooting.

After this instant signification, our eyes are firstly drawn to the dominant silver birch wood poster on a dull green wall. This poster occupies almost half of the image. In the poster, there are two birch boles with lots of branches. We see more branches and smaller boles around them with most leaves in vivid yellow colour some with light green hue. We know that the poster depicts a birch wood in a sunny day. However, the edges of the poster, especially the bottom edge, are sliced off irregularly and it presents a messy and irregular serrate margin. Other edges are somehow folded in a not neat way. It might be on the wall for a long time and people sliced off pieces many times when the edges curled up. Our eyes are then drawn to two people sitting on the left side shoulder by shoulder and facing out of the frame. They have very short hair and are dressed in dark blue uniform. One face is little blocked by the other’s head, but we can see both have deadpan complexions. It seems that they are gazing something although the image gives us no clue what they are gazing at. Our eyes next move to a table behind them with colourful table cloth on the top. We recognised that colourful repeated pattern are of red tomatoes, yellow flowers, green leaves etc. We see another table with same cloth albeit it was cropped by the right edge of the image. There are some banknotes, black rye breads, and some white plastic bags on the table. We then noticed that big part of the wall are peeled off with appearance of white calcareous colour and even grey concrete colour.

Our common sense formed in our daily life and culture context tells us instantly that this is probably a scene in a canteen from the denoted sign of the table cloth. We can also infer that there are several more similar tables in the space from the cropped table on the right side. We also know that this might be an institution canteen because the two men leaning the table are dressed in uniform with same hair cut, though we are not sure if it is a prison or other institute. The peeled wall and torn poster inform us that this facility is not well managed. The extent of the peeling indicates that it has been run down for quite some time. The two people’s deadpan complexions seem neutral.

This denotation is the ‘mechanical analogue of reality’ (Barthes, 1977a, p. 18) which then acts as a signifier and pushes us to the next level - connotation.

Whenever we think of prison or other institution, we know people’s freedom is somehow bereaved. The dull tone of the overall image, the run down wall and torn poster with the deadpan faces somehow persuade us that the two young men are disappointed, depressed and numbly sad. Yes, if the canteen is run down to this level, other facility in the institution should be similarly dilapidated. Lack of comfort will fuel the deprivation of the freedom and will make people even more disappointed and depressed.

After we looked at the image, we then noticed the title of the image: ‘Canteen, Serbsky Psychiatric Institution, Moscow 1995’. This ‘anchoring’ function of the text verified our surmise of the location and further reacts to our signification, which is the ‘relaying’ function of the text. We have been all influenced by our media around us. Most media claimed that Russia is a country of poor social system, severe social problem, and fragile economic situation. We all know that this is especially the case in 90’s just after the dismantling of the communist regime. The title signifies our stereotyped prejudice of Russia, which in turn strengthens our connotation that those people living in the institution are miserably deprived of everything by the social system. We see the kitschy colourful poster and table cloth; this contrasts the overall dull tone and the ‘melancholy’ deadpan complexion and therefore endorses our sensation further. We noticed the black rye bread and the banknotes on the table against which the two young men are leaning. It seems that they are not interested in them. They are looking out forward steadily with faces lit up by some light projected from out of the frame right in front of them. Our sentimental development reacted by the image and relayed by the text. We might easily consider the bank notes and rye bread as the signifier of the material world and the light projected from outside of image to the deadpan faces as the signifier of freedom and hope. The two young men turn back to the material world; yet they look forward to freedom, hope and future. This in turn develops the silver birch poster as a signifier to another level. Birch wood always has a romantic touch in culture meaning (eg., birch wood love scene in Tarkovsky’s Ivan’s Childhood). We might consider the birch wood as the symbolic sign of their arcadia, which they can not get into at that time but hopefully will be reached someday. As we gaze on the image further, the young men now are signified as young Russian generation. It is then connoted that young Russian generation look forward to their dreams, despite the currently dull, difficult and depressed surroundings.

This image is the cover for a photographic book named Acta Est which is a Latin phrase meaning the game is over. It signifies now as a pun with several layers of meanings. It could mean that the two young men’s game is over ending up in such a under-developed institution. It could mean that USSR is dismantled and the communism game is over. It could even mean that the young men see their arcadia, soon they will get there and the current institution game is over. As we browse the pages, we see all the dull and run down factories, facilities and some deadpan faces in the book. These photos combin and form a stronger sign as a whole. We now perceive a both absence and presence of past, present and future.

Connotation is making meaning via a set of codes that are ‘forms of social knowledge which are derived from social practices and beliefs’ (Dyer, 1982, p. 135). If I had not been exposed to western media daily in the last decade, I would not have analysed in the above way. I am a Chinese and had been living in China for decades before I came to England. I had been to Russia many times and I understand the situation well. From my life experience, social knowledge in China and Russia (China and Russia shares similarities because of communism background.), communism cultural and ideology background, the signs would not be the same as the above.

First of all, the peeled wall and torn poster are not be the signifiers of a run down social system. At that time in the 90’s, most public facility was not well maintained due to the overall poor economic standard. Even normal home might have cracked walls etc. Therefore it is not a signified message that the institution is neglected by society. Secondly, since we were educated that people sent to the prison or psychiatric institutions before prison for assessment are usually someone who committed crimes. Therefore, the two young men as a sign of normal Russian young generation will not be valid. We will consider them as the symbols of delinquent young Russians. Under such circumstances, the deadpan complexion is interpreted as a sign that they are regretful of what they committed. The light and birch wood are then signified and symbolised as Russian society. Accordingly, a new meaning is formed: they need to work hard in the institution to correct their mind and start clean before getting back to the sun shining and colourful society.

Sarfati as the photographer of the image claimed that ‘the pictures I make are not snapshots…my pictures aren’t about reality’ (cited in Boot, 2004, p. 410). She takes her own position before shooting and constructs mise-en-scène to make her own version of the world. From the introduction Acta Est (Sarfati, 2005), we know that actually Sarfati likes and knows the young men in the photo well but due to some murder incident, the young men were sent to psychiatric institution for assessment before being sent to institution for young offenders. Sarfati probably codified her sentiment of sympathy into her work. Despite of this fact, mass media make these images popular; the signifiers within the image are connoted to construct different meanings to different viewers from different cultural and ideology background. This in turn directs ideology and culture meaning in our society. Popular myth is created accordingly in our times.

(Word Count: 1988)


Reference:
Barthes, Roland, (1977). Image-Music-Text translated by Stephen Heath. New York: Hill and Wang.
Barthes, Roland, (1977). Mythologies translated by Annette Lavers. New York: Hill and Wang.
Boot, Chris, (2004). Magnum Stories. London: Phaidon.
Chandler, Daniel (2004). Semiotics: The Basics 2nd Edition. London: Routledge.
Dyer, Gillian, (1982). Advertising as Communication Method. London: Routledge.
Sarfati, Lise (2005). Acta Est. London: Phaidon.
Burgin, Victor (1982). Thinking Photography. London: Macmillan.
Mitchell, W.J.T. (1994). Picture Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago.

ON HISTORY

The first major photography history book was published in 1937 by Beaumont Newhall, when photography became an important medium in publishing, art and people’s daily life, almost a century after Photography was invented in 1839. Since then, different books on histories of photography cropped up and so far dozens of history books on photography in similar or different aspects have been written and published. These books are different in structure, content and analysis. This essay focuses on two influential history books: Mary Warner Marien’s Photography: A Cultural History (2007) and Ian Jeffrey’s Photography: A Concise History (1981). The essay is organised to define the concept of history, explore the background of the authors and writings on history of photography, and discuss the comparison and contrast of the structure and contents of the two books.

History is sometimes taken for granted as truthful, neutral and authoritative. However any history is subject to critical analysis due to its intrinsic subjective character. Raymond Williams (1988) claims that ‘history’ as a word moved in 15th century from either an account of imaginary events or events supposed to be true to an account of past real events which is more than organized knowledge of the past. (p. 146). This past knowledge, which forms history, is supposed to be written by historians. Even if historians produce out of personal preference, readers are obliged to consider as general authoritative description, following habits formed from the past. Edward Hallett Carr (1961) maintains that there is such a vast quantity of information about the past that the historian always chooses the "facts" he or she decides to make use of. (cited in Hughes-Warrington, 2007, p. 26). Therefore, it is critical to understand whom the history is written for, who writes them and what value criteria authors use to define a history.

History of photography can be introduced in several themes such as technology development, specified topics, cultural and social background etc. Both books discourse history from a cultural and social point of view. Mary Warner Marien’s Photography A Culture History was drafted in 2002. She was then a deputy professor in Syracuse University. The purpose of her work is to ‘make readers gauge the medium’s manifold developments and appreciate the historical and cultural contexts in which photographers lived and worked’. (Marien, 2002, p. x). Ian Jeffery’s Photography A Concise History was first published in 1981. Jeffrey (1981) maintains that he focuses ‘on those photographers who have both sustained and supplemented photography’s dominant modes’. (p. 9). He was then a professor in Goldsmith College. While both authors have similar academic background, they published in years with a gap of almost 20 years. During the 20 years, society, politics, technology and culture had changed significantly and photography has entered a new epoch. Marien’s work of course covers more period than Jeffrey’s. However, setting aside this period coverage difference, there are many other differences in Marien’s and Jeffrey’s interpretations of photography history. The following sets out to explain the structure and content of the books, the methodologies of the writings, the contrast of the similar issues discussed, and dimensions one discuses and the other one does not.


Marien’s work includes 7 chapters strictly following the timeline: ‘The Origins of Photography (to 1839)’, ‘The Second Invention of Photography (1839-1854)’, ‘The Expanding Domain (1854-1880)’, ‘Photography in the Modern Age (1880-1918)’, ‘A New Vision (1918-1945)’, ‘Through the Lens of Culture (1945-1975)’, and ‘Convergences (1975-Present)’ plus ‘Epilogue’. Marien groups the 7 periods mainly according to major social and culture watershed changes in history. Jeffrey’s book contains 10 chapters: ‘Seeing Nature’, ‘Instantaneous Pictures’, ‘Documentary Meanings’, ‘Small Worlds’, ‘Truths beyond Appearance’, ‘Looking to the Future’, ‘American Society’, ‘The Human Condition’, and ‘Self-asserted, Self-absented’. While each one has a unitive theme, the 10 chapters develop in a chronological way albeit with occasional jumping around to maintain focused on each topic. Jeffrey obviously summarised the history out of his own understanding by grouping photographers and their works by the theme that he develops.

While Marien introduces the technical, social and political background before 1839, Jeffrey does not discuss the social, cultural, and scientific background before the invention of photography but starts directly from Fox Talbot. Marien also introduces the precursors and the inventors including Daguerre, Herschel and Talbot and analyses in depth the social and political background and reaction of the inventions.

Following the first chapter, Marien starts to discuss the forthcoming practical uses and social meanings which emerged in more than a decade. She introduces the photography usage in science including biology, anthropology and medicine, in recording events and war, expeditionary and travel and in portraiture. Jeffery introduces the period in two folds with two chapters. He focuses the photography with the function of seeing nature while critically explains the limit. Secondly he discusses the instantaneity of photography and elaborates further the problems and advantages in art, portraiture and topography.

In Marien’s chapter three, the ‘Expanding Domain (1854-1880)’, she explains the emerging popularity of photography. She delineates the photography popularity in the society, photography usage in war, survey and science. She also discusses art and photography and woman behind the camera. Writing on the same period, Jeffrey concentrates the documentary aspect of photography in only British and American photographers.

‘Modern Age (1880-1918)’ explains the technology and social background of the time and the interaction relationships. Marien discusses in depth the relationship art and photography, emerging usage of photography in publishing, and more application in science. In Jeffrey’s chapter named Truths beyond Appearance, he analyses the artist-photographers in Europe and United States around 1900.

Marien uses ‘A New vision (1918-1945)’ to introduce how the photojournalism started to enter into common usage, how photography pioneered in avant-garde art and how photography played an important role in science and World War II. Jeffrey, on the other hand, spends 4 chapters to introduce this period. ‘Looking into the Future’ lists a dozen of photographers, their works and reviews mainly in Europe between the two world wars. The photography style mainly includes documentary and surreal. Then Jeffrey introduces Sander, Atget, Stieglitz, Strand and Weston to focus on European society and American nature. He analyses American documentary photography and culture in the depression times in the next chapter by discussing how photography responded to economic crisis, war, industrialization and mass society during 1930 to 1950.

Marien, in the Chapter, ‘Through the Lens of Culture (1945-1975)’, elaborates the sea change in social and ideology internationally. Then she explains the development and interaction of photography as a medium in publishing and art with societies and cultures in different countries internationally. Jeffry analyses the new documentary pioneered by Frank and names his last chapter ‘Self-asserted, Self-absented’, which introduces from subjectivism to a self-denying photographic movement in the seventies.

Marien’s last Chapter, ‘Convergence (1975-Present)’ introduced and focused on globalisation, convergence of culture, value, ideology and convergence of photography with other forms of art. ‘The Epilogue’ based on the theme of beauty, science and nature to shed more lights into the photography’s future.

Mary Warner Marien’s Photography A Culture History has 528 pages with 600 illustrations (The First 2002 Edition). Ian Jeffery’s Photography A Concise History has 248 pages and 136 illustrations (The First 1982 Edition). Both works, according to its own publicity, claim that the books fulfill the need for a critical and cultural approach, rather than a technical one. Both authors used ‘A’ instead of ‘The’ on their title, which indicate their attitudes toward the definition of ‘history’. Both of them admit the difficulties and limits in writing an impartial history book on photography in each of the introductions. Marien (2002) admits she does have personal preference such as Doisneau’s photos taken in 1950’s, (p. x). and Jeffrey (1981) expresses concerns on how to choose photographic cannons. (pp. 7-9) Both Marien and Jeffrey do not elaborate further how her/his methodology is developed in selecting those photos out of the massive photo stock in history. To readers, those photos are simply authoritatively assumed of great dominance in history. While Marien takes an approach more focused into the context of a number of layers including society, culture, politics, science and art; Jeffrey maintains the classical approach to introduce in depth the masters and categorised them and their works into different theme.

Based on these methods and structures, the way of their discourse differs. Marien strictly follows the timeline because each period offers similar social, cultural and technology background to photography and to photographers during that time. Jeffrey selects a number of themes, under which he introduces and analyses the works chosen. Marien devotes a high percentage of space to explore extensively and broadly on social and cultural background. Jeffrey analyses the social, cultural and technology background very briefly but in a focused way.

Marien’s work explored extensively and internationally including Mexico, Latin America, Africa, Russia and Asia, although she is mindful that she has not mentioned much the photography in India and China; while Jeffrey’s work hardly mentions any other country than Europe and United States. Marien’s work pays much attention to female ones by setting out special sections such as ‘Women behind the Camera’, ‘Women in the Pictorial Movement’ and ‘Feminism and Postmodern Photography’. However, Jeffrey’s work is overwhelmingly concerned with male practitioners.
Marien also discusses family and vernacular photography in reasonable depth as an important aspect of photographic cultural and social history, but Jeffrey fails to discuss at all.

While Marien endeavours to include a number of photos with contexts of magazines covers or advertisement, Jeffrey’s illustrations include none of the kind but just single photo. While Marien explored thoroughly photography montage and mixed media techniques, Jeffrey fails to discuss in depth these issues. There are more areas where Marien has discussed but Jeffrey has not mentioned. Marien’s maintains good criteria that anything related photography’s culture history is worth discussing. For example, some photography related art forms such as pop, conceptual and installation art are discussed excellently in her work to explore the interrelationships between photography and art. Jeffrey’s book does not mention this area.

‘Art is a public production’. (Wolff, 1981, p. 1). Photography, as a new form in art, publishing and people’s daily life, is a new subject with more than 170 years history permeating into so many area of our life, culture and society hence it is impossible to create a history book that covers all aspects. It is understandable that a concise history with only 248 pages of A3 size book can not cover everything in detailed manner as Marien’s 528 pages A4 sized book. Even with such a volume, Marien (2002) also consent in her introduction that she has not mined photographic archives of business and industry, the history of advertising photography. (p. x). Both books discusses well in depth in their own kinds. Marien’s work explores and shows an extensive prospect of culture, society and the world and Jeffrey’s book sheds new lights into photography and culture within his chosen 10 themes. While Marien’s book flows smoothly seamlessly of the development of photography in our cultural background, Jeffrey’s work brings forth a number of important fragments within the development of photography. Marien’s history can also be considered another kind of fragments presentation of photography history in the history due to the subjective characteristics of history writing. Jeffrey’s history then could be considered the fragments of fragments in the history of photography. I read Jeffrey’s book first before I started Marien’s book. Marien’s excellent discourse of background of culture, society and other photographer’s work enables me understand Jeffrey’s work to another level. There is no ‘the’ history. All history books inter-relate real history and author’s own knowledge and understanding. It is reader’s choice to understand different approach of historians and to interpret, interact and weave by using one’s own mind to weave one’s own history.


Reference:
Hughes-Warrington, Marnie, (2007). Fifty Key Thinkers On History. London: Routledge.
Jeffrey, Ian, (1981). Photography A Concise History. London: Thames & Hudson.
Marien, Mary Warner, (2002). Photography A Cultural History. London: Laurence King.
Williams, Raymond, (1988). Keywords. London: Fontana.
Wolff, Janet, (1981). The Social Production of Art. London: Macmillan Education.

ABSENCE/PRESENCE - SUBMISSION

Untitled Absence-Presence
Critical Reflection 2009

The 31 photos in the first class in October were inspiring. I had split absence and presence in meaning but the presentation completely changed my ideology that contradicted concepts can be embodied in the same situation and can create a strong inter-related engagement. I undertook an initial research and concluded that photographically representational absence is a form of presence.

I searched for any images with absence presence theme but images found mainly include traces of the past and some formalist fine art work.

I then brainstormed and shortlisted 4 concepts: human/nature, surveillance, billboard and manikin. I evaluated trial shootings myself and consulted with Ulrike Leyens whose comments enlightened my concept greatly. Finally I decided to shoot manikin with a theme on the ambiguity of realness and artificialness.

I visited all major high streets in London and shot with formulated layout to keep visual coherence. I used wide aperture in shooting and high contrast in printing to to convey the realness of these manikins. I reinforced the visual coherence in editing and finalised with five frames. In the post production stage, Rachel Cunningham introduced some manikin works by Roger Mavity and Valerie Belin. Their works strengthened my committment to the concept of this project - ambiguity.

(Scanned from Fibre Prints)

ABSENCE/PRESENCE - MOUNTING

(Retouching Demonstration)

(The Hot Iron & Wax Paper)

(Mounting Press)

(Cutting)

(Retouching)

Ulrike showed us how to mount and retouch. After finishing printing last Thursday, I finished my production on Friday by doing mounting, cutting and retouching. The works are far from perfection, but due to time and skill constraint, I had to finish this way. I bought black mounting board from art shop on campus, considered different alternatives of mounting and decided to make a no-boarder mounting. First of all, to stick photo, fibre paper and mount board by a hot iron. Then, I wrapped the mounted stuff with wax paper and tucked it into the mounting machine for 3 minutes. They look very neat afterwards. After cutting to the expected size (not an easy job to make all 5 mounted prints to the same dimension), I tried to retouch to get rid of the dust spot and other defects in the prints. It was hard to match the right shade! Anyway, I finished everything! Next stage is to organise my introduction and workbook and to submit next Friday the 18th!

ABSENCE/PRESENCE - EDITING

(J1.15 classroom, 2009)

We had an editing session yesterday. Each one was give other people’s photo and choose 5-7. I was given Michal’s 28 photos. His topic is about a disappearing river in London, which run well 100 years ago but now covered with urban structures. I choose 7 according to subjects and storyline. In discussion, Ulrike took a different approach and picked 5 and instantly I noticed they are of a better choice. She emphasizes on visual coherence. The 5 shots she chose have similar composition with horizon in the middle and space in front and residential house in the back, though they only depicts residential house rather than road, space, land and building, which what I tried to convey. As the topic is conceptual engaging already, it makes a better argument with these 5 shots. It is stronger to form a series to pass this conception this way. I wanted to convey many things but end up with weak and messy photography rhetoric. The visual coherence!

She also emphasized that the context (on a museum wall, in a book, or…) is very important for edit. We discussed my works. An easy consensus was made with 5 shots chosen.

More haste, less speed. I can not understand this any more today. I tried to print everything but end up with not a single satisfied one. What I should have done is to print each one to its perfection, then move to the next… It seems I might have to make do with these prints, as next Friday is our last chance for print.

TAKE A BREAK

(Courtesy: Ed Ruscha; John Baldessari.)

I took one day off. No reading on Visual Culture and no shooting on Absence/Presence. I went to Tate Modern to see Pure Beauty by John Baldessari, which David Campany strongly recommended. The whole show is highly conceptual with clever usage of texts, image appropriation, and strong montage and juxtapositions. He does not take un-necessary photos but just utilise what he can find and then create his own signifiers. The signifier. This is the idea and tool of my photography. I should always find a concept, and then look for signifier to achieve my own photo, rather than take the camera and seek saccharine scenes randomly unless there is a good reason.

I visited the sculpture by Miroslaw Balka in turbine hall. Without reading any introduction, I walked around it and entered into this sublime cold iron box of darkness. The first perception is the gothic atmosphere, in which I felt overwhelmingly overshadowed by the thick darkness. It was amazing that in the darkness I could still saw subtle shades of other visitors. As I walked further, some more shadows came into presence out of nowhere like magic. It seemed everything was submerged by the darkness but it was not as more shadows just came around you walking into and out of the box. I like the atmosphere created by the coldness and darkness. You are not sure whether you would like to walk a step further, but you just adventure more. You think you can not see but you can see little by little more and more. Suddenly you turned back, wow, a fantastic scene of the entrance with tiny peoples’ silhouette against the sublime tall background of the grey turbine hall. I found this piece of sculpture amazing, refreshing my mind with darkness and the sudden presence of flickering sublime brightness, quite thought provoking.

By chance I watched a short film documenting Balka. Then I understand it originally is the symbolised Nazi holocaust. Thousands of Jewish were put into iron train box and carried to the camp for death. Balka is quite cool Arte Povera artist. I quite like his approach and his sensitive artistic mind documented in the film. Then I went to Hayward Gellery and finished my day with the loud Ed Ruscha show.