However, the shot of the day was the third. I do not know if this would be considered officially a ‘crucifix’, it is, but it is mostly a rosary. One of the ‘rules’—my self-determined and self-imposed rules--is doing the crucifix as ‘found object’, objet trouvé. I will not tell you that I never move or rearrange—although it is extremely seldom that I do and what I do is very minimal, but there are times when it has to be done. (Confession, case in point: on the second image I did flip the price tag over since for the series tentatively called ‘the price of Christ’ having the price showing in the photograph is part of the concept. I am not sure that is ‘cheating’ since I really disturbed the price tag in no other way—it remains where it originally lay.) For me the image has much more significance if I photograph it as found. The concept comes from Hattersley’s discussion of finding Christ in all aspects of daily life.
There is just a certain serendipity in found objects that can not be planned without becoming superficial when the symbolism of objects work together and they often do. When they do they strengthen the symbolism—or at least they do in my mind. That significance may only come across to me but I feel that it is important to the process even if I am the only one who knows it.
The rosary was found in a booth where a new tenant is moving in. It was not yet ready for business so the entrance had been taped off to prevent entry. Fortunately the rosary was on a table next to the isle. The chance of finding two such dissimilar objects, a religious artifact and a carpenter’s tool, which had such a strong symbolic connection to each other struck me as being very powerful. For anyone who might not grasp the connection, Christ was by profession, a carpenter. Even though the point of view was extremely limited and I really didn’t have the best camera and lens for the shot, I had to take the photograph. I suppose it is possible that the two objects were placed together by intent, but there was really no indication that the two objects were placed together for any reason other than simply by accident. The table was laden with all sorts of objects from dinnerware to picture frames—the booth was a classic scene from a moving day, everything in disarray including this table.
I have no idea whether anyone else will find any significance or value in this photograph, or even care. I never know that about any of my photographs. But, like the dead bird in Port Arthur, this one photograph made the entire day worthwhile.
Addendum: Would love to have comments on the third photo from anyone that connects to the symbolism of the objects.
Curious about the gold oval frame—is there any connection or symbolism that can be identified in the frame; does the arcs of the dinnerware tie the frame into the composition sufficiently, or is the frame simply out of place, an anomaly that draws too much attention to itself?
What about the major lines; do they radiate upward, or do they simply carry the eye out of the photograph. Would it have worked better if the apex of the triangle created by the rulers had been at the top of the image rather than the bottom?
How do you read the size of the ‘crucifix’ within the image; is it discovery or is it simply too small to be sufficiently significant? I was limited by my equipment but would it have been better to have worked closer to the crucifix?