Monday 20 August 2007

Sixth Avenue (1959) by André Kertész

sixth avenueAndre Kertesz
Sixth Avenue, New York
1959

© The Estate of André Kertész
Scan courtesy of
Masters of Photography

It's one of the very few photos for me, which consists of a "dual" punctum.

What's the short man doing? Is he also in league with the blind person, to attract even more sympathy, and is only putting the penny given by someone (who must be that someone? was he attracted to the blind girl? or the pathos of the scene? or was it just routine charity) into the box. But, wouldn't the short man in that case hold the box himself? Why would it be in the hands of the girl, when the girl can't even see? And when the girl, in that case, would also be moving in the centre?
So, is it that, that the short man is the alms-giver? Why did he do it? Would he have done it, if he would have been born a normal man? Would he have the empathy instead of the sympathy now? From his dress and appearance, the short man does not look in best of the condition - and yet he is giving alms? Hair combed back Elvis-like, but there's one thickish strand coming on over the forehead - interests me deeply. As if that's the punctum in the short man which he couldn't wish away and hence he chose to give alms - trying to remove the "guilt" of his disabledness.
There's another punctum for me in this photo, as I said earlier. The young, ambitious-looking man, striding to the left of the photo. My problem is his "stride." Why such a long, quick one? Is it only a normal one for a young, ambitious man, going about his work on a good, fresh morning? Or is it that he has, unknowingly to himself, quickened because of the drama going to his left - an avoidance of giving something (least likely), an avoidance of anything unpleasant, or simply the scheme didn't exist for him in this morning, when he woke up so raring and full of bright plans? But, still he's observant; the eyes are at the blind man, and a hand is raised as if in analytical reasoning - there is a soul in there, active or not, a photo is insufficient to tell. It only can raise doubts, valid, troubling doubts.

No comments: