>>3680841>See that simps, even isi agrees with me that>>>3679639 is genuine critique.you're about 3/10ths right, except for all the inwardly-motivated interpretations. The banality and central compositions is entirely the product of the visual language of my region and influences. Some of my subjects (none in this thread, mind you) are quite literally the same buildings featured in certain Evans, Lange, and Christenberry photos and I approach shooting the area as if I were continuing their work. It's just visual linguistics, anon.
Your psychological interpretations of these pieces kind of fall on their face considering this isn't my full body of work. It would be interesting to see you try to psychoanalyze my show photos or more abstract work contrasted against my anti-topographic snaps.
You're likely to have a better insight into my obvious mental illness from the work I've made from scratch than from the scenes I've chosen to document in the most straight forward manner possible.
What I'm saying is, you tried, but the crit was still shit :^(
