Yes, it is all those things I mentioned. I doubt that it is a set-up to
convey a "2006" message.
Even if inadvertent, I'm still curious as to P.J's thoughts.
Jack
--- Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's a lot of there there. You're looking at this with a
> preconception,
> that mother & child should have some interaction. This is the US in
> 2006,
> and TV is a major factor in the lives and the social interations of
> many
> people. That the girl looks so blase, and the mom is focusing on
> adjusting
> the TV, says much about the relationship, maybe even more than if
> they were
> engaged.
>
> The photo as it appears on my screen is not very good technically.
> But
> it's more real than a lot of saccharine, trite work I've seen this
> past
> year.
>
> Shel
>
>
>
>
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Soft image.(?) No interplay between mother and daughter.(?)
> > Daughter staring at the camera with a disinterested sort of
> impatient
> > air.(?)
> > Tell me what moved your world.
>
>
> > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > I gotta go with what he said. While, technically it's okay, there
> is
> nothing
> > in the photo that screams mother and child. It would be much more
> interesting
> > if they were engaged with each other, either affectionately or even
> angrily.
> > There's no there there
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com
