I like the shots. And beyond me liking the look of them, I think they are a fair treatment of the city. Disclaimer: I am not from Detroit, or even American. I am a mere Canuck, but Detroit was 'the big city' for my community. We certainly were within its sphere of influence (cultural and economic) and related more to it than the more distant (and aloof) Toronto. Nonetheless I will gladly defer to anyone calling it 'home' -- but we will see whether I, as a stereotypical Canadian, can manage to say a lot of words without actually stating an opinion!
I like that you called the Motor City 'photogenic', and I think your shots capture it as an alive city, granted one that has some grit. I don't have a problem with grit. Living things have grit. It is when the shots start veering into "ruin porn" (which yours do not) that I want to change the channel -- and I can understand how as an artist it can be easy to be seduced down that path. What the right path is is question where I play my 'indecisive canadian' card: There are
many different, simplistic stories that can be told of Detroit -- and simplistic solutions that can be as problematic.
I can relate to piece by author
Jeffrey Eugenides in his critique of ruin porn:
"I, too, have committed the sin of aestheticizing Detroit’s demise, I’m well aware of the seduction of this posture and, therefore, all the more eager to condemn it now. To see the city of Detroit as it is, today, a beaten-up, beaten-down place of incalculable difficulties, but a place where a half million people still live.... [N]ot everyone gets to leave. Not everyone wants to leave."Sorry to veer out of photography (and to talk about something I may not have a legitimate claim to). Nice photos.
