Terje and I have a disagreement.

Our disagreement is all to do with story and context. Terje argues for a photograph that can carry its own meaning, in between the viewer and the image, an impression is formed. This is, I believe (or have chosen to misunderstand), one approach to so called ‘fine art photography’.

But photography is not a fine art I hear someone from the back of the room clamouring*, it is asocial contract. A social witness bearing. Or as Terje reminds me – it is the light bouncing of athing and then a record of that light bouncing off that thing. So what do we have light bouncing off here? A watermelon. Devoured by insects. An impotent lamp post. A woman in a bikini with egg shells on her eyes.

Terje and I have a disagreement.

The disagreement is this. I need to know what is going on behind the images. The photographs area veil obscuring the truth. I want story, meaning and context. I want history. I need to know where every image was taken, and the prologue leading up to it. I need to know what he had for breakfast (those eggs actually) and where he slept the night before (in the sunbather’s sisters hotelif you must). I need to know if Terje ever showed the model his photo (soon)…