SHACKLED, LONELY, BEATEN

I missed this LOOONG and interesting conversation. I have to say that while I care for animal rights, I'm not a fan of PETA, which I consider a self-serving organization that doesn't give a rat's behind about the animals they are supposed to be saving. I think PETA's work on the infamous Michael Vick case turned my stomach. While I agree that dog fighting is reprehensible, I think denial of due process to an accused HUMAN BEING is a much highrer priority. It was PETA that gave the phone number of the NFL to every major talk radio host, who invited their callers to flood the NFL lines with calls demanding that the NFL ban Vick for life. And, when news emerged that Vick owned several dogs, and that only few of them were aggressive, PETA lobbied for all the dogs to be killed so the act would appear as reprehensible as possible and get Vick the maximum possible prison sentence. Another group had to go to court to stop all the dogs from being euthanized. This reminded me of the story of the two women fighting over the baby where King Solomon awarded the child to the mothefr who did not want him cut in two.

Simple and interesting visuals that I like for some reason not easily explained. I think I figured it out, though: Tension is created in the photo through several opposites. The van with the PETA ad and the other vehicles that are just plain color. All vehicles are moving in the same direction, on the same road, yet they are not on the same road, metaphorically speaking - they don't have the same goal - they just happen to be driving on the same road. So tension is created by sameness (road, direction) and difference (ad vs. no ad).

 

 

 

 

Another tension or opposite would be the elephant foot chained so that it can't move - yet all the cars are supposedly moving. And yet another, the steel of the chain as well as the cars and the road (not made of steel but built with it and symbolizes civilization in control) and the elephant foot - strong as it may be, it is no match for steel. Also, the van gives the impression that it is transporting an elephant - of course it is not but the impression is there visually because of the image of the elephant foot and the text in the ad. This message is opposed to the agenda of PETA.

 

 

 

 

Is there a visual similarity between the white truck on the right and an elephant? I would say there is. White is purity and elephants are, in a sense, pure. The exhaust resembles an elephant's trunk. Its big (though visually smaller than the van).

 

 

 

 

The colors wok well and support my interpretation. The dark road and the light sky. The red car on left and white truck on white - both colors contained in the van in the middle of the image. Red symbolizes danger - blood or suffering. White the innocent elephant. Black, the doomed direction of treating animals poorly.

 

 

 

 

Over interpretation? In my opinion not. Probably many will disagree :-)

Another trip here with more to say this time? You're always welcome and I love to hear what you have to say. As I mentioned before, I had no intention of furthering or harming the PETA agenda. I leave that to you guys. You made some very good points. Thank you.

Thanks so much for the wonderful critical commentary. It was interesting that you stuck to the discussion of the merit (or lack thereof) of the image and did not get sucked into the argument about PETA. I'm awed by your critical ability. I'm also indebted to you for opening my own eyes to some of the possibilities that I had not considered previously.

 

<

 

 

Exclusive: PETA Killed More than 90% of the Animals in its Care in 2007

 

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, a group that complains bitterly when animals die accidentally in horse races or intentionally in slaughterhouses, killed more than 90 percent of the adoptable animals in its care during 2007.

 

Last year, PETA wrangled with the Virginia government for nine months before its 2006 records were finally made public. In a cynical bid to hide the outrageous percentage of animals that wind up in their giant walk-in freezer, PETA's leaders tried to lump the pets they spayed or neutered in with those they took in for more than an hour. That squabbling continues, but this year we decided not to wait for the dust to settle.

 

Instead, with the help of Virginia's public records law, we did a little digging. Responding to our formal legal request, the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) has released PETA's 2007 "Animal Record" report. Although VDACS itself has still not relased this report, we're making it available to the general public.

 

PETA claims to be dedicated to protecting animals and treating them "ethically"ﾗitﾒs right there in the groupﾒs name. But killing animals that could otherwise be placed in adoptive homes isnﾒt terribly ethical, especially for a group whose $30 million annual income is more than enough to do the right thing instead.

 

In comparison, the Virginia Beach SPCA, right down the road from PETAﾒs Norfolk headquarters, managed to adopt out almost 70% of the animals in its care last year. And it did it on a relative shoestring budget.

 

Adding PETA's 2007 numbers to the mix, we can now document that the group has put down over 19,200 dogs, cats, puppies, and kittens. While it's possible that some of these animals were too broken or sick to be rehabilitated, humane societies in Virginia managed to save an average of nearly 65 percent of their animals in 2007. PETA found adoptive homes for less than 1 percent.>>

 

 

Very interesting. Thank you

Point well taken....very cool image with great narrative potential.....thanks for sharing and for the nice rating on POP CULTURE.....I have made a point in the last 2 months to correspond to all traffic going throught my PN portfolio and my audience has not grown but has in fact diminished. Something to consider is that my work may only appeal to the small audience that I have enjoyed thus far on this site which is ok with me. I am thankful that some out there get it. Thanks for sharing and getting it. Best wishes and hope for you,

 

I'm sorry that you may feel that I misled you. I thought I had seen more people responding to your images, and I truly believe you are doing quality work. I can tell you from my own experience that the advice I gave you is sound at least for me. Virtually nobody has found his way to my portfolio on their own. In almost every case, I commented (sometimes multiple times) on their images, and sometimes they started viewing mine. I have no illusions that I'm that marketable, and know for a fact that the only reason I've gotten the views I have is from working hard at critiquing others' work. If after a few attempts there is no response, I move on and try to cultivate other relationships. I know that in the long run it would work for you, but I understand your disappointment. I certainly share it with you, as I find your work to be of a very high quality. Thanks for giving me some feedback.

Nice shot, but you've got to stop following my car around!

Damn it man, come back! I miss you.

I miss you too! But I'm back. I just needed a little break, and now I'm ready to go again!

I like this one very much, David. Gorgeous light and color.

While I don't recommend driving and shooting at the same time, this did work out pretty well. Thanks for stopping by.