Hello Gang! A lovely collection of snapshots: Not all of us live in beautiful mansions but some of us do. Many of the homes portrayed were made of wood which seems to me an unsuitable material as I live in a country where nearly all homes are brick or stone. Many of the photographs are taken in what we call "the country" meaning not built up. I grew up in and have always lived in an urban landscape moving from the slums of South Wimbledon and Balham to the suburban paradise of Merton Park. The area is altogether 8 miles square to encompass the lot. Looking at #10028 it made me think that there are 10029 homes as beautiful as that and how rich Americans are in general. Do all Americans live like that? The images in Bob Sull's work tell me no there are humble abodes for Americans too. That most American homes are of wood tells me something about relative wealth. Wood is cheaper in the US than brick so more homes are built of wood but here wood is a scarce commodity or would be if homes were made of it but legislation dating from the Great Fire of London in 1666 is the reason for our use of bricks, wood burns too easily. I saw in one snap the tell tale sign of fire in the woods that surrounded one home and it must be constant vigilance that prevents homes going up in smoke. I saw that I was not the only person visited by tragedy or personal disasters and that at least one person's consolation was her cats. By the way she was cruel to them by having them spayed. I have got through several friends some "borrowed" from another person with the misery that causes and so I do have a family one or two I still know and can talk too but all brought up by others. I thought this was in their best interests. And families grow up and flee the nest, never to be seen again. My adopted daughter did that and I do not know what happened to her. I understand she is in trouble with a terrorist charge against her as a Moslem who wanted revenge for her father's death at the hands of a Christian Serb policeman. I did notice that many of the snaps were of people living out in the sticks; there must be inner city snappers around too. I think I know the problem, if I took pictures in some city streets I would be mugged and beaten. You need passports to go into some part of London. Soho is out of bounds after 5:30 pm and Brixton is always out of bounds, if you venture there you get charged by the street gang "duke" to be in their street and it is strictly "no photography" or your camera and film get smashed. I suppose the rich people in the forest dwellings might enquire of the motive of the photographer if he was not from "these parts" and the village "duke" could get violent if the wrong snapshots were taken. In Britain now photography is getting very difficult because of the privacy and copyright laws. No Telephoto lenses and images with recognisable people are allowed. So Street photography has become almost impossible now even if there are no people in the frame and images that have peoples home imaged could be a breach of the peace so images of peoples homes are outlawed, similarly for images of businesses and works. It is OK to take you own property and family but not your own children as a porn merchant might get hold of them. I think the concept was good and there are tonnes of images I could get round my area, of shopping centres and churches and works, bus stations and railway stations and things. All are different from yours and they make suitable photographic material for "where I live". I think we could do this again sometime and my contributions to the gallery will reflect this new revelation (that we don't all live in an urban hell). I think America will go the same as Europe soon and we shall loose another Paradise. I wonder what Pittsburgh and Boston are like?
