Wednesday, November 5, 2008

'Art' That Adds To The Landscape Or 'Technology' Which Detracts From


I remember a few weeks ago, when taking pictures in the fog, noticing that large objects looked mysterious and somewhat beautiful in the mist. Usually a big iron bridge does little to add beauty to the landscape; however, I think in the fog the bridge does add to the landscape. This morning, with the recent time change, it was bright enough for me to capture these images in Tribes Hill.

I like how, in the last image, the bridge suddenly rises from the ground to amazing height and width. I often wonder what the landsape looked like in a time when there were no large structures dotting the horizon. Without roads, buildings and manmade structures what would there be to look at? Would I appreciate that much more what nature provides? How beautiful the untouched land must have looked. Today, I wondered what early man would have thought had they stumbled upon the scene below. Would they have been scared? intrigued? Would they have overlooked the 'ugliness' because of the usefulness of the bridge? Has man traded in beauty for technology and is there a way, in the future, to maintain the integrity of nature and at the same time continue to modernize?



3 comments:

jvelez said...

These came out great! I'm drawn to the second one and I also love the last one. I frequently find myself asking, what did all of this look like before we had wires and bridges and roads? And what will the landscapes of the future be like? Nice morning shots!

trishalyn said...

Loved the last image, Steve! The greenery in the foreground draws the viewer in, then the bridge takes the viewer thru to oblivion. Really nice!!! (Also enjoyed your commentary...made me THINK!).

linda said...

Great images. I love the fog too. I especially like the last image, I think because there's so much foreground. Nice job.