The physicality of the object is something we see less in our time throughout the digital advancements we live under. To print our photographs, look through them like a found archive, to share the among a group of friends instead of virtual acquaintances. A relationship that has a strange distance, knowing each other by virtual status, and header names.
The physicality suffers as we see our work in pixels over pigment, therefore the first thing to strike as Takagi’s work was found was the use of the print in a creative form of presentation.
It is the physicality of what he sees, and how he records it. As perspective gets distorted, we are given frames within frames to work with, all produced with a kind of blinking notion. A notion of quickness which matches the energy surrounding his pictures. They are moments of joy, and radiate a kind of comfortable happiness. This is my favorite kind of photography, one that at first view may not relate to our own, but the inward nature can be read generically. We can look at an image of someone in the picture and match them up with someone we know, it may be a quirk, a detail but we look at them differently as a result.
A challenge to the exotic might be affiliated with this idea, as everyone lives their lives and it is not exotic to them, because it is their own. The viewers position is set to ‘0’, neutral. We know nothing of the before or after, we are given a moment to read. We might look at its exotic features and go, ‘look at that sign, its not like ours’. But to the photographer, it is a sign he barely resonates with. The relationship between viewer and the experienced person, the maker, the photographer, is a challenging position to be in. For one, why would anyone take interest in another’s personal archive, no matter what public intention it may have. I do not know them, none of them in the picture.
We can speculate, read into details given to us, revel in the way its been observed, the technical choices as a blur blends colours to become a large shape distorting whats actually there. The flash reaching its subject, and their energy they feel at that moment, propels right back. We can look at these features, love an image of sheer joy, beauty and brilliance. Although, how far can we go, into understanding this work. Is it possible, and if it isn’t, should the work be redundant because of this.
I disagree here. The work performs on a level that it needs to, it shows us someones life and we can enjoy what has been given. It is the nature of our own interpretation, how our minds see things that makes us look at in the way we look at it. And that is always the correct understanding, for us.