There have been a lot of DNMC comments and users trying to give different interpretations on challenges that caused me to wonder where do we draw the fine line. In the mother challenge it happened to me. When I took the picture I felt it fit the challenge well, could not believe some people didn’t recognize Mother Nature. It seemed the whole challenge shrunk down to motherhood even though there were no details to the challenge.
So when I took my wife to school I talked with a professor about this issue. She asked me to email her and she would try to give an answer, if there was one. I explained to here the dilemma most all of us have dealt with here and what she though was the problem. Does our Interpretation differ as a photograph vs. voter? Or is it we can't see the wood for the trees? (def.: if someone can't see the wood for the trees, they are unable to understand what is important in a situation because they are giving too much attention to details.)
When my wife came home from school last night she had a paper from the professor, for me, about what I had asked here. Below is what she wrote.
Scott,
Concerning the question you placed before me last week I found some time over the weekend to look in to the dilemma. I must say as I look at the site and viewed some of the post, I found it very interesting but not out of the norm of reality. As two snowflakes are not a like the same can be said about humans, none are the same. At the same time the same human differs interpretation on a daily basis. I could go in detail but I don’t have the time to do so therefore I will attempt to give you a quick logical reason for what you and other have been through when interpreting a challenge.
Based on what I have reviewed and seen by visiting the site the real issue is a case of conflicting interpretation of a topic by an individual that change as the challenge progresses. Let me explain. When a challenge is placed before someone, in your case a photography challenge, and it gives you a specific topic you as a photographer starts out thinking very narrow minded, to the point (mother must mean mother). As you begin to think of a picture you broaden you views of the topic until you have what you feel is a picture that meats the challenge. And sometime you go to far off topic that the viewer cannot relate your photograph with the topic without a title or even with a title. But that is not the complete dilemma, now we must look at you as a voter. In this case the opposite applies. You begin with a broad interpretation that subsides during the voting process. The direct opposite of you as the photographer, I guess even in this scenario every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
My advice would be to continue as you are doing but when you think you have the right shot think back a step keeping it more on topic but yet unique. And as a voter do the same, when you think you have the topic interpreted correctly back up a step and open your mind. Some where in that axis you will find that you will take picture closer to topic but unique and vote with a personal interpretation that leaves room for others uniqueness.
Thanks
|
