Thank you, Jock Sturges, for your insightful response to last month’s column. Jock Writes; “I am challenged by the notion of ambiguity as a first principle. Making art has everything to do with manifesting oneself in the object, expressing oneself. The greater the extent to which there is clarity in that self expression and the greater the extent to which the self expressed is noble and visible and easily apprehended, the greater the work. Even then, post facto, some variety of interpretation is of course possible and, in fact, inevitable. We're a subjective species. But good work has everything to do with knowing who you are as an artist and what you want and then making that manifest in the object. At the onset we all blunder towards that inchoately. But as time goes on, we must necessarily refine ourselves, bring things to a sharpened point.”

I so agree with all that you write, Jock. I am surely not insinuating that a photographer consciously introduce ambiguity into his work. He must master the skill of implication rather than description, where pictures transcend their subject and evolve into the realm of metaphor. There, the artist offers his viewer a truly personal encounter. The photograph touches upon the luminous and the conscious viewer is offered a door in through which to step, an invitation to interpretation, and hence...ambiguity. Of course it goes without saying that great art must be a representation of its maker, and the more honest and direct that representation, the greater its power to arouse and inspire. Never, however, should this be done through an effort to be anything to anyone. Such effort which will only lead to contrivance, obviousness and cliché. When a work of art is born of the soul, it is its undefinedness that offers a penetrating connection. All by itself.