A proper foundation

[Mike McCarty]

I've mentioned before that I was once a builder of fancy homes for fancy people. The image below, the boss of my foundation crew, was taken on the site of the last home I built. It was typical in that it was a custom home, original design, difficult site, with a client hovering over me for two years. The sort of ingredients that make me sigh and think how glad I am that I don't have to wake up to this anymore. Ten years of this and I was never sued -- the only true measure of a man.

The further I get from the events of this image the more I am able appreciate it. Also, my perceptions regarding what portraiture may be have been modified substantially since then.

My reasons for posting this image are to make the comparison between this, a man working at his profession, and the many corporate portraits of suited men surrounded by books. Not to malign those images too much, I wish I had a google of them backed up. But, to say that they offer sameness ... well.

I believe that my sensitivities, my thinking about what a portrait can be has been altered by the images I've studied on Daniel Greene's new web site.

Is this man, spattered with concrete mud, any less worthy of our efforts? I post Daniel Green's image of "The radiologist," not to demean it in any way, but to suggest that it is not much different than this "Man of concrete." Both are shown heroically, in their element.

I don't mean to ask this question in a way that suggests that the answer must be yes. It certainly offers a different aesthetic. Matters of concept and judgment are by nature difficult to discuss in absolute terms, but, I would be interested in hearing opinions on the subject. Hey, what else do you have to do?

Also, I think that some might call this a figurative image, I would call it a portrait.