i was sitting in class and watching slides of robert frank's work and i started to wonder. i am always avoiding any reference of the present in my photos. i'm sure there are little clues here and there but they are kept to a minimum. maybe i should stop trying to hide the fact that it's 2005. maybe right now is what i need to photograph. whenever i take photos i think 'what will people see 50 years down the road that i don't see?'. no matter how much i look back, fantasize, idealize the past it is always farther and farther away. when my kids look at my old pictures i want them to see what it was really like to live now, the good and the bad. i think i relish in the nostalgia of old photos, tarnished jewellery and worn down old shoes is because the past is more of a myth or a mystery to me. i'll never see it with my own eyes, talk like they did, see things the way they did. future and technology is always being pushed in my lap through magazines and t.v. ads and it becomes invisible. but i'm thinking now that this is what i should be taking pictures of. every minute that passes is a history: a cloudy, rainy day, a cluster of umbrellas, an untied shoelace. why should i decide that now is not significant just because i feel an angst against the new and the improved. the future for me means urbanization, a dependance on machines and computers, an illusion of security, a false sense of being a highly cultured individual. being cultured today seems to be the abilility to shell out 3 dollars a day for that dopio con panna, reading homer or socrates, saying that eating meat always wrong, or memorizing all the major (as well as the minor) filmmakers and their filmographies just to impress your class.