I have two thoughts about this week in class.
- Very very quick thought, but what took my attention for the entire short was the fact that The Lost Thing was able to get inside buildings whose doors were very clearly too small for it. That play with physics keep my attention the entire film and also made me question whether The Lost Thing was a figment of the main character’s imagination. More specifically whether it was part of his innocent child mind, the mind that creates and builds, that imagines the impossible. It would explain why the older he got the less frequently he saw Lost Things. Ultimately, it made me laugh.
- Also I thought an interesting point to make between the Tan’s work and the photography we compared it stylistically depends on not what it has that is similar but in what ways it differs. Tan’s objective through the book is to use the photographic aesthetic to bring the audience in and make us connect tot the characters. But the photography we looked at aimed ultimately (with a few exceptions of course that used photography for social justice) to capture the events in a documentary manner. That is so say there is an objectivity to the photography during the period of immigration in which Elis island that would not be effective in creating an warm and fuzzy imaginary world in Tan’s children’s book.
