Millennium Bridge

I shot this couple crossing the Millennium Bridge over the Thames, with St Paul's in the background. In the last few years three pedestrian-only bridges have been built over the Thames in central London, totally changing the character of the South Bank (as I mentioned the other day). This bridge in particular is a fantastic addition to the city. It's not just because it has linked two major tourist attractions in a way that has totally revitalised two moribund neighbourhoods, creating massive amounts of foot traffic where before there were just cars (or nothing). It's also a really interesting structure. Amazingly, it's only one of several really interesting structures that have appeared in this part of London in the last few years: how is that even possible?? A risky, architecturally ambitious public building programme in this day and age? Obviously this sort of stuff ought to be happening, but whereas in the past great public buildings were financed either by the spoils of war or by private donations, nowadays private individuals build only for themselves, and the public purse has other priorities, sadly.

Enter the wonderful tax on stupidity! Actually, that's a bit harsh. Maybe we should call it a tax on blind optimism. Either way, I have mixed feelings about it. Lotteries pander to people's greed, they target the poorest and weakest in society, instead of the wealthiest. They provide governments with additional revenue streams while letting them pretend to cut taxes, and they give politicians an excuse to divert funding from core services. On the other hand, without the lottery, our public spaces would be poorer. Which cash-strapped government is going to choose to build non-critical infrastructure like this instead of a new hospital? I guess, if carefully regulated, with lots of safeguards on how revenues can be spent, on balance it's a good thing. Certainly, when crossing the Millennium Bridge, I felt as if I'd won the lottery, without having spent any money!

Details: Nikon D70, 18-200mm @ 50mm, f/13, 1/50s, ISO 200, ND grad simulated in Photoshop. London, 28 December 2006. Placemark.

Fishmonger

Another photo taken during yesterday's ramble in London. This is a fishmonger in Leadenhall Market, a really picturesque and little-known corner of the City, next to the Lloyds building, between Bishopsgate and Fenchurch Street. The City is a very strange place: visitors tend to go to St Paul's and the Tower, ignoring the rest and staying rather in the West End. I don't entirely blame them: the City isn't superficially very attractive, nor even very interesting (unless you have a thing for streetnames). Despite being the oldest part of London, and its historic heart, the City is largely made up of modern office blocks. The mediaeval city was destroyed by the Fire in 1666; Wren's and Boyle's city was destroyed by bombing in World War 2. Compared to Westminster, there's not that much to see, if it weren't for the odd asymmetrical layout of the streets, and the classical churches liberally scattered throughout, you could almost be in North America. Which is why Leadenhall Market is such a treasure.

Details: Nikon D70, 18-200mm @ 38mm, f/7.1, 1/10s, VR, ISO 200. Leadenhall Market, London, 28 December 2006. Placemark.

South Bank

Taken from the Thames Pathway just east of London Bridge, looking south from the north bank. It's amazing how much the south bank of the Thames has changed since I lived here (OK admittedly that's over ten years ago now - actually more like twelve - eek!). Back then I used to bike along the south bank from Rotherhithe to Lambeth every morning and evening, and I scarcely saw a soul. Nowadays the riverbank is heaving with tourists and pedestrians, it's like a different city.

Of course, since the mid nineties the whole area has been massively improved - with the Greater London Authority's new HQ, the Millennium Bridge, the Tate Modern, the Globe Theatre, the London Eye, and a proper integrated transport system including a riverbus. I'm not a fan of London as a place to live, but there's no doubt about it, Mayor Ken seems to have done a lot to improve it. If only he could do something to stop property speculation, maybe I afford to move back...

Details: Nikon D70, 18-200mm @ 200mm, f/5.6, 1/160s, ISO 200. London, 28 December 2006. Placemark.

Hume

This is the mausoleum of David Hume, in Calton Cemetery, Edinburgh. At the age of 26 Hume wrote his Treatise of Human Nature, a work which had a huge impact on me when I was a student reading philosophy.

Hume did not believe in universal moral laws, which exist in an abstract sense, like the laws of physics. It will always be true that two plus two equals four, whether or not there are people there around to make the calculation. Morality, though, is a human construct and is therefore subjective.

So far so good, but most of us recognise 'good' and 'evil' and agree to a very large degree on what's good and what's evil. So just because morality is subjective, that doesn't mean we can do what we like. This is the paradox which stumps ethics students everywhere. Hume's solution is one that makes a lot of sense to me. It was longer ago than I care to remember that I studied this, but here's my rough recollection of how it goes.

Morality - 'virtue' - as opposed to solipsism (selfish desire), is the subconscious awareness of what will benefit society at large. This is often at odds with the course of action which will be best for us, individually. Hence the need to codify morality into a set of rules backed up by law, or religion. Morality is the collective expression of a culture's sense of what will best benefit that culture. No wonder, then, that most cultures in history have agreed to a fairly wide degree on what is right and what is wrong, but never completely. If moral laws were universal truths, then surely there would be even greater overlap between moral codes in different cultures and different historical periods. The fact that some cultures think homosexuality, or female circumcision, or capital punishment, or child labour, are right, and others think they are wrong, is pretty good evidence that there's no such thing as 'right' or 'wrong', just a collective sense of what best benefits society. This collective sense of course can (and does) change over time and space, as you'd expect. Even within a society, there will be strongly held views for and against.

So why do what's 'right'? Why indulge in guilt? Hume argues that the absence of universal moral laws does not absolve us of the responsibility to respect morality. Just because we deny the universality of morality, does not make us amoral, or immoral. As social beings, we understand that we must weight our own desires against the needs of our society, which are reflected in the prevailing moral code. This has really interesting and important implications for political theory, the right to civil disobedience, one's duty to one's country, etc.

Anyway, I've opened up a whole can of worms there, with my mince pie and sherry-fuelled hazy recollection of ethics tutorials, triggered by this photo of Hume's tomb. I should read up on this stuff again - it had an incredibly powerful effect on me as a student, brought up as someone who believed in absolute right and wrong, good and evil.

Details: Nikon D70, 105mm, f/8, 1/40s, ISO 400. Edinburgh, 28 December 2005.

Hoar frost

Well here we are, back on this side of the Atlantic! Christmas at home... Flying into London this morning was exciting, a blanket of fog covered the city. As the fog lifted on the drive home the countryside was stunning - hoar frost and misty sunshine giving the whole place a magical feel. This frosty spiderweb was waiting at my parents' front gates to welcome me - I just wish I'd thought to bring my tripod!

The downside of all this icy beauty was black ice on the motorway - someone shot straight into the back of us, shunting us into the car in front. Dad's car's a write-off but no-one's hurt so I suppose we should be glad.

Details: Nikon D70, 105mm, f/3.5, 1/40s, ISO 200. Beaconsfield, 20 December 2006.

Puja

This is M performing her first puja (act of worship) at a mandir (temple) in New Friends Colony, Delhi, when she was two. The statue ('murti') represents the goddess Durga riding on the back of a lion.

I'm posting it because this morning we discovered, almost by accident, that we have a temple in our neighbourhood. The Vishva Shakti Durga Mandir is just around the corner, five minutes' walk away, in a small building which used to be an Orthodox Church. It's small, homely and rather charming, a contrast with the big temple a half-hour's drive south of Ottawa where we celebrated Diwali. I wish we'd found it sooner. As I said back in July, I'm not religious, but I find the cultural and spiritual grounding that religion affords very calming. After this morning's puja, this evening we'll be going to a carol service in the Anglican church at the end of the road. I'm looking forward to it, a lot, and I'm glad my daughter can experience these two important aspects of her cultural heritage.

I love Hinduism, it's non-proselytising, open, complicated, mysterious, exotic, and acts of worship involve incense, drums, bells, funky rhythms and the distribution of sweets to worshippers. What's not to like?? I've always been attracted to the ritual aspects of religion - whether it's the rakhi, thika and prashad (thread bracelet, crimson forehead mark and sweet offering) in puja or the wine, wafer and Latin chanting of mass. It's just so interesting.

Details: Minolta Dynax 5, 50mm lens, exposure not recorded. Vaishnav Devi Mandir, New Friends Colony, New Delhi, October 2003. Placemark (I think).

Iris

I was away! Sorry. Here's an iris, at the Butchart Gardens in Victoria, BC.

Details: Nikon D70, f/7.1, 1/320s, 105mm, ISO 500. Victoria, BC, 15 May 2005. Placemark.

Edinburgh Castle

The south side of Edinburgh Castle, looking west.

Details: Nikon D70, 18-70mm @ 22mm, f/14, 1/20s, ISO 200. Edinburgh, 29 December 2005.

Mount Kenya

This was taken from a light aircraft flying from the Samburu reserve north of Mount Kenya back to Nairobi.

I heard an interesting story on As It Happens this evening: apparently the management of the National Museum in Nairobi has bowed to pressure from a fundamentalist evangelical 'bishop' to move its incomparable collection of humanoid fossils to a back room because they will "confuse" children. They conducted a phone interview with Richard Leakey who was surprisingly calm about it all - not happy, of course, but resigned, and reasonably confident that within a few decades a richer and more educated Kenyan public would be able to throw off the overweening influence of the (mainly North American) religious fundamentalists who flood the country. I'm not sure I share his optimism. It really is astonishing that reasonable people could genuinely think for a minute that presenting the fossil record, without interpretation, would prejudice people or confuse children. It's obviously an indication of the weakness of the fundamentalists' own faith in their mythology. On the other hand, I didn't agree with Leakey when he argued that religious beliefs have no place in a museum. That's exactly where they belong. The Kenyan National Museum (which is fantastic by the way) could present a fascinating collection of creation myths gathered from the hundreds of ethnic, tribal and religious traditions in the country.

Details: Minolta X-500, 50mm lens, exposure not recorded. North-west of Mount Kenya, December 1997. Placemark.

Surf

Another shot taken in Portugal this summer - wonderful rough seas down at the beach, the surf coming in off the Atlantic, the wind whipping the crests of the breakers into a spray. The composition isn't so good, the figure should be off to the one side, but (a) I only had the use of one arm, (b) there were people on either side who would have spoiled the shot and (c) I had about three seconds before getting swamped by the incoming wave. God, it was lovely, though. (sigh)

Details: Nikon D70, 18-200mm @ 120mm, f/8, 1/640s, ISO 200. 29 July 2006, Praia das Maçãs, Portugal. Placemark.

Freezing rain

Tough weekend... It started miserably enough with freezing rain, and it's finishing pretty miserably with the weekly fix of Desperate Housewives inexplicably dropped from the schedule. Where did it go?? Oh well, there's the consolation of watching Carole MacNeil out of the corner of my eye, looking sultry on the Sunday night news, while I fish out a photo and get another blog post in.

Here's another picture of the photogenic berry tree outside our front door. Freezing rain is something I'd never encountered before coming to Canada. It looks nice, even if it isn't.

Details: Nikon D70, 105mm, f/20, 1/640s, ISO 800. Ottawa, 18 February 2006.

No comment

Details: Nikon D70, 105mm, f/6.3, 1/200s, ISO 200. Halifax, Nova Scotia, 21 August 2005.