I was planning to try to take more shots for exercise 5.1 however when I re-read the notes I decided that in fact I had captured the very essence of Azoulay’s comment:
Human subjects, occupying different roles in the event of photography, do play one or another part in it, but the encounter between them is never entirely in the sole control of any one of them: no one is the sole signatory to the event of photography. (Azoulay, 2012, p.17)
This image of my son proves the theory that the encounter is in neither the control of the photographer (myself) nor of the subject (my son).
I wanted an image of my son, unawares and candid however I was not the sole signatory to the event and he countered my planned image but putting his hand up to obscure my view.
I hadn’t planned on including his hand in such a manner just as he hadn’t planned on being my subject. Strangely the image actually manages to show (to me at least) his laid back humour, I can hear him laughing as I look at this and it has become a game between us in which he prevents his image being captured, so far he is most definitely winning this game!
If I look closely however I can see him in the photos on the wall behind him, evidence that I did once manage to beat him at this game.