inoccuity

Despite having the sort of role where the proper work/meetings balance is usually well in the favour of proper work a small weekly huddle (does everyone else's workplace-jargons use this term to describe a small, quickish, stand-up non-table meeting?) and a two-hour follow-up meeting to the meeting recently griped about bracketed today's lunch-space, particularly unfortunate as it was the chosen day for the second Mr David Mosque Luncheon? featuring everyone who was at the last one minus EcoDad but plus Boab, StevieFish, 42, Joe, LLP and BLT. Forty minutes is barely enough time to eat the large curry-portions of the Mosque Kitchen and a bottle of mango juice. never mind speaking to people. The three people never met before were barely waved-hello at and the five met once before barely spoken to before TFP and I had to steam back at a very fast walk for the two-hour meeting which could easily have taken an hour less if there had been one fewer attendees and no facilitator. With my lunch and a rare enjoyable social occasion needlessly curtailed by work I was disinclined to tarry long past the meeting's end and escaped in good time to catch up with David and MAIT as they promenaded amongst the High Street bustle.

I'm increasingly finding (or at least thinking) that I don't feel able to do as much with the flocks of tourists in the city centre as I could (and did) a few years ago. It's partly the ubiquity of certain types of image making further similar captures redundant or stale, partly the over-use (sometimes abuse or misuse) of street photography to the extent that even the term can sound either distasteful or pretentious. It's not just a photo taken on the street anymore; it's Street Photography; it often seems to imply more about the process or practitioner than the result. As a result, a lot of what is seen can't be recorded just in case either the technique or output are misinterpreted. Luckily a couple of pairs of feet on a balustrade-thing on Parliament Square being used as a perch by some people watching some sort of display can't be easily mis-judged; the feet and legs are fully-clothed, no-one is identifiable (or unidentifiable, but in a bad way), no-one is portrayed indecorously, nothing is misinterpretable, nothing sets out to deliberately provoke or titillate at the expense of the viewer or subject and it's something I would have done anyway even if I wasn't feeling restricted by the presence of the camera in my bag in case it modified the perception of my behaviour.