Surface, in a park - date unknown

​We understand a family. It’s the physical proximity of their bodies, the familiarity of the tableau. The box offered these as negatives – classifiable as ‘family’ but denying me any detail. I’ve scanned them, so we can see. Glance across the images, gleaning mum, dad, baby. Two boys. Dive deeper. Their faces are intangible. Not pixels now, like my location searches, but grain mimicking skin. Shadows for features. Come back to the surface, comparing foreground with back-. This photographer was unsure of the camera, or of its settings. The family, if that is what it is, are not the focus. Yes, they were meant to be. But it hasn’t turned out that way. They are located, but smudgy; the woman on the grass behind is clearer. These would be deleted today, in situ, and others taken. A filter chosen. Shared. Liked. Forgotten.

It feels political to blur them further, like I’m censoring. It is selfish. I don’t want my investigations coloured by their ordinary faces. I’ll say its Verpixelungsrecht,[1] and I’m protecting them. But you and I both know that in order to keep the Box mine (and now yours) I’m going to have to obfuscate them. They can be in the wallpaper, as long as they’re not recognisable.

[1] Jarvis, J. (2010). ‘Germany, what have you done?’. buzzmachine.com