Diane Arbus - Child with toy hand grenade in Central Park (1962)

After attending the lecture on "Elements of composition" this image really interested me and so as a starting point for my blog I will analyse it in terms of its visual attributes, composition, context and signification.

The framing of the shot is open as we see beyond the central figure to other figures and a park landscape of trees and open space. The fact that the figures in the background are distorted and no specific detail can be made out focuses the viewers attention on the figure. However we are aware of some aspects of their identity, as a family and as American citizens with western values common in the 1960s, in particular patriotism, wealth and materialism.

If The Rule of thirds is used to view how the image is composed (see above) in a more technical manner we can see the child is positioned centrally which means the viewers eye is instantly led to him. The upper right section holds the family group which are out of focus but would soon cross paths with the child and his grenade as they are heading down the path towards him. The Upper row of sections highlights the much brighter lighting in the background encompassing the faceless figures, however the child very shadowy which conforms with the rule of relative contrast where there is more contrast in the foreground to create detail and less in the background to create a sense of distance.

By seperating the photo in this way, a shadowy figure behind the child also becomes more distinguishable. As the figure is more or less directly behind the child and appears to be facing in the same direction as him this suggests a connection between the two. By observing the larger height of the background figure and the fact that the direction of the leaves' shadows on the pavement appear to spread out from the figure to the child, suggests that the relationship is possibly controlling and manipulative. The Two trees, also more or less directly behind the child, can give a sense of height and strength to the object in front of them however a stark contrast is made between the two is made as the small, feeble child bears no inclination to any natural strength, only the manufactured weapon he wields. This possibly sends the message that anyone can manufacture strength through weapons, however what is truly strong and beautiful is nature itself.

The camera has neither been positioned at a low or high angle which means the viewer is at eye level to the child. This creates a more profound focus on the child and makes the image more personal to the viewer as by making eye contact with people we are more susceptible to their emotions and body language.

The expression on the childs face is one of hostility and anger, something rarely seen in images of children and which makes it more striking and even frightening. To emphasise this the boy is dressed in very innocent, traditional American children's clothing. Although we are told that the grenade is a toy his expression and tense body language, his claw-like gesture, his drooping strap and the manic expression on his face, makes it appear more real and creates a feeling of fear for the approaching family but also sympathy for the child who is clearly disturbed.

To put the image into a historical and social context explains why the child appears in the image this way. In 1962, when the image was taken, the Vietnam war was into its third year which explains the militaristic theme of the grenade in the image. It does not however glorify the war like a lot of media products at the time would have, instead it expresses the importance of conserving the innocence of children by teaching them that violence is wrong, for the sake of peace so that in future wars may not occur. The angst and tension on the face of the child may also be a result of the climate of paranoia and fear of communism present at the time due to the Cold War between America and the USSR.