Elephants, Metro Toronto Zoo 1985

Editor: So, we’re looking at Volker Seding’s photograph, “Elephants, Metro Toronto Zoo” from 1985. It’s…stark. The concrete enclosure feels so isolating, especially with that heavy chain fence. What do you make of this, especially given it's a photograph? Curator: Isn’t it fascinating? It’s a photograph, yes, capturing what seems like a real space. But look closer. The textures, the almost theatrical lighting… it feels less documentary and more like a carefully staged reflection on captivity. It's as if Seding isn't just showing us the zoo, but asking: what does it mean to "exhibit" life? Does the number "2" stamped on the door symbolize being second best? Editor: Oh, I didn't catch the number on the door. I was so focused on the animal itself! So, you’re saying it's less about the elephants and more about… us? Curator: Precisely. Think of those chains. Are they holding the elephants in, or are they holding us back from truly seeing them? Does the composition feel cold and calculated, as if to mirror the supposed "calculation" behind keeping wild animals in a controlled environment? Editor: I see that now. The way the light falls, the deliberate framing... It's not a candid snapshot. There is intentionality here. So, the "urban landscape" tag seems misleading, no? Curator: Not misleading, precisely! A zoo IS an urban landscape - the built and natural worlds colliding! Think of Central Park Zoo nestled into New York City or The London Zoo. It asks: what can a picture *be* beyond just "showing something?" The real art sneaks between the bars of the image... or am I just projecting now? Editor: Not at all! It reframes my whole understanding of the image. I came in thinking "sad elephants," but I'm leaving thinking about systems, observation, and ethical responsibility. Curator: Exactly. It becomes a looking glass reflecting back at us as the viewers!