Same Sex Marriage - Separation between Church & State of Happiness

Separation between Church and State of Happiness
© Louisa Garcia 2009

Separation between Church and State of Happiness When I first proposed the idea for this controversial shoot to friends and family, I got a lot of looks, a few criticisms and at least two handfuls of support. One friend told me I would have to watch my back. That it was the kind of shoot that would literally get me shot. I shrugged my shoulders and said, "So be it. It needs to be done."

The inspiration for this shoot derived from several articles I read pertaining to same sex marriage and whether or not it should be approved by the government. The articles focused on one particular senator and reverend from the Bronx who rallied the Hispanic community against gay marriage in the name of religion.

This kind of rally, in the name of God, seemed very reminiscent of the early 1960's when black and white could not marry. It was unlawful and ungodly until the justices of the supreme court deemed it otherwise. It is, unfortunately, a union that is still frowned upon, but nonetheless, it is widely accepted.

Now myself, being heterosexual and a young Hispanic, I felt someone from our community should speak up. Not all of us are against gay marriage. We are the "live and let live" generation. As for our government, religion has no place there. As the constitution states, church and state are to be kept separate. Why should anyone living under our constitution be denied the right to marry freely and devoid from any church influences? Homosexuals aren't asking to be married by the church, they are asking to be married by the state.

In this photograph, a lot can be interpreted, but the underlining tone is injustice and in it, a weighted opinion. I hope the viewer can look passed the seemingly violent photo to the bigger message.

And I welcome any criticism and thoughts.

Click here-
To view more photographs

Artist Statement

A person, a camera and a subject. This is a photographer. A person not afraid to lose seconds of his/her life with every click of the shutter in order to capture a moment in time. Sounds cheesy? In my experience I have found that statement to be true. On countless occasions I have excused myself from a scenario just so I could take a picture of it. I find that in stealing that moment I am somehow connected to it and for each photo I take from the world I leave a piece of me in its place. Trying to encompass everything that an eye can capture is the folly of the photographer. It's almost unfair to have so much to weave with so little thread. Instead I hope to evoke reactions with my photographs. Whether they inspire or disgust or please is not for me to decide, as an artist I'm only trying to light a fire under an audience.

In my directorial photo shoots, I aim to be unconventional but very much conceptual. The majority of my work is incited by inequality and prejudices of the world. Dominance and submission are two key elements that are consistent in my photographs. One thing I've tried to do is turn figurative ideas into poignant and graspable works. Something an audience can identify with even if only empathetically and not directly. I don't expect everyone to feel the same, but I do expect an opinion. The enemy of the artist is an audience with no opinion about their art whatsoever. If my ideas come to fruition and it strikes a chord with an individual, then I've succeeded as an artist.

Photography has allowed me to give shape to thoughts, beliefs and emotions. It takes that which is intangible and makes it real, or perhaps is it the other way around? Where something that was once real, and captured on camera, is now intangible. This is how we are survived and become legendary, through photos. It has the power to shape things not yet seen and I hope that my pictures will one day etch themselves into memories not just my own. This is what I strive for. Me, a camera and a subject.