What possible connection can be made between photographs and houses? Perhaps we take photographs and houses equally for granted. There are so many. You just use them as ... Who really ... ? Do the developers, builders, sellers, town planners see other than economic structures? Of course they do.

Photography when it is not much more than an illustration of psychological and social worlds can be spoken of in post-modernist, post-structuralist terms incorporating a touch of phenomenology, a bit of structuralism, a hint of hermeneutics, and great gobs of pretty well anything else you care to mention.

The photographs reproduced here have too many possibilities in their grasp. They can point to family, social, economic and political structures, the good and the going bad. They point to housing that is a fundamental force, particularly for the homeless. They might make you think that housing can structure a way of life, ways of thinking, kinds of conflict, dreams. Housing can influence oil markets. Houses can burn and leave the most recent occupants dead or devastated. The notion of housing can create unrealistic, unattainable dreams. Housing can be a bad dream. Or it can be ...

Contemporary mass-produced housing, and the suburbs it demands, form and release the stories of individuals, families, and society. Photographs can contain stories, the stories viewers care to remember, create or anticipate.