The visualization and caption communicate the relations that a community has with the river that bifurcates its city. It describes how these relations, particular those of "life" have been disrupted by the pollution of the river upstream from industries, due to corrupt dealings. Nonetheless, the now-untouchable water still structures daily life despite its toxicity but also generates ongoing local concern and mourning for the lost vitality of the water.
The caption is very well written and informative, but I was left wanting to know more about the relations of power that has generated the rivers toxicity-- the explanation is currently vague. It seems to matter deeply to locales, but is this sentiment widely shared and if so, what are the mechanisms that prevent change?
It is a film still from a documentary that the author partook in creating. The image itself shows how people interact with the river's polluted waters, tentatively, and as such it suitably furthers the caption's argument and suggests the water's toxicity, despite the pleasant aesthetic.
nope
It shows how lives are spatially reoriented through the infiltration of toxins, but also how people persist in maintaining these relations despite the toxicity.
