Response - Photography and the Multitude

The article mentions a "clash between a world becoming and world passing" in Gursky and Sekula's works, how the works show two vantage points, two separate worlds of globalization, one which follows the other. I believe both worlds presented by Gursky and Sekula are one in the same, by combining both perspectives of globalism you get a better understanding of how the machine is able to continue to operate. Through Sekula, "smooth space" is brought into question, "how did your tennis shoes get here from Indonesia, Mr. and Ms. Jogger?" Sekula also brings up job displacement and other problems associated with globalization. But this troubled world is not able to exist on its own, there has to be a counter point to Sekula's work. On that opposite end of the spectrum is Gursky's work, which endorses "smooth space," where capital has conquered space and "everything feels in equal focus and perspective."
The article mentions that "both worlds exist within globalisation," with one described as the "promise of borderless capitalism" and the other the "reality of capitalist exclusion." I think that both can be realities and coexist, both are products from the same action of a global market, and only when both sides can acknowledge and accept the other can any change occur.