How has Erwitt structured this image? What do you think the image is ‘saying’? How does the structure contribute to this meaning? Make some initial comments.
Erwitt has clearly gotten down on the ground or cropped the top part of this photograph to focus on the tiny and smartly dressed dog. Next to the dog is a set of slim legs bedecked in long, black leather boots and at first glance, next to those legs are another set of slim legs…but upon further inspection it is clearly seen that they are the legs of a much larger dog.
The juxtaposition of the long, slender legs with that of the short, pudgy dog create a sense of humor in the image. One wonders why that little dog is dressed that way and why the woman is out walking these two vastly different animals. Had we seen their full bodies, it would not have been as effective (thus humorous) since the eye plays a trick on you with the way Erwitt structured the image.
It can also be a comment on the ridiculousness of rich culture and their pets. The way the small dog is dressed is made even more ridiculous by the dog eye level shot and the presumably Great Dane standing leg to leg with their mistress.