The railway should make the lives of the working people better through saving time of commuting by more aand more speed of transportation. Yes, that was their "good intention". And what happened in reality? As they weren't willing to pay for new rails on which faster trains could move, they simply made the connections "denser" by reducing the waiting time of the trains in the stations, making it impossible for somebody to change train without running his/her lungs out of the own mouth. (If one is not as fast for any reason, forget about the next train.) Oh, and not to forget train speeds exceeding the tolerance limits of the rails. Even a boat in a typhoon in the open sea wouldn't shake as strongly. Oh again, and not to forget lowering the number of available wagons in order to maximize the profit per transported person, which also resulted in passenger having to stand in the train in peak times.
Well, all the above was in my mind when I decided to somehow depict the false direction that the railway took. It should also be a bit ironical and so I decided a triple exposure with some chaotic look of the rails. Two frames are the rails themselves and one frame (that with the red net-like lines) is the pattern of seats in the train.
Thanks agaon for the ncie and very detailed comment, Shyamal, that was not predictable at all! Indeed I am surprised to read it, and it provides yet another source for thoughts for me, about multiexposures.
I do want to create complexity, interdependance, geometries embedded in each other, as if the inside were ouside, the left were right, the top were down and vice versa. Much like Klein's bottle. But despite complexity I still leave some anchors there, and so the interesting point is that they seem like anchors to me, but they do not seem like achors to other people. Here, for example, the anchor seems to me to be the bottom right, where the rails cross each other. Does the image "start" there? Is it the point where the divergence starts announcing itself, before everything goes astray? I'd be glad to know how you see that.
I have sold some of these images - and yes they wanted them in the biggest possible format! But still I didn't have any exhibition of this work. I hope that it will happen some day though I do that mostly for myself. Let's see what happens.
Nick, I am almost running out of things to say for your images, I fear I am starting to sound predictable. To that end, let me first assure you that this image is fantastic, and only for the sake of not beating that drum again, I will not mention how much I like your concepts and the execution of shots such as this. It makes me too envious.
Instead, I will blither about how my eye roams around the image like a vagabond, trying to see everything and yet not being able to find an anchor to rest beside. Maybe it is just my eye that feels the need for this anchor, but as one of your recurring viewers, I feel entitled to mention this. You have great pictures, and in their complexity I feel lost.
Also, I am now curious: Have you exhibited your work? I think your images are of the type that should be seen on a grossly large scale, and viewing them on a web, on my laptop's screen, cannot do them the same justice.
0 
