|
 |
Reading Photographs
By Hans Durrer | Wisdom and Inspiration |
Mar 3, 2010
|
|
Photography is a popular way of looking at our world. Less popular, however, is thinking about photography and how we use it, or are used by it.
To read photographs is personal, and inevitably so. Such reading depends on one's upbringing, culture, interests, preferences as well as dislikes; it is also subjected to one's moods. Barthes in Camera lucida (1984) distinguishes between what he calls studium and punctum: "It is by studium that I am interested in so many photographs, whether I receive them as political testimony or enjoy them as good historical scenes: for it is culturally - this connotation is present in studium - that I participate in the figures, the faces, the gestures, the settings, the actions."
Studium, therefore, stands for the general, cultured interest one has in photographs. There is, however, another element that comes into play - the personal relation, the emotional side. It occurs when one is deeply touched by a picture. Again Barthes: "... it is this element which rises from the scene, shoots out of it like an arrow, and pierces me. A Latin word exists to designate this wound, this prick, this mark made by a pointed instrument: the word suits me all the better in that it also refers to the notion of punctuation, and because the photographs I am speaking of are in effect punctuated, sometimes even speckled with these sensitive points; precisely, these marks, these wounds are so many points ... A photograph's punctum is that accident which pricks me - but also bruises me, is poignant to me."
Looking at a picture might not tell us very much and it remains doubtful if, as the saying goes, every picture tells a story. The photo, frequently, does not speak for itself which is why we want, and need, the story behind it. Moreover, to know what we look at, is often not necessarily enough to understand a picture. Benjamin in his "Short history of photography" (1980) makes this point by referring to Brecht's statement that "... less than ever does a simple reproduction of reality express something about reality." Moreover, "A photograph of the Krupp works or of the A.E.G. reveals almost nothing about these institutions." What we need is the frame of reference, the context, the story that accompanies the picture.
As much as the picture of a pipe is not a pipe but the picture of a pipe, the interpretation of a photograph is nothing but the interpretation of a photograph. The reader, as in the case of books, ultimately, does with the image what he deems fit. This implies that there is not so much a right or wrong reading than one that is more or less informed or educated. To further the latter, Clarke argues in his The photograph (1997) that "... we need to insist that we read a photograph, not as an image but as a text." And as Burgin, in the same book, elaborates: "The intelligibility of the photograph is no simple thing; photographs are texts inscribed in terms of what we may call 'photographic discourse,' but this discourse, like any other, engages discourses beyond itself, the 'photographic text,' like any other, is the site of a complex intertextuality, an overlapping series of previous texts 'taken for granted' at a particular cultural and historical conjuncture."
It is one of the peculiarities of photo-books that the captions - if there are any - often do not really contribute to an understanding of the photos displayed. It is almost as if to say: trust your eyes, look for yourself, explore what you see, discover your own picture. In The world of Henri Cartier-Bresson (1968), for instance, the pictures are accompanied by numbers that indicate captions that can be found on the final pages of the book and say "Paris 1932," or "Mexico 1934," or "New York 1964." With the exception of notables like, for example, Jean-Paul Sartre or Alberto Giacometti - whom one might have recognized anyway - people are not labeled either. Neither is the context of shooting explained - who was he working for when he shot the pictures? For travel magazines? Newspapers? Commercial advertising? Or were they movie stills? As much as one might appreciate not being told, this practice is difficult to grasp.
To read the full text go to: Studies in Photography
Hans Durrer's homepage: hansdurrer.com and blog: durrer-intercultural.blogspot.com
Let us know if you found this article useful, and tell us what kinds of articles you'd like to see in upcoming issues. Send your comments and ideas to the editor.
© Copyright 2010 by PHOTOWORKSHOP.COM
Top of Page
Last Updated: Jul 10th, 2010 - 16:19:44
|
|
|
|
|
Wisdom and Inspiration: Additional Articles
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
