|
December 31, 2009
There is the common belief in photography that the photograph is natural. The assumption is that the image is a natural sign, a straightforward analogue of its object that is unmediated by language or convention.
In Picturing Ourselves: Photography and Autobiography Linda Haverty Rugg says that while we know on one level that photographs are the products of human consciousness, they also can (have been, are, will) be taken as "natural" signs, the result of a wholly mechanical and objective process, in which the human holding the camera plays an incidental role in recording "truth."
She adds:
Our belief in this aspect of photography allows us to admit photographs as evidence in courts of law and persuades some that the spirits of the dead or heavenly emissaries can be captured on photographic film. In this reading of photographs it is possible to posit the metaphorical "Eye" mentioned above, an eye so close in character to that of the unknown and invisible reader, or the eye of the observing and narrating autobiographer, or the eye of the State or of God, that it achieves a transcendent and disembodied quality.
She says that if, as practicing poststructuralists, we would like to discount photography's evidential power, we should remind ourselves of the small army of photographic selves that verify our status and agency in the world on passports, drivers' licenses, and so on.
However, it is not as straightforward as this either or, since passports and drivers' licenses are part of our visual language and conventions.
|
All the best for the new year to all.
2010 is going to be one of those years I think that when we look back from the future we will think WOW! That was a big year. Good Luck