This week we have two readings from the OR and both are related to the power of images and how we see it.
In the first reading, "Social Photography" by Lewis W. Hine, he talks about what he sees through photographs and what kind of impact they have. An example he talks about is when he takes a pictures of children working in mills, factories, and other work environments and he interprets what that image could mean for other people. By just looking at the photo, you can feel sympathetic, sad, and at times angry because of the issue that's being shown as realistic as it can be. To Hine, who was the first person to who shaped a style for an engaged and sympathetic social documentary, he wanted to show everyone that looking at a picture can give you an look at the evidence, a social injustice, and also show what people have to endure in intolerable situations.
And in the second reading, "The Stereoscope and the Stereograph" by Oliver Wendell Holmes, it talks about the characteristics about the stereoscope and the stereograph and this applies to pictures and also leads to how a camera could work. He also explains how the way a picture can turn out differently using certain effects like negative, brightness, darkness, and sometimes make the picture solid. By changing the effects in the pictures, it can give off more feeling to person or everyone in the picture. Pretty much of lot philosophy as he continued as well as scientifically.
I find the shorter reading more understanding than the second one mainly because looking at photos can really make you get up and do something about the person or people in their situation just by looking at the photos. I've it seen it happen a couple of times and so did others like the attacks of September 11, Hurricane Katrina, Presidental Election, and other major events.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi Vanessa,
ReplyDeleteI agree - the Holmes reading was a bit more dense and focused more on a scientific explanation of the stereoscope, although his conceptualization of 'form is henceforth divorced from matter' is an extremely important idea for thinking about how mass produced images have affected our world.
The Hines reading is interesting, and particularly his argument that photography needs to describe social reality in order to help understand and make the world better. What do yo think about his comment that "...the average person believes implicitly that the photograph cannot falsify. Of course, you and I know that this unbounded faith in the integrity of a photograph is often rudely shaken, for, while photographs may not lie, liars may photograph." How can photographs be manipulated to tell a certain reality, and what are the consequences of this?
-Ariana