We are presented with the part of the conversation between Hurn and Jay[1] on what makes a photographer different from a person who takes photographs. Some interesting points came out of this text:
1) the concept of what a bad photograph is. I have always thought int dreams of the traditional interpretation of bad photographs as being those with cluttered scenes, no obvious subjects that the viewer can look at and a lack of technical skill. Here, the authors make the point that a bad photograph is more where the viewer isn’t interested in looking at the picture for long enough to see any meaning. For me, the idea of dwelling on the image was established in the previous course, with the idea that the image needs to hold the attention of the viewer in some way. Only where there is time to digest what is happening, can the photograph be considered ‘successful’. The parallel drawn with Graham Greene’s comment that the hardest parts of a written work to write are the bits that link the action is interesting. Some photographic series that I’ve looked at so far have some clearly weaker images from my point of view. Their value in the series though is to keep my attention as i move through my created narrative. I’m not sure I’ve ever approached photography in this way before.
2) the need for good design. This is presented not as the photographer establishing clever links or patterns within a series, but the notion of designing the revelation of the subject. The authors describe the act of producing connected images through technique or patterns of similar subject material as being fairly boring. I would agree and add that I actually find that process of connecting a series of photographs, even when not trying to overtly tell a story, exhausting and not particularly conducive to creativity. Design in this case, then is more about looking at the subject and trying different ways of revealing the thing we saw in the first place. Reference is made to taking a number of shots of the subject to see if there are stronger ways of getting to the meaning of the image through small variations in the approach.
3) Linked with 2, the idea that good design is what separates the powerful photographers from those that are less competent. This is more important that technical prowess or knowledge of photography as some sort of process.
4) The concept of a beautiful photograph of a social issue distracting away from the subject and being more about the photographer. This is disputed by the authors who instead favour the idea that a photograph is only good if it reveals the subject. The role of the photographer is to do this in the most elegant way, not simply to create a beautiful image.
In trying to think about the subject of Exercise 3 and Assignment 2, I realise from Hurn and Jay’s conversation [1] that my starting point needs to be a subject that I am interested in or passionate about and starting to think about the design of how that will be revealed in my series. Exercise 3 is about interpreting a poem through a series of images. The emphasis is on how to interpret the poem as opposed to describing the poem. So, I am going to need to select a poem that resonates with me in a way that makes me care about how it is interpreted through imagery.
Cut out some pictures from a newspaper and write your own captions.
How do the words you put next to the image contextualise/re-contextualise it?
How many meanings can you give to the same picture?
Try the same exercise for both anchoring and relaying. Blog about it.
The Pictures
I cut these three photographs out of the The Times newspaper and removed the text that went with them. They were taken from different sections of the newspaper that cover different types of story.
We are brave
I chose this photograph for its powerful imagery but also for the lack of any textual messages within it. I wanted there to be no distractions from the visual messages in the picture, that is the woman and what is assumed to be her child in a classical protest pose. I added the words ‘We are brave’ to contextualise the image as a rally against struggle. The image is actually taken from a recent protest at the senseless killing of George Floyd in the US, which has vastly increased the racial tension across the country. When I consider my caption, it is firstly a much shorter and ambiguous text to accompany a news item. It suggests a brave struggle against something, but not what specifically isn’t made clear. The subjects both appear to be of African descent, but with part of their faces obscured by the medical masks, it is difficult to be sure. The raised arms speak to the Black Power movement of the 1960s, which famously had John Carlos using this gesture at the 1968 Olympics to protest the treatment of black people across the world, in particular in his home country of the United States. The actual photograph caption was:
Hundreds of people lined a rally in Barcelona in support of protests in the United States where activists have called for the abolition of the police departments
Now we have the specific context in the form of an anchor. We now know that this is a rally in solidarity with the US, rather than a protest itself. We know that it is in Barcelona rather than the US and the extra information about the demand to abolish police departments sets the political backdrop to the image. If the viewer has similar or contrary political opinions about the police, the photograph is intended to put only one side of the argument through its anchoring caption. By contrast, my caption could be referring to COVID-19, which is the currently the dominant news story in the world. It finds its way into this photograph because of the medical masks, so this image could have other meanings through my caption. It could be interpreted as a defiance of lockdown rules, families determined to conquer the virus or a show of unity with the rest crowd that can be seen in the background. The general narratives are similar, though, but my caption doesn’t seek to constrain the viewer in the same way as the newspaper.
The biker bar that delivers
I chose this image because there is something obvious about it, but without the caption that the newspaper used, it could be interpreted in different ways. For my caption, I wanted to be more descriptive in explaining the scene than in the previous photograph. Here we see a man with a heavily modified motorcycle that holds kegs of beer and he is serving a very happy looking customer. In the foreground there is further evidence of the delivery being made by the biker with the wine adding something different to the beer being poured. This photograph is actually of a landlord who’s novel way of staying in business during COVID-19 is shown in the newspaper as testimony to the resilience of the British people in times of crisis. The original caption was:
Rob Galvin, landlord of The Feather Star in Wirksworth, Derbyshire, serves a happy customer
Now we have lots of information about the picture that we didn’t have before. The caption is similar to mine, in that it is a mobile bar but where there are no real pointers to where the picture was taken added by my caption, now we know that it is a place in Derbyshire. If the viewer knows about Derbyshire, they may know that Wirksworth is a very small market town in the Derbyshire Dales National Park, so this is a service to a remote part of the country. The use of the landlord’s name is almost a tribute to him, where my caption keeps the anonymity of the principle subject.
We can interpret this image in a number of ways ranging from the intended show of inventiveness during COVID-19 to a crackpot inventor’s money-making scheme. What is clear, though is that the messages within the image are positive ones. The expressions of both men and the implied transaction point to this being part of a ‘feel good’ piece.
Looking for the right size
This photograph was taken from another story but is aesthetically similar to the previous shot. This time, I wanted to lead the viewer away from the story by adding an unrelated caption. Here we see a man sorting through the clothes on the rack whilst wearing a medical mask. The caption suggests that this is a shopper, although the clothes appear to be very different from what the man is wearing. Perhaps he is shopping for someone else, or perhaps he’s the proprietor. The visual signs are of an outside street market illustrated by the bright light, the building exterior and the price tag on the rack that has the appearance of being handmade as opposed to a professional ticket. The inclusion of the face mask points to the story of the moment, COVID-19. The recent announcement that some business can reopen with protective measures in place. The caption that accompanied this photograph was:
A seller takes stock at Petticoat Lane market in London
Now we have confirmation that the man is the seller of the clothing and we know his location. My interpretation of the image now shifts away from buyer to someone trying to overcome the effect of COVID-19 on his business. The inclusion of the location could almost be and advertisement for the market or simply an indication of the vulnerability of open-air markets in a normally bustling city such as London.
Research Task: Relay
We’ve had the concept of relay introduced through the writings of Barthes, but this task is to explore it further using examples in contemporary photography.
Sophie Calle – ‘Take Care of Yourself’
Calle’s work begins with a letter from her boyfriend informing her that their relationship was over. This letter, which has been translated from her native French into English, is to begin with an anchor that directs the reader to a state of confused, negative emotions. The sender begins with his own self-pity, explaining to Calle that he’s throughout his recent malaise, he has acted honourably. The references to ‘the others’ suggests that he had more relationships than just Calle’s during their time together. His noble gestures of not having seen them, but instead to do the right thing by her are interpreted by me as a warm up to blaming her for the break-up. The letter goes on to suggest that Calle had precluded any notion of them remaining friends which effectively made the break up and the need for the formality of writing, her fault.
Little wonder then, that the letter left Calle in a state of shock. Her reaction, that she states was an idea that came within days of receiving the email [1], was to create an artwork that addressed the sender through the eyes of women. She asked 107 women to read the letter and respond in some way, which Calle captured using mixed media. The reactions ranged from the letter being reimagined as a crossword puzzle to the more extreme shooting of a copy by a professional sports markswoman. Each woman brought their own perspective through the context of their professional lives as well as their emotional response to the words. The result is a curation of many cultural narratives, with no guidance through them by the artist with the exception the initial text of the letter itself. The viewer joins the narratives together by bringing their own feelings toward the events and the players. As the subject matter is something we all encounter at some point in our lives, the effect of parallel experiences further enhance the meaning of the works. For me, it aligns with the post-modern narrative that Barthes was referring to in Death of the Author. On the surface, it appears as lazy, almost getting other people to create the piece for her. However, the use of the mixed media to draw attention to and enhance the reactions of her women, make it an impressive piece of work.
Sophy Rickett- Objects in the Field (2012)
Rickett’s work is different but similar to Calle’s. Here we have an artist telling the story of her encounter with a renowned astrophysicist and the way she purloined his photographic documents of celestial bodies for her art. The project seeks to explore the relationship between what is created and what is appropriated [2], namely Rickett’s use of Dr Wilstrop’s old negatives to create her story. The collection is brought together by a written essay that walks the viewer through Rickett’s relationship with Wilstrop. For me, perhaps the most compelling use of media to support Rickett’s work is her video [3]. The video is a loop of Wilstrop polishing the optics for the telescope that he pioneered in a small workshop at his observatory. The audio track that is dubbed over the video is of Wilstrop reading Rickett’s essay account of their meeting and subsequent ‘collaboration’. When we are first presented with the video, it is difficult to understand how the words align with what we are seeing. As it becomes clearer, the impact of Wilstrop speaking the artist’s words is evident. His belief that his negatives taken through his telescope had no intrinsic value outside of his scientific field is contradicted by what he is saying. At no point does the video show his images or how Rickett worked them through her own use of photographic process, but it does in its own right offer a big contextual point to the narrative. Like Calle, this additional information in video and text doesn’t support the image series but works equally to tell the story. In the case of Rickett, her decision to use someone else’s photographs rather than her own may appear controversial, but the piece is as original as the previous examples of non-sequential story telling we have encountered so far.
Duane Michals – This photograph is my proof (1974)
This image is a further example of how the additional information can have an equal standing to the image, but in this case the wider interpretation of the photograph leads us to something almost unrelated to the subject.
‘This photograph is my proof (1974)’, by Duane Michals [4]
Michals presents us with a photograph of a couple in embrace, sat on bed and obviously posing for the camera. This then is a self-portrait similar to the sort that we see everywhere with the advent of ‘the selfie’. There is clear affection in the way the couple are connected in the image, but the accompanying text seeks to steer us to a situation; the affection that was once there but no longer. In this sense, the text has a feeling of ‘anchor’ about it; directing the viewer to a certain conclusion. However, the text also offers something more broad than the instant conclusion that we may have already reached:
“This photograph is my proof. There was that afternoon, when things were still good between us, and she embraced me, and we were so happy. It did happen, she did love me. Look and see for yourself.”
The text starts with a suggestion of dishonesty. The photograph is ‘my’ proof, as if it has been suggested that the claim was false. It then proceeds to describe a point in time when things were good between the couple, clearly not the current situation. The relationship could have ended for a number of reasons, but I naturally find myself assuming an acrimonious split. The element of disbelief continues with the claim that it was real; it DID happen. The last sentence invites the viewer to see for themselves. This is perhaps the most interesting element of the text, because it now asserts that the photograph must be telling the truth. We already know that the truth of an image is entirely subjective as opposed to objective, so what the photographer is saying here is that this proof cannot be challenged by the viewer. It could almost be seen as the evidence in a court case, perhaps even a divorce proceeding. What I see when I put the image and the text together is someone daring me to disagree. As the photograph was taken in 1967, the additional context of the time that has passed suggests to me that perhaps this is a take on ambivalence in a relationship, a taking for granted of the people we love. Perhaps this is supposed to be a warning to me and my generation that love is something that evolves in a way that we don’t necessarily expect, the longer we have it in our lives. I guess that depending on our own life experiences, each viewer is going to be inclined to either agree or disagree with Michals’ version of events.
In a similar vein, I was drawn to the other work in the course notes but Sharon Boothroyd. The series Disrupted Vision tells a story of clashing perspectives through a series of instant photographs. Boothroyd asks her subjects for their perspective on the picture that she has just shot of them, which in itself is a major advantage of using instant film. The immediate reaction of the subject is more often than not contrary to the intentions of the photographer. There were three images from that series that I wanted to discuss here. Unfortunately, I am unable to find the series on Boothroyd’s website (or anywhere else online) to include here.
The first is of a man standing in front of a fairground stall, holding his bag of chips. His reaction, written a on the bottom of the photograph is his commentary on his appearance rather than anything to do with the setting of the photograph. It’s undoubtedly not what Boothroyd had in mind with the selection of subject, background and his relaxed pose for the portrait. However, like the other examples of Relay, the inclusion of the text gives alternative meaning to the image. The subject has a voice with regard to his appearance in the shot that he agreed to and we are going to hear it.
The second image is of a man standing in front of a leafy background, holding some flowers. Again, the pose is simple enough and again the subject offers their opinion on the image but this time its about how to improve the picture. His reaction that it would have been better without his coat suggests that there was something more interesting in his clothing underneath or that the picture is fairly dark already; his coat doesn’t really contrast with the scene. The viewer can decide for themselves whether they agree with the sentiment which leaves plenty of ‘space’ for the narrative to be created.
The final image is of a man seated on a park bench. This time, the text is a very pointed question of the artist’s photographic skills and knowledge. His reaction is potentially based in some knowledge of the medium and rather than being a passive voice in the final result, is vocal is what appears to be disagreement. When the text is used with the picture, instead of a clash of meanings we have something that is almost in agreement. The subject’s expression is uncomfortable, his agreement to be photographed looks like it was more of an inconvenience than the other two shots and the whole demeanour of the image lends itself nicely to the text. The ironic inclusion of the criticism of the lack of the use of the rule of thirds is contrasted with the use of a Polaroid camera, which in itself is more artistic than of technical photography.
Conclusion
This exercise has been very interesting. We have the contrasting use of additional media that supports or contrasts with the seemingly obvious interpretations. We have the very specific Anchor text that leads us straight to the predetermined meaning, such as the traditional addition of photographs to written journalism. We then have the interesting takes on how media can be used and where it can be sourced from. I liked the way that Rickett had the subject of her work read her description of their encounter and subsequent collaboration over footage of him at work. That video highlighted the difference in their perspectives on his scientific work, while showing her clear respect of his achievements. The series of reproduced photographs are uplifted from their original context to be part of Rickett’s narrative. It’s a fascinating piece of work. I also loved the way that Boothroyd included the perspectives of her subjects to challenge the obvious imagery in her Polaroid photographs. I’m reminded of the reactions of some people to my use of film in my photography, which on occaision poses the question “why would you use that? It’s not as ‘good’ as digital”. The ‘goodness’ being referred to is their perspective on what makes a good photograph rather than what the artistic message may be. Boothroyd’s subject who challenges her for not following the rule of thirds is a powerful statement on photographer vs. subject vs. viewer and it’s my favourite of the series.
The two photo essays we have looked at so far draw on other media to enhance the strength of their messages. In the case of Smith’s work for LIFE magazine, the pictures were set against a written text, mainly because of that was the way the stories were being consumed by the readers. In the case of Briony Campbell, the text was also accompanied by a video that contained interview segments with her father. During the video, he doesn’t once refer to the work itself either as individual images or as a series. His testimony of sorts, seeks to add the context that begins the project and his wishes for its purpose as a father-daughter bond and catharsis for his family upon his death. In both cases, I find that the supporting media adds to, but does not detract from the ability of the images to tell the story on their own. This is my starting position in entering this project.
Roland Barthes (1915 to 1980)
Barthes was a literary theorist and philosopher who’s two works Death of the Author and Rhetoric of the Image are presented to us. The former asserted that the author was not some creative genius that should be lauded for their own original ideas; that their work was in fact an assembly of ideas that span a huge range and variety of cultural references. The ideas of structuralism with its categories and classifications was said by Barthes to lead the reader through the story aligned with conventional signposts with the result that the reader believes they understand the original intention of the work. Barthes encouraged the reader to stop being so passive in the way that they consumed the story, picture or artwork, instead encouraging them to apply their own experiences as if they were completing the narrative. The effect of Death of the Author was to create more challenging and obscure work that demanded the viewer to work harder to gain a sense of the story.
The second essay introduced the concept of Anchor and Relay to describe the purpose of accompanying text. Anchor being more akin to the news media, where the text controls the narrative in a very specific way in order to avoid any misunderstanding. This description matched my view of Paul Seawright’s Sectarian Murders that we studied in Part 1 [1]. The application of very specific text lead the viewer to see the work and all of its cleverly applied layers to the narrative that this was all about murder. In the case of the image that I looked at in the series, the blended use of the factual statement of what occurred in the drive-by shooting and the emotive sadness of the way the boy died, leave the viewer in no doubt that something terrible happened in the scene. Without the accompanying text, the photograph has multiple meanings that I could bring my own experiences and political viewpoints to when looking at it. However, I don’t because of the very specific nature of the Anchor text.
For me, the Relay is how I would describe the use of the video in The Dad Project. It seeks to almost lead the viewer away of the sadness of losing someone to a long, debilitating disease and leave enough space to interpret as a testimonial. The interview with her father looks at his letting go of the idea of being the provider of the family and he desire to explore a slightly different relationship with his daughter while he has time. In this case, some of the imagery that is included in The Dad Project isn’t just about the sadness of the subject. The image below is an example of the effect of Relay for me.
‘Family Portrait’, by Briony Campbell (from The Dad Project) [2]
Here we have a slightly abstract portrait of her father and brother in conversation in the kitchen of their home, shot through the window glass. The composition is interesting enough with Campbell and her camera being visible in the frame as well as the reflected outside detail overlaid on the kitchen items (such as the refrigerator). Campbell’s father is clearly ill, but the image doesn’t speak to me of sadness, but much along the sentiments of the video that accompanies the series. However, it is the title that goes with this image that invites interpretation without being constrained by Campbell’s intentions for the image. ‘Family Portrait’ is a simple setting of the scene. It’s up to the viewer to judge the mood of the image for themselves. To me, this is a happy exchange between father and son, being observed from outside the relationship by the daughter. She is both insider and outsider to the scene and the jumbled effect of the inside and outside elements in the frame further enhance that.
Conclusion
I read both of Barthes’ texts and, like many found them difficult to grasp in their entirety. From my understanding of the essays, I believe that in the case of Death of the Author Barthes began by challenging the traditional notions of originality in writing and asked the reader or viewer to take focus instead on what they bring to the understanding of a piece of work rather than trying to get to the ‘true intent’ of its creator. The idea that we can never know what the original intent of a work is, but instead bring our own completing piece of a narrative through our understanding and experience, makes sense. However, I can well believe that this was considered a controversial shift in thinking at the time of its publication, particularly with the literary authors of that age. In his video explaining the essay [3], Tom Nicholas refers to the way that J K Rowling continues to re-visit her Harry Potter series, perhaps to increase the volume of information that supports her original intent for the characters and the story. Far from being a straight-forward embellishment, the effect on the readers could be a sense of distrust of Rowling, brought about by her intrusion on their narrative, created over a number of years and readings of the texts. When I reconsider The Dad Project with this in mind, I then start to recognise myself trying to interpret what the purpose of the essay was. As I ‘consumed’ the information as laid out on Campbell’s website, I was directed away from how the series made me feel and more onto how she felt. Perhaps there is such as a thing as too much information.
When presented by Barthes’ analysis of the messages in advertising, I understood the way that text with an image could control the narrative in a recognisable way. In the case of the Panzani advertisement, the idea of Italianicity is created through the eyes of the French culture through the mix of native language and label names. Barthes points out that an Italian wouldn’t have necessarily observed the impact of the labels as the image of what ‘looks Italian’ is different within the culture from outside of it. The concepts of Anchor and Relay made sense to me in that we see examples of both in everyday life without ever noticing them.
References
[1] Fletcher, R, 2020, “Project 4: The Gallery Wall – Documentary as Art, OCA Blog Post, https://richardfletcherphotography.photo.blog/2020/05/12/project-4-the-gallery-wall-documentary-as-art/
[3] Nicholas, T, 2019, “The Death of the Author: WTF? Roland Barthes’ Death of the Author Explained, Youtube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9iMgtfp484
Richard Fletcher OCA Photography Blog 