Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/11

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Vs: [Leica] in defence of sontag...
From: "Raimo Korhonen" <raimo.korhonen@pp2.inet.fi>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:40:48 +0200

Many of Sontag´s views seem to be based upon the impression that photography is an extension of photographic industry and practised by hordes of Japanese tourists. 
All the best!
Raimo
photos at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen

- -----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: Apostolos Mamatas <a_mamatas@hotmail.com>
Vastaanottaja: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Päivä: 09. syyskuuta 2000 8:47
Aihe: [Leica] in defence of sontag...


>From what I've read, there seem to be at least two major schools of thought 
>on the Sontag issue. One may either consider a work of art (including 
>photographs, of course) in the context in which they were made (the 
>biography of the artist, the conditions under which he/she worked, etc.); or 
>one may consider the work by itself, in isolation, without knowledge or 
>interest of what the artist's intent was. Both views have their merits and 
>shortcomings. Here are a few: In the former view, there is an open 
>invitation to "photo snobs" (e.g. "she doesn't know shit about 
>photography/she's only a critic writing for the literati..."). There is, 
>however, merit in understanding the background of the photo, especially if 
>it is enlightening to the subject matter (like certain famous war photos or 
>those with historically significant themes).
>The more important view, in my opinion, is the latter. In employing this 
>perspective, we may be better equiped to view photographs as history will 
>likely view all things eventually--with dim recognition of the lives of the 
>participants, and almost none but the most arcane of interests in what 
>equipment was employed. In brief, taken in its isolated state, a photograph 
>must speak for itself. It may be worth considering the viewpoints of Sontag 
>and Barthes, because of the way they illustrate the way photos impart 
>meaning to the observer. It is far more beautiful to watch a thing grow and 
>evolve through time (like the the menaing of a photograph), than it is to 
>sit in the presence of the tyrannical, unchanging "intent" of the artist. 
>Just because Sontag is not a photographer does not mean she is not human. It 
>does not mean she lacks a valid perspective. After all, all art needs at 
>least two people to define it: the artist and the observer.
>_________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
>Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
>http://profiles.msn.com.
>