- Most provocative quote: “All photographs are possible
contributions to history, and any photograph, under certain circumstances,
can be used in order to break the monopoly which history today has over
time” (Berger 109).
- This quote identifies one of the most provocative
paradoxes about photographs: photos are both components of history and
disrupters of history. A photograph is a past tense medium; that is, when
a photo is taken, the exact moment photographed ceases to exist outside of
the photograph. Because of this inevitability, the photo contributes to
history. However, this is not the
extent of the power of a photograph.
For just as the photo records moments for history, it also allows
us to retain those moments in the present. The smile on someone’s face, a
family gathered around a table, a child on Christmas morning – photographs
allow moments like these to exist beyond the scope of our memory. We can look back on these photographs
and see every detail captured by the camera, every detail that would have
been forever lost to history without the photo being taken. The passage of time is inevitable and
photography doesn’t stop this. Still,
photographs, while contributing to and documenting history, allow us to
preserve moments. The photograph does
not allow us to experience the moment with the same level of sensation as
we did when we lived it; yet, it does allow us a visual experience of that
moment – and sometimes, depending on the moment, this visual experience
leads to other sensory experiences too…perhaps the sounds swirling around
that moment or the feeling you felt just as the photo was taken.
- One of my current research projects is looking at the
use of photographs on Facebook to commemorate those who have passed away. In thinking this through and looking at
how people use Facebook to mourn loss and celebrate lives of their loved
ones, I’ve been really amazed at the role photos seem to play in these
interactions. A photo of a person
who is no longer alive often garners written feedback expressing how the
photo has impacted a viewer, reminded a viewer of a specific memory, and/or
caused the viewer to react with happiness or sorrow. In this context, the photographs become
a component of history (it is a picture of someone who is no longer with
us) while at the same time allowing the viewers to hold on to a piece of
that person and remember specific times in ways they may not have remembered
without the trigger of the photo.
- Connections to other’s quotes:
- The quote Jason chose is about how photos can
memorialize individuals. Although I remember reading this quote, I hadn’t
made the connection to my own research interest until Jason posted it.
(So, thanks!) The meaning of a photo taken when a person is alive changes
after the person has passed away; although not the original purpose of
the photo, the photo can function as a memorial to that person after
his/her passing. (Uh oh, we’re back to purpose and function again…)
Friday, September 14, 2012
Most provocative quote
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteChristine, your research sounds interesting, and it reminds me of something I noticed recently. When an acquaintance of mine unexpectedly died, I noticed her LinkedIn profile stayed up, and active. Although we weren't friends on Facebook, I assume it was the same there. It was almost eery, these derelict monuments of her online presence, now untended. Do they go away? Do they just stay up? And how might this connect with Berger's ideas about arresting time, and potentiality?
ReplyDeleteYou're right, Dave...the FB profiles do stay up. This is something I'm researching and presenting on at a conference this fall. It's also interesting that new/different pages sometimes are created in response to the person's death.
ReplyDeleteDavid, I was just noticing this same thing with facebook. My best friend's aunt passed away (two or more years ago). She still appears in my "suggested friends" list at times. I've also noticed how the preexisting sites become memorials to the dead (a few people I went to hs with have passed etc...) Friends post to their walls as if it is a link to them. I find it fascinating. I also wonder, am I heartless when I trim out friends and delete the dead? It kind of makes me uneasy when there facebooks randomly appear in my news feed. Wonder if you could find some connects, Christine, with Leigh's vernacular work with memorials?
ReplyDeleteMolly, I've talked to Leigh briefly about it. :) I'm still trying to think through the research in my head and make some sense/draw some conclusions from it. Thanks for the suggestion!
ReplyDeleteHere's one insight: I left my dad's Facebook page up, but I'm considering taking it down now that it has been a year. I've left it active not to become some sort of memorial--that is not valid in this case. Rather, several of his friends from his youth--all men and women who are now 75 years old or so, have learned about his passing by "finding" him on Facebook. Through that they have been able to contact me or my siblings to send their condolences or share their memories. Many times I have thought about taking it down, but I've decided at each turn to leave it for a while.
ReplyDeleteOn the flipside, when my mother-in-law passed away in June, my sister-in-law deleted her account (and her email account) within the first few days. I was flipping through some photos recently and came upon one of my mom, my mother-in-law, and me, taken this year on Mother's Day. The caption now reads, "Moms. With Nancy McKay and"
Left me cold. She still has a name. Her daughter took down her accounts to avoid anyone stealing her identity, and I understand that compulsion.
You bring up a great topic: memory and the photograph. One thing that struck me in your response was how you describe how photographs capture moments that then can exist outside the scope of our memory. I've always been curious about whether photographs taken in memorable moments in our personal lives affect how we perceive the memory years later. Do we recall memories better when the image has been photographed, memories not photographed not so well? Along the lines of that, does the photograph skew how we actually experienced the event? Things to consider.
ReplyDeleteInteresting Joe...on a related note, sometimes I think I have memories only because I've seen them in photographs. For example, I don't actually remember sitting in my great grandmother's living room, but I feel like I do because I have a picture of me, my siblings, and my great grandmother on her couch. In a way, I have a memory of the photo.
ReplyDeleteInteresting you say that because one of the earliest memories I have involves my cousins and me sitting in front of a staircase taking a picture together. I think we can probably find most everyone having their earliest memories involving some sort of photograph or video--though that's a generalization. Since we can't actually form memory until we're about 2 years old, our unconscious could be using photo or video from this time to make memories out of them. Interesting stuff!
ReplyDelete