In the chapter The Archive as Producer introduced the idea of the photographic archive. With varied opinions and definitions of what the archive consists of includes that of socio-political, ethical, propagandistic and aesthetic values. Beginning with the example of Muybridge's representation of photographing movement introduces a new transformation of photography. Sekula holds a strong opinion on what he believes the archive to be. He refuses to view the archive as an art historical sense but a materialist cultural history while insisting that the archive is organized and controlled by bureaucratic means. Steichen on the other hand views the archive as not historically based but a stand on a contrived understanding of history. Using the example of The Family of Man, Steichen ultimately fails with his view of the archive because he stripped the photos he used of their authorship and independency to attempt to "contract a fictional, ideological utopian statement about the so-called "family of man, which goes against the concept of the "naked image". I think that the example of the Crystal Palace is a much better representation of the archive. This reflects what is considered to be the "archive" without breaking what has grown in photography. The work of Dijkstra and Opie led the archive in a direction of cultural discourse and a documentation of culture.
I think that the definition of what the archive is can be flexible because I understand there to be multiple works of art that differ from one another that all can be a part of a photographic archive.
I found the views of Barthes in the discussion of the archive to be a interesting and different view, so I would want to know if there is an agreement or disagreement with Barthes and that we must interpret and read images to understand how the could be used to make the cultural, historical or political appear as if it were natural.
No comments:
Post a Comment