On Photography - Susan Sontag

The copy of the book - On Photography written by Susan Sontag - that I have used was published by Penguin Books England in 1979. One of the first things that I noticed was that throughout the book Sontag presumes that the reader will know who the people are mentioned. There is no usual references and frequently no first names. First published in 1977 in the United States of America and Canada it was published in Great Britain in 1978. In a foreword to the book Sontag writes - "It all started with one essay - about some of the problems, aesthetic and moral, posed by the omnipresence of photographed images..." The final result was 6 essays entitled "In Plato's Cave"*;  America, Seen Through Photographs, Darkly;  Melancholy Objects;  The Heroism of Vision;  Photographic Evangels; and "The Image World". Although it was tempting to follow the same structure and consider each essay in its own right I decided to explore Sontag's views on the three main elements of Photography - the Photographer; the Photograph; and the Viewer. In part my decision was based on the overlap between the essays on these elements.


Photographers

It is a statement of the obvious to say that without photographers there would be no photographs for the photographer chooses, consciously or unconsciously, what shall be photographed. As Sontag states (p.11 note all page numbers reference the page in the edition I used) - "A photograph is not just the result of an encounter between an event and a photographer; picture taking is an event in itself, and one with ever more peremptory rights - to interfere with, to invade or to ignore whatever is going on". The act of ignoring happenings surrounding the chosen subject of the picture is to exclude context that may be important to understanding and subsequent cropping is not only used to achieve a better composition but also to exclude elements that would detract from or confuse the message that the photographer wishes to convey. Whatever the claims photographers may make that they wish only to record reality they are always conditioned by their understanding of taste and conscience and what makes a great image.

As a student I often come across the phrase "photographic seeing" and yet I have never been sure what the term means as it seems to be one of those things that defies a consensus view among photographers. There is a commonality of view among photographic writers that to ensure a good photograph you must first see it in your imagination - a first construct of your mind. Stieglitz (Alfred 1864 - 1946) "proudly reports that he stood for three hours during a blizzard on February 22 1893 "awaiting the proper moment" to take his celebrated picture "Fifth Avenue, Winter" (p.90). Sontag suggests that the "proper moment" is when one can see things (especially what everyone has already seen) in a fresh way. It is not until you think about Sontag's statement that you realise that it is actually not very helpful having substituted one phrase (fresh way) for another (proper moment). Cartier-Bresson (Henri 1908 - 2004) talks of the 'decisive moment' which is only slightly more revealing.

For Sontag photographic seeing ..."turns out to be mainly the practice of a kind of dissociative seeing, a subjective habit which is reinforced by the objective discrepancies between the way that the camera and the human eye focus and judge perspective" (p.97).

To distinguish between the professional and amateur photographer in terms of their approach to photography is no easy task. Professional photographers are more likely to defend the place of photography in the world of art or in revealing of truth. Sontag claims that virtually every important photographer has written "expounding photography's moral and aesthetic mission" (p115). Some, such as McCullin (Don 1935 - ), believe their work can reveal truth and change the world for the better only to be disillusioned by pressing reality. One wonders how many conflict areas McCullin had to photograph before he realised that the same thing was happening only the characters and the scenery changed. Perhaps even more alarming is the possibility by the public's constant exposure to his and others work we became immune to the true horror of what was being presented and no more real than such films as "Saving Private Ryan".

Professional photographers will also emphasise the non-partisan, non-involved nature of their work. Sontag makes reference to Diane Arbus (1923 - 1971) - "Arbus's photographs - with their acceptance of the appalling - suggest a naivite which is both coy and sinister, for it is based on distance, on privilege, on a feeling that what the viewer is asked to look at is really the "other". (p.34). On page 39 Sontag makes, what to me is a startling statement - "The fact of her suicide seems to guarantee that her work is sincere, not voyeuristic, that it is compassionate, not cold. Her suicide also seems to make the phtographs more devastating, as if it proved the photographs to have been dangerous to her."  It seems odd,to say the least, that suicide can in some way legitimise the work of the person killing herself. It could equally be said that her suicide followed a realisation of the nature of her intrusion into people's lives.

Professional photographers are also more likely to emphasise the level of skill needed to take a great image whilst having to acknowledge the chance element in their success. Recent developments in cameras and their inclusion in a whole range of devices increase the chances of the amateur capturing that "proper moment". As Sontag states "..there are pictures taken by anonymous amateurs which are just as interesting, as complex formally, as representative of photography's characteristics as a Stieglitz....p.132.

I would like to finish this section with two further quotes from Sontag:

"The photographer - and the consumer of photographs -  follows the footsteps of the ragpicker who was one of Beaudelaire's (Charles Pierre 1821 - 1867) favorite figures for the modern poet:

Everything that the big city threw away, everything it lost, everything it despised, everything it 
crushed underfoot, he catalogues and collects...He sorts things out and makes a wise choice; he collects like a miser guarding a treasure, the refuse which will assume the shape of useful or gratifying objects between the jaws of the goddess of industry". (p.78)

"...1928 silent film, The Cameraman,...has an inept Buster Keaton vainly struggling with his dilapidated apparatus...never managing to take one decent picture, yet finally getting some great footage...by inadvertence. It is the hero's pet monkey who loads the camera with film and operates it part of the time." (p.53)

Perhaps the greatest character asset the photographer should have is humility.

* Plato's Cave - Plato has Socrates describe a gathering of people who have lived chained to the wall of a cave all of their lives, facing a blank wall. The people watch shadows projected on the wall by things passing in front of a fire behind them, and begin to ascribe names to these shadows. According to Plato's Socrates, the shadows are as close as the prisoners get to viewing reality. He then explains how the philosopher is like a prisoner who is freed from the cave and comes to understand that the shadows on the wall do not make up reality at all, as he can perceive the true form of reality rather than the mere shadows seen by the prisoners. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_Cave)

Photographs

"...first of all a photograph is not only an image (as a painting is an image), an interpretation of the real; it is also a trace, something directly stenciled off the real, like a footprint or a death mask...a photograph is never less than the registering of an emanation (light waves reflected by objects) - a material vestige of a subject in a way that no painting can be" p.154

Sontag offers a number of statements about the photograph and here she offers an almost magical explanation - the photograph captures the uniqueness of the subject as 'seen' by the camera. We are offered an interpretation of reality not reality itself. Yet later in the book (p163) we are told that "photographs are a way of imprisoning reality, understood as recalcitrant, inaccessible of making it stand still." This ambiguity is evident throughout the book  one of the earlier statements (p.3) being that "Photographs really are experience captured."  [ Sontag argues on p.52 that surrealism is at the heart of the photographic process because photography by its creation of a duplicate world - real;ity in the second degree]

The photograph in its essential state is an image printed on some form of medium is part of the real world (I am avoiding here the philosophical arguments as to what constitutes 'real' instead taking a pragmatic approach that if I can sense an object using one of my senses then it is 'real'). What is less certain is whether what I 'see', in the wider sense of interpretation and understanding, is reality. Sontag argues (p.5) that photographs are not so much statements about the world but miniatures of reality that can be created by anyone. Most of us will accept that what we see in a photograph is proof that the subject matter was in front of the camera at the time the photograph was taken and, further than this, that it is sufficient proof of something happening. Whilst their is a healthy cynicism about the veracity of the photograph rarely do we challenge what we see unless it clashes with our fundamental understanding of the world around us. Photographs reinforce our world view.

Yet is this world view universal or are we alone in what we 'see' when we look at a photograph? Sontag gives a range of statements about what a photograph can tell us from "a photograph passes as incontrovertible proof that a given thing happened" (p.5);  "In the fairy tale of photography the magic box insures veracity and banishes error, compensates for inexperience and rewards innocence"  (p.53); and "the force of photographic images comes from their being material realities in their own right, richly informative deposits left in the wake of whatever emitted them, potent means for turning the tables on reality - for turning it into a shadow. Images are more real than anyone could have supposed." (p.150).

Can these statements be held to be true if we are also told:-

"The ultimate wisdom of the photographic image is to say: "There is the surface. Now think - or rather feel, intuit - what is beyond it, what the reality must be like if it looks this way" Photographs, which cannot themselves explain anything, are inexhaustible invitations to deduction, speculation and fantasy." (p.23).

Unable to speak to us the photograph relies upon our ability to interpret what we see in such a way as to have awareness of the message that the creator of the image intended. That the creator is aware that the message may not be heard or seen offers the reason why photographs are often accompanied by text designed to guide our thinking - to set our thought processes on the road to the desired conclusion . That this is a fruitless quest is evidenced by how we do not understand how to react to a particular photograph unless we can place it within our world view. It matters not what we are told if the understanding from that telling is at odds with what we believe to be true.

The Viewer

As suggested in the previous paragraph how we interpret photographs is personal and, to others, unpredictable. We need to know or, at least feel that we know, what it is that we are looking at when viewing a photograph. We have to be able to place it within a reference frame that we understand. As Sontag says (p.19) we have to have a political consciousness to be affected morally by a photograph. How we react to images of the people living in the ghettoes of Poland in 1938 depends upon our knowing what their future held. If we are aware that nearly all of those we see in the images will die in camps we will have a different reaction to that if we knew nothing of their fate. She further argues that because each photograph is only a fragment, its moral emotional weight depends upon where it is inserted. A photograph changes according to the context in which it is seen. (p 105). Not only do we see the photograph through the filters of our own world view but that world view is altered by where we see the image.

The vast majority of photographs are viewed privately or in the company of a few others. Whether it be looking through a family album or browsing through Flickr our surroundings are familiar to us and we can allow our feelings free rein. What we 'see' are snapshots - a much abused term that is more often than not used in a derogatory form. We are ready to accept the imperfections and are usually uncritical of failures to follow the rules of composition or placement of the subject. What, however, if we are viewing a photograph in a Gallery or Museum. Our perception and expectations change. What we demand of the image is something approaching perfection. The paradox is that we may well see the same photograph, albeit enlarged, as we saw in more comfortable surroundings yet demand more of it.

Where we view the image impacts directly upon our responses - in a museum or gallery our judgement of the image is constrained by the often unstated belief that because it is hanging on the wall of the Museum of Modern Art in New York or Tate Modern in London it is in some way 'better' or a work of art. We allow our own personal judgement to be suspended, to replace it by the judgement of those who chose the images that hang in front of us. We feel uncomfortable and ask questions of ourselves if in some way we do not like some of the  display. Sontag (p.135) in suggesting why we like a particular image writes "to prefer one photograph to another seldom means only that the photograph is judged to be superior formally, it almost always means - as in more casual kinds of looking - that the viewer prefers that kind of mood, or respects that intention, or is intrigued by (or feels nostalgic about) that subject".  Whilst this is true at one level I believe that it understates the power of the placement of an image to affect our feelings about it.

The photographer strives to capture the proper/decisive moment or strives to find that shot that tells the story s/he wants the image to communicate to the viewer but it is all in vain. What we see in a photograph is a combination of expectation, desire and our cultural background. To finish with a quote found on page 170: " .....in China.....Not only are there proper subjects for the camera, those which are positive, inspirational (exemplary activities, smiling people, bright weather), and orderly, but there are proper ways of photographing, which derive from notions about the moral order of space that preclude the very idea of photographic seeing".