For this exercise, we looked
at the essay “Understanding a Photograph,” written by John Berger in 1972.
First, a sentence to
summarise each paragraph:
Para 1: Is photography considered a fine art?
Para 2 : Not many museums hold photographs, making
photography more accessible to the public.
Para 3: Works of art are valuable property.
Para 4: Images are infinitely reproducible, and therefore
have no property value.
Para 5: A photo shows a message about the event it
records.
Para 6: Why did the photographer choose THAT moment to
record?
Para 7: Differences between photography and painting –
painting involves arranging things.
Para 8: What gives the photo meaning may depend on the
observer’s understanding of the background.
Para 9: The moment the shutter is pressed is what is
recorded.
Para 10: Painting interprets the world in a different way,
photography has no language of its own.
Para 11: Choosing the moment to preserve within a
continuum.
Para 12: What is present and what is absent are both
important in a photo.
Para 13: The message may be very simple.
Para 14: Photos are a view of reality that may be used
against us.
Summarising his paper into
one sentence: Photography is unique, and shouldn’t be judged in the same way as
painting, sculpture and other fine arts.
John Berger is known for his
socio-political stance. How is that reflected in his argument?
Are you convinced by
Berger’s argument? If not, why not?
What is your opinion of
Berger’s writing style?
He makes reference to social
class, and ‘nobility’ owning works of art, and of this being out of reach to
the general public. At the end, he also talks about using photography as a
weapon, which could be seen as political.
Not really, but the main
reasons are to do with the fact that the article is 40 years old and the
digital age has changed things considerably. Museums and galleries also seem to
have more photography now, and it seems to be taken as a form of art. There is
also a lot more digital manipulation, and this can be seen as unreal, in the
same way potentially as painting might be seen. I also disagree that
photography has no value as it is easily reproducible, again this is not always
true, many images can be sold at auction for a high value.
At first, I found the essay
quite hard to read as it was a bit old fashioned. Some concepts have changed so
much today that from that aspect it was also quite hard to read. It also
requires a fair amount of concentration and reading through in order to get the
overall message.