Morris
relates images to beliefs by discussing photos and what we associate with them.
When I first viewed the photo of the ship, I felt absolutely no attachment
whatsoever besides thinking the photo itself was fascinating. After reading the
stories attached to the history of the boat (whether or not it is truly the
Lusitania as we presume it is), I felt sympathetic when viewing the photo
again. Naturally, my brain started wandering between possibilities of who was
on the boat, under what circumstances the photo was taken, where in the
timeline of the ship’s history the photo was taken, etc. As soon as I believed
I knew the situation expressed in the photo, I felt differently towards it.
To a certain extent, as expressed by the aforementioned change in my feelings, I agree with Morris that beliefs influence what we think about an image. However, he then goes on to state that we cannot assign the labels “true” or “false” to any image because those labels reference not our thoughts on the picture but our thoughts on statements related to the picture. Even if these statements are as simple as a caption, we never answer directly whether or not a picture is true without answering an underlying question. This is where I disagree. I wholeheartedly believe that a photo can induce feelings on its own and answer questions. It is indisputable that photos can give us insight into otherwise mysterious occasions, as seen by the help they provide for solving crimes, and often this information cannot be acquired by other means.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/05/world/europe/armenia-rally-balloons-explode-at-campaign-rally.html?ref=balloons&_r=0
Images like this can tell us who was where, and answer questions about the atmosphere of a situation, even if they cannot provide insight as to what chain of events led up to the photo or what exactly it may be depicting.
To a certain extent, as expressed by the aforementioned change in my feelings, I agree with Morris that beliefs influence what we think about an image. However, he then goes on to state that we cannot assign the labels “true” or “false” to any image because those labels reference not our thoughts on the picture but our thoughts on statements related to the picture. Even if these statements are as simple as a caption, we never answer directly whether or not a picture is true without answering an underlying question. This is where I disagree. I wholeheartedly believe that a photo can induce feelings on its own and answer questions. It is indisputable that photos can give us insight into otherwise mysterious occasions, as seen by the help they provide for solving crimes, and often this information cannot be acquired by other means.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/05/world/europe/armenia-rally-balloons-explode-at-campaign-rally.html?ref=balloons&_r=0
Images like this can tell us who was where, and answer questions about the atmosphere of a situation, even if they cannot provide insight as to what chain of events led up to the photo or what exactly it may be depicting.
Brooke, I like how you described your thought process as you read Morris's article instead of writing about it in the abstract. It definitely helped strengthen your point and made it a lot more personal. The only thing I don't agree with is when you say that it is "indisputable that photos can give us insight into otherwise mysterious occasions." While some photos may be able to do this, many photos are extremely vague and neutral until you actually find out the real story behind the image.
ReplyDeleteAh, I'm glad you mentioned that, Connor! I guess this post could benefit from some clarification- I definitely agree that often photos can feel distant and disconnected if out of context or lacking definition (even if that means a false title or incorrect interpretation). I do, however, believe that photos often do speak on their own. I guess I meant to emphasize that not ALL photos are bland and meaningless when we are first introduced to them.
DeleteI definitely agree with what you said about how a photo can cause people to feel or have strong emotions without a caption or context. I think this can be seen photos of impoverished people or kids with cancer. Pictures really can tell a story on there own.
ReplyDeleteI had been thinking about using photos as proof or further clarification for other occasions, or even as descriptions of a scenario or atmosphere, but I hadn't specifically thought about pictures where someone is telling their own story. That is a super good point, reminding me of a photo I just saw on Facebook where a girl was using social media as an attempt to locate her birth mother. I think there is a huge scale of variation as far as what photos can represent.
DeleteI had the same set of feelings when I was reading his article. At first it was just a photo of a boat, but once the meaning behind it was revealed I felt very sympathetic towards it. I really liked how you talked about and explained your thought after you looked at the image.
ReplyDelete