Roland barthes photography2/9/2024 ![]() ![]() The terms studium and punctum, coined by Barthes for two different ways of responding to photographs, are part of the standard lexicon for discussions of photography Barthes's understanding of photographic time and the relationship he forges between photography and death have been invoked countless times in photographic discourse and the current interest in vernacular photographs and the ubiquity of subjective, even novelistic, ways of writing about photography both owe something to Barthes. However, while the pictorial self-portrait translates into epistemic valuation of its author, Selfi e delights in the vulgarization of the repetitive and banal gesture.Roland Barthes's 1980 book Camera Lucida is perhaps the most influential book ever published on photography. Its origin derives from narcissistic mechanisms that require a continuous desire to stand out socially. Self-portrait and Selfi e are thus the ancestral mechanisms of self-preservation. The Selfi e does not prevent the subject's Kafkian metamorphosis, but renders reality vulgar, making it acceptable through both similarity and integration. The mechanisms of self-contemplation thus produced translate into a clear ontological impoverishment of reality. The intrinsic and immediate value of image thus overlaps sign and word. Its immanence is a true narcissistic affl iction. The value of image while self-awareness mechanism compels us to question the fi eld of action where it is far more active-on social media. When dwelling on the contemporary Selfi e we need to consider also the salvifi c dimension of this kind of self-representation mechanisms that have always been there. The analogy between the myth of Narcissus, referred to as the intrinsic symbol of painting by Leon Battista Alberti the typological value of self-portrait as an ontological and statutory reference its value while metamorphosis of reality and the self-representative phenomenon that Selfi e translates-all this has to be established and requires due consideration. Taken together, these cases constitute a unique element in the dialogue between Aby Warburg and Georges Didi- Huberman, yes, very much like a cyclopic “eye of history” (l’oeil de l’histoire). Therefore, I will isolate seven cases that, in my opinion, are anchored in visual anthropology:2 the nymph, the butterfly, the passer-by, the surface, the dance, the silence, and sophrosyne. ![]() Didi-Huberman’s extensive oeuvre, however, demands careful selection. ![]() In seven stages, I will describe in what way Georges Didi-Huberman’s unique inner eye rotates around Warburg’s cosmos of images as tenderly as possible, in order then to define what can be termed the visual medium. Georges Didi-Huberman’s personal points of view uttered that particular day in May, and subsequently published in the IKKM journal Zeitschrift für Medienstudien (“Glimpses: Between Appearance and Disappearance”), are points of departure for this essay. Is it possible to characterize this genre? To denominate the collection of thoughts that welcome the image as a witness to the history of thought? Let us define it as “the nameless science” just like Giorgio Agamben carefully described Aby Warburg’s oeuvre out of fear of suffocating its meaning (“Aby Warburg and the Nameless Science”). The reply of the master was that the particular beauty of the discipline of art history can be seen through the embracing of multiple genres. student inquired about expanding upon the associative approach of the theme. During his talk, Didi-Huberman used evocative images – recollections – which he had collected over the years impressions while walking in the streets, melancholic musings about love, and thoughts gathered from literature en route. As a former fellow of the IKKM in attendance, I was profoundly touched by the personal depth Didi-Huberman displayed in his paper.1 It consisted of various reflections concerning the meaning of the image as instances of flaring up and fading away. On, Georges Didi-Huberman presented a keynote lecture “Que ce qui apparaît seulement s’aperçoit” at Charles University in Prague, during the “Dis/Appearing” conference organized by the Internationales Kolleg für Kulturtechnikforschung und Medienphilosophie (IKKM, Bauhaus Universität Weimar).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |