View of The Not-So-Hard Truths of Photography, or, Exposing the Untruths of Photography

(1)

1 IMAGE [&] NARRATIVE Vol. 21, No.2 (2020)

The Not-So-Hard Truths of Photography,

or, Exposing the Untruths of Photography

Agnes Neier and Nancy Pedri

Abstract

This introductory article provides a brief overview of the uses and theorizations of photography. It details how questions of truth and untruth have always filtered into understandings of the photographic image, and continue to do so in the current digital environment.

Résumé

Cet article introductif propose une brève synthèse des usages et des théorisations de la photographie. Il se concentre sur la façon dont la question du vrai et du non-vrai a toujours filtré dans les différentes a hen i n de la h g a hie, e d n elle c n in e l e dan n en i nnemen n m i e.

Keywords

Indexicality; subjectivity; context; art photography; documentary photography; amateur photography.

Despite growing recognition that photography theory is post-indexical, indexicality (in the sense of the emi ician Pei ce) c n in e g e n nde anding f h g a h ; he inde ical ign [i ] a c nce that has served for a long time now as the cr cial e f he h g a hic medi m (Elkin 23). M

igh l linked h g a h eali m and e iden ial a , he inde ical he f h g a h na e underscores and privileges its mechanical process whereby light impresses an image onto the silver compounds in the negative. The photograph that results from this photochemical process is thus the d c f a di ec ca al im in f ha a ac all bef e he came a len hen he h g a h a taken. Consequently, it has a unique, truthful relation to the real world. Unlike handmade images, the h g a hic image ha a l ng hi f being nde d be an im in f na e (Dag e e 12), void of artifice and free of the subjective processes informing art.

(2)

a Jame Elkin n e , h g a h link he h ical ld and a gene al en e f h he ld looks -- to naturalism, to realism -- have not been seriously threa ened e en in academic c i ici m (47). Several interrelated (socio-cultural) factors that have and continue to assert photographic truth make it difficult to leave indexicality out of the picture despite strong critiques that center on the intent and skill of the photographer or the socio-cultural contexts in which photographic meaning is created. As many have noted, photography quickly became linked to the type of objectivity desired or, better, considered necessary in scientific discourses. As early as 1839, Dominique François Arago listed the extraordinary ad an age ha h g a h , hich d ce fai hf l ic ial ec d in a imel fa hi n (17), ffe scientists in general.

Indeed, soon after the inception of photography, photographic images were deemed by many to be the product of a more scientific medium than other graphic mediums. As such, they were reproduced in or acc m anied he i ing f h ician (Alf ed D nn Cours de Microscopie (1844), Duchenne de B l gne Mécanisme de la physiognomie humaine (1862) or Jean-Ma in Cha Iconographic

Photography from Salpêtrière (1876)) and ge g a he (J hn Th m n Illustrations of China and Its People, 1873-1874 (1874) C mmande William Allen Picturesque Views on the River Niger (1840)).

Ph g a h e e al e d ced in b k n na al hi (Anna A kin Photographs of British

Algae (1843-1853)), a el b k (Ma ime d Cam Egypte, Nubie, Palestine, Syrie (1852)), and nature magazines (Nature began reproducing photographs in the 1890s in addition to drawings, etchings, and lithographs). The function of photographs in these and similar scientific or nonfiction venues extends beyond being mere visual aids or illustrations. Rather, they fulfilled a documentary function, serving as visual evidence and lending legitimacy and weight to the argument being put forth (see Rose). The photographs presented readers with an unassailable and objective truth.

Definitions of photography as factual and objective or photographic images as passive records of concrete eali and hei e a i al e idence e e f he f eled b hinking f h g a h a he nl ni e al lang age e ha e, he nl ne e i ing n an la i n (S eichen d. in Kaplan 58). This was particularly a a en in j nali ic ac ice ha in he 1880 a ached h g a hic ill a i n a

nl fi f h e f limi ed ed ca i n (Beegan 120). Ph g a h a c n ide ed b man be la and i ial be incl ded in he ealm f he e i e (Becke 291). C n e in i i el , he belief ha h g a h d ced nmedia ed image f eali ked again j nali m fundamental intellectual processes of analysis and interpretation. Although some attempts were made to reproduce photographs as early as the 1870s, photographs remained largely missing from European and N h Ame ican ne a e n il he 1920 a man eade and edi e i ed ha he c n ide ed

he dead mechanical li e alne f he h g a h (T che 196).

Sociologists were similarly reluctant to embrace photographic objectivity, but for a very different reason. Al h gh ci l g a ina g a ed a a cience ne ea bef e h g a h fficial a ea ance in 1839, main eam ci l gi ef ained f m ing photography because of possible subjectivity im egna ed in i (Pande 76). Whe ea j nali fea ed he h g a h ed bjec i i c ld c n e he j nali inci al a k f c i ical anal i f da a, ci l gi belie ed ha h g aphs provided either data that could not be statistically verifiable or redundant information. Due to its focus on the particular, photography was also deemed irrelevant to sociologists whose concern was to explain society more abstractly (Harper and Lenman). In its early days photography appeared in only a few rare b k , incl ding J hn F be Wa n and J hn William Ka m l i l me The People of India (1868); photographs principally served as records of field experience.

In addition to being important in cien ific ealm , hi ne echn l g al ee ed in e le d me ic life. The carte-de-visite photograph, patented in France by Adolphe-Eugène Disdéri in 1854, was a small

(3)

portrait measuring 4 x 2 ½ inches that was distributed among friends and acquaintances, but also collected in albums. Mass produced -- eight or more portraits were produced at once at a relatively low cost and with relatively little skill required by the photographer -- these popular photographic portraits were the precursors of the family album so common in Victorian homes in Europe and North America. Thus, before reaching its twentieth birthday, photography entered the private sphere, impacting but also being impacted by discourses of family that bestow meaning upon and make sense of our private lives. As J. Hi ch ecifie , famil h g a h la a la ge a in he hi f idea hich fi defined he indi id al, and hen he ec la famil , a a i ic bjec (10). Famil h g a h e e n nl created under the regulating norms of the social and aesthetic conventions of the people who take them, pose for them, and collect them; they were also consumed under those sets of social and aesthetic conventions. The photographic image as a faithful record of family life combines with a manifest, albeit often times subconscious, concern with the social and aesthetic values and assumptions informing cultural constructions of family and home. Caught between a struggle to record family life and, at the same time, adhere to establi hed ic e f ha ha famil life h ld l k like, famil h g a h a e a a e a he a e an a en (M. Hirsch 2). These photographs are personalized images that repeat the clichés that circulate about family, functioning simultaneously as keepers of family history and filters for family experience that communicate at once its truths and untruths.

Thi b ief e ie f h h g a h a ecei ed and ed ac di ci line gge ha ini ial emphasis on the realism and truthfulness of photography effectively masked the subjectivity inherent in he deci i n f ha ec d (Sch a and R an 3) and he c l al c de and c n en i n ha eg la e h g a h meaning and, a ad icall , c n ib e i e iden ial f ce ( ee Ryan 19). This, h e e , i n gge ha bjec i i and i im ac n he h g a h abili need be hf l were absent from early discussions surrounding photography. Unquestioned belief in the photograph as a neutral, reliable trace of reality was significantly shaken as early as 1871, when the public discovered that Ernest Eugène Appert produced a series of doctored, falsified, highly manipulated photographic images, titled Les Crimes de la Commune, of protests in the Paris communes. Even without knowledge of a high level of manipulation in the dark room, the fundamental role of subjectivity at all stages of the photographic process and insistence that the photographic image is an artistic representation created with a particular intention -- and n a mime ic e d c i n f ac al cene e en (T che 200) -- inf m he hi f h g a h . A h g a he Ed a d S eichen adaman l a ed in 1903, e e photograph is a fake from start to finish, a purely impersonal, unmanipulated photograph being practically im ible (48).

Indeed, in line with current trends in philosophy that claimed the world was seen through the subjective lens of individuals, several early photographic theorists emphasize the unlimited ways in which something can be photographed and the variety of effects -- including truthfulness -- achieved across the different choices the photographer makes. Whereas Talbot refers to a new Photographic Art (34-36), Henry Peter Robinson speaks of the poetry a photographic image contains (102). These and other early theorists promoted the artistic properties of photography, claiming the photographer an artist who cultivates and practices a privileged subjectivity. The photographer artist exerts control over vision, manipulates what is seen, and makes choices among the many that are available to him or her (Thompson 7). Furthermore, approaching photography as an artistic endeavor makes room for the viewer, who encounters a photograph as representation and begins to think h gh i , in e e -- to explicate, to develop, to deci he , an la e a ign (Dele e 97). Ph g a hic image nd b edl enc age ec la i n and trigger the curiosity of viewers. Indeed, their inherent ambiguity opens them up to a number of possible meanings and stimulates more questions than answers. First and foremost visual representations, photographs are unique works of art constructed by a photographer to produce particular effects that

(4)

viewers, in turn, experience while scrutinizing the images.

Art photography, in particular, has always been valued for its uniqueness, originality, and high quality, and not for its function as a truthful record of a concrete reality. Openly sidestepping issues of documentary fidelity and more or less shunning realist aims, art photography encourages and accentuates he h g a he bjec i e, in e i a ach ha i ic ed (S l m n-Godeau 87). Art h g a h aging f bjec ; e e imen a i n i h ligh ing, f aming, c m i i n, and angle of vision; and implementation of other studied photographic aesthetic techniques freed the photographs produced and, to some extent, photography in general from the burden of truth. Like all photographs, artistic photographs are also casually dependent on the specific reality that was in front of the camera at a particular moment in time. However, unlike photographs that are made and used as direct evidence, art h g a h enl e hibi an in en i nal [dem n a i e] h gh ab i bjec ma e an e e i e i al e ec i e n he ld (F ida 77; 101). A h g a h , a ne c i ic i e , h h [ ] a hen ic e e ience in he ga bage (G ldbe g 15) and fla n he h g a h a i ic expressiveness, a quality that has little or nothing to do with the truthful recording of a singular concrete reality.

That photographs encode the subjective in a subtle, at times untraceable way marks them with an impressive evidentiary power. Cartier-Bresson stops on the intersection of objective real-world event and subjective experience of the event in photography, describing the photographer as someone who is tasked i h ec gni ing an e en , and a he e in an and i hin a f ac i n f a ec nd ig l gani ing the forms you see to express and give meaning to that event. It is a matter of putting your brain, your eye and hea in he ame line f igh (Ca ie -Bresson qtd. in Riding). The subjective is always present (if not dominant) in photography; however, because it is tigh l a ed a nd h g a h l k outward onto the existent world, it often goes by undetected by viewers. Even documentary images combine art and social documentary; they are aesthetically pleasing images used to construct socially critical statements. The union and tension between reality and artifice raise important questions about the trust we place in photographic images as accurate, unmitigated records of events, times, and places. By e ing ha me ee a he f agili f he h g a h a a ce f d c men a e idence (Falc ni 131), it also casts doubt on the idea of a stable photographic intent and meaning -- on truth.

At the same time, documentary photographs and the beauty that lies within them does not compromise their evidential (and li ical) meaning. On he c n a , a Michael a g e , i ha gives them their li ical meaning and e (126, em ha i iginal). Rec gni ing he en ial f he bjec i e f elling h ab eali , a ne gene a i n f h g a he in 1960 Ame ica, incl ding Lee F iedlande , Diane A b , and Ga Win g and, di ec ed he d c men a a ach a d m e e nal end (S a k ki d. in R le , In, a nd, and Af e h gh 321). The eme gence f documentary projects that questioned and subverted the perceived truthfulness of the medium by calling a en i n i inhe en bjec i i nde c ed h g a h d al na e: i i a nce cien ific and a i ic and ha al a been ca gh in he c nflic ing he ic f assivity and control, mechanical and c ea i e (Wilde 163). A Ri chin i e , de i e he a ie f a ache , h g a h ha achieved the paradoxical credibility of a subjective, interpretative medium that has simultaneously been deemed reliable and l ima el ef l a a cie al and e nal a bi e (19).

F m i ince i n, hen, h g a h a di ided am ng and e i ed al ng a e : ne a i -- supposed to consist of subjectivity, art, and beauty (the axis of the icon) -- and another axis -- composed f cience, h, bjec i i , and echn l g ( he a i f he inde ) (S l m n-Godeau xxii). It was amid roughly opposite approaches to photography that often positioned its value as a mimetic image of concrete reality against its value as art that many full-heartedly embraced photography. Writing in 1857, Lady

(5)

Elizabeth Eastlake notes the early beginnings of what has been described as the photographic boom: photography has become a household word and a household wat; is used alike by art and science, by love, business, and justice; is found in the most sumptuous saloon, and in the dingiest attic -- in the solitude of the Highland cottage, and in the glare of the London gin-palace -- in the pocket of the detective, in the cell of the convict, in the folio of the painter and architect, among the papers and patterns of the millowner and manufacturer, and on the cold brave breast on the battle-field. (Eastlake 40)

Photography quickly transformed from a practice available to only few knowledgeable people to one that engaged enthusiastic hobbyists, some of whom experimented with the form. With the introduction of inexpensive, easily operated handheld cameras by the Eastman Kodak Company in 1888 that promised Y P e he B n, We D he Re , h g a h ened a m ch ide a dience and b adened i c e: Ph g a h , hen a n , a e e hing and e e he e (S l m n-Godeau 168). Photographic images quickly served to record the relatively insignificant events of everyday existence, assuming a spontaneity that was previously lacking. This shift in photographic practice, in turn, f he b l e ed he image e iden ial e : h g a hic na h ec d da -to-day experience. The evidential power of spontaneous, snapshot photographic images is particularly evident in the way ama e ne image a e f en e cei ed a m e a hen ic -- due to their unpolished, unprofessional style and their involved or ordinary photographers -- han fe i nal ic e (Pan i and Sirén 497). The credibility of these photographic images is not connected to the high quality or the decisive moment captured by professional journalistic or documentary photographic images. By contrast, the out of focus, poorly angled amateur images signal the immediacy of action and speak to the lack of time and skillset needed for constructing a visually appeasing image. In other words, the amateur news images so popular today at once reveal and sidestep the constructed and aesthetical demands that traditionally guide photographic meaning by presenting viewers with images that clearly expose the relatively low in l emen f he h g a he bjec i e ch ice f ha and h ca e he h g a hic bjec . Counterintuitively, the instantaneous nature of the blurry, less-than-perfect image actually lends an aura of credibility to the photograph. In personal amateur photography, the quasi-fetishization of low-quality images that replicate the imperfections of old film cameras or Polaroid photographs seemingly adds a nostalgic quality and a positive truth-value to the images that older photographic images often acquire over time.

How viewers interact with, see, and think about photography has always been informed by the continual reinvention of the photographic process and discourses behind it. William J. Mitchell identified the early 1990 a he a f he - h g a hic e a. F him, i ma ked a maj ning in in he hi f photography when digital image making and taking became more prevalent than the emulsion-based technology used previously. In the digital environment and with the emergence of social networks, smartphones, and increased online presence, the photographic process -- taking, sharing, viewing, and consuming photographic images -- has transferred almost exclusively to data-based images on our screens, be it a smartphone or computer. This shift in process impacts photographic meaning, especially in relation to personal uses of photography. Digital photo making and the alternation to photographic ac ice n i in j an he , ela i el e heme al, ae he ic f m, a R le a e ( P -D c men a 211). Al h gh R le a i ing hen he echn l gical ibili ie f image ha ing and taking were quite different, the sentiment that photography is turning into an ephemeral art is still appropriate today. In the past, amateur photographic images functioned as a memory aid to be printed and

(6)

collected in an archive to preserve but also transmit the details of important events or experiences. By contrast, digital images and photo-based social media sites like Instagram function not so much as an electronic photo album, but rather as a visual diary that temporarily gathers moments from the mundane, referencing the c ea e e da life and i mall de ail f m image f hei b eakfa k de k , family and friends, and themselves. The constant photo stream that flows online does not foster a sense of preserving one moment in time; rather, it gives rise to a feeling of temporariness and constant flux for the new photographic images.1

The function and aesthetics of photographic images have undoubtedly changed since the invention of digital photography and platforms. Apart from a new sense of immediacy and disposability that was not there before the advent of smartphones and social networks, photographic meaning has become inc ea ingl de enden n ec gni ing and a e ing he h g a h mani la i n. In he digi al age, he photographic image imposes emotional realities onto concrete ones. Consequently, linking photographic images to a performative speech act or an expression of a feeling seems to allow for a more accurate examination of the photographic process and its meaning than seeing a photographic image as a transparent, truthful presentation of a concrete object. As Jurgenson claims, in the digital age, the h g a hic image h ld be ie ed a eech, a ge e, a b ea h (24). B , he m e h g a h come to be seen as representing a personal expression or a feeling rather than a thing in itself, the more they function as metonymy and, by extension, reach into the realm of art. This, in turn, renders questions f h g a hic h and he h g a hic image e iden ia d c men a f nc ion less important, if not altogether moot.

The digi al de abili ed he h g a h a a fai hf l ec ding f he i ible (Rich in 53) in he a as well. In a digital environment, the photographic image exists in a web of images, sounds, and verbal texts that alter what it originally represented and thus drastically diminish its ability to serve as a memory aid. In this ever-growing and rapidly changing environment, photographic images are repeatedly scrutinized and recycled, their meaning multiplying with every click of the mouse or touch of the screen. In addition, the malleability of the digital photograph, where meaning is easily created and contested, also draws attention to and significance away from the initial exposure and primary point of view. The h g a h iginal eali -- whether spontaneous, staged, or completely fabricated -- recedes further and further behind new configurations and contexts. Context also impacts understandings of truth at the le el f ece i n: Digi al h g a hy only makes clear what was present in all photography, which was ha ha e ee i a la ge e en ha e an ee and ha e ha e been a gh ee (McCa le 423).

The discourse of photography -- the codes, significations, and aesthetics of photography -- and the different approaches to the process of photography also impact understandings of its relation to truth. John Tagg em l e m like c n ac al lang age di c i e egime de c ibe he in i i nali a i n and regulation of h g a hic meaning and he di c i e c ndi i n ha i i n h g a h cen al function as one intrinsically associated with visual evidence and truth (The Disciplinary Frame xxvi). In her study of photographic history, institutions, and practices, Abigail Solomon-Godeau also seeks to e e he fallac f he h g a h d c men a e a fi ml anch ed in he came a i elf and he perception that it can neutrally capture reality. Emphatic that photographic images are used to confirm and eng hen d minan ide l gie , he n e , he hi f h g a h i , in eali , in eg all b nd with numerous discourses -- those of science, of geographic expansion and imperialism, of reproduction,

1_{Although digital images may seem to be more durable and stable than an actual physical photograph, there is actually}

m ch m e deg ada i n and l f inf ma i n be een copies of digital images than between copies of traditional h g a h (Man ich 54).

(7)

f a chi ec e, f a che l g , and f h (S l m n-Godeau 167). Just as no photograph is free of the h g a h m de f d c i n he h g a he in en i n, n h g a h i meaningf l ide the cultural, perceptual, and psychological processes that regulate not only how the world is experienced and understood, but also how the photograph is experienced and understood.

The impact of context on photographic meaning was recognized well before the invention of digital photography. In the 1970s, Larry Sultan and Mike Mandel confirmed that cultural and institutional contexts regulate photographic meaning when they compiled a book that consisted of photographic images obtained from various U.S. government agencies. Going through more than two million prints ha e i l e i ed lel i hin he b nda ie f he ind ial, cien ific, g e nmen al and he in i i nal ce (S l an), he elec ed fif -nine images and presented them without captions, contextual references, or any other additional information. Their work, which spanned three years from 1975 to 1977, demonstrates how photographic meaning does not emerge solely or even primarily from the photographic image itself. Instead, photographic meaning is principally conditioned by external context and conditions. Sultan and Mandel found that when presented with the selected photographic images in a sequence, viewers of the photobook fill in the gaps in the visual narrative. For Barthes, verbal text, such as ca i n de c i i n , g ide ie e elec a c ec le el f nde anding b leading hem n hei a en i n me ignified in he image and di ega d he ( Rhe ic f he Image 39). In their attempts to reach narrative coherence by aligning the verbal text to what is visually present, viewers l ima el di l e he h g a h iginal meaning. Th gh hei in e e a i e ce , they impose a new, vastly different and highly unpredictable one.

At the same time, accompanying text and external conditions can highlight the un-truthfulness of the image. A A la e lain : In im le ignif ing ela i n , hen he h g a h i e cei ed a he signifier of the event attributed to it by the caption, it is easy to dismiss the photograph as partial, false, inciden al and bia ed l k a he efe ence e e en ed b hi e f ca i n ( Wha I a Ph g a h? 9). The e and imila in ance nde c e h g a hic meaning a ce ible ide influences and its truth value as highly malleable. Indeed, the meanings and functions that photographic images carry with them change with the addition of different captions or a change in context. For instance, D hea Lange` fam h g a h, Mig an M he , changed f m being a documentary photograph to an art photograph that gained meaning in several different socio-cultural, ethical, and political contexts. The h g a hic image i a ma e ial bjec and an ne, al a (a lea in inci le), can ll a ne f its threads and trace it in such a way as to reopen the image and renegotiate what it shows, possibly even c m le el e ning ha a een in i bef e (A la , The Civil Contract of Photography 13). Regardless of the contexts in which photographs are read or the social discourses that filter into their meaning at the stage of production or reception, the photograph is unlike any other image insofar as it is he e l f a mechanical ca all g e ned m de f d c i n (F ida 38). M e f en han n , me hing a bef e he came a len and he i al de ail f ha me hing a e e d ced n he h g a h face, he he a e c een. Ph g a h g a an ee he e i ence f a c e nding pre-photographic reality; they truthfully point to the fac ha he e a a necessarily real thing which has been laced bef e he len (Ba he , Camera Lucida 76, emphasis in original). But, at the same time, photographic meaning reaches far beyond the mere mechanical means of production -- the existential essence of photography -- to considerations of the processes and contexts that influenced the creation of something (ie, a photograph) that stands apart from what was in front of the camera. In a subtle way, the meaning of every photograph is the resul f a h g a he di i n f eali , a egie in place to fabricate an image that coincides as closely as possible to a specific intention. It is also the result of the ways in which the photographic image is transmitted and received, contextualized and

(8)

recontextualized, collected and streamed, in short, how it is manipulated. It follows that photographs first and f em a ake in he d c i n f a ne and ecific eali (Tagg, The Burden of

Representation 3), a reality governed by the truths and untruths of representation.

While photographs are always interpretive, they nonetheless can and often do establish the existence of a a i ible eali . In hi en e, h g a h can be h gh f, like i ing, a n nfic i nal and fic i nal ( hich i n a all he ame a anal g and digi al) (Rich in 66-67). The interpretative autonomy of the photographer, who makes several critical choices at the very beginning of the photographic process when pointing the camera at a real subject, has always made it impossible for the photograph to be a neutral, unfiltered, direct rendition of reality (if reality is something that exists apart from a series of possibilities or probabilities, apart from representation!).2_{Despite the continued pressure from several}

institutions that it serve to elicit reality and provide viewers with verifiable facts of a past concrete reality, the photographic image can only articulate specific manipulations of a particular reality as understood by those engaged in the photographic process. The very institutions that continue to demand accuracy from photography also create a network of discourses that trap it even further in its articulation of falsehoods. Anchoring photographs within a series of histories, including histories of photography, they not only prompt takers, viewers, collectors, sharers, and publishers of photographs alike to reinforce existing stereotypes, ideologies, and attitudes. The institutions that make photography what it is also confirm the interplay of truth and untruth in the creation of photographic meaning.

Works cited

Arag , D mini e F an i . Re , Classic Essays on Photography, edited by Alan Trachtenberg, Lee e I land B k , 1980, . 15-25.

Azoulay, Ariella. The Civil Contract of Photography. Zone Books, 2008.

---. Wha I a Ph g a h? Wha I Ph g a h ?. Philosophy of Photography, vol.1, no.1, 2010, pp. 9-13.

Barthes, Roland. Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography. Translated by Richard Howard. Jonathan Cape, 1981.

---. Rhe ic f he Image, Image/Music/Text, edited and translated by Stephen Heath, Fontana, 1977, pp. 32-51.

Becke , Ka in E. Ph journalism and the Tabloid Press, The Photography Reader, edited by Liz Wells, Routledge, 2003, pp. 291-308.

Beegan, Ge . The U -to-Date Periodical: Subjectivity, Technology and Time in the Late Victorian P e . Time and Society, vol. 10, no. 1, 2001, pp. 113-134.

Daguerre, Louis Jacque Mandé. Dag e e e, Classic Essays on Photography, edited by Alan T ach enbe g, Lee e I land B k , 1980, . 11-13.

Deleuze, Gilles. Proust and Signs: The Complete Text. Translated by Richard Howard. U of Minnesota P,

2_{F man i e n h} _{g a h , a efe ence inde icali i a he l gical a he han a ic l Pie cian claim; i}

(9)

2000.

Eastlake, Lady Elizabeth. Ph g a h , Classic Essays on Photography, edited by Alan Trachtenberg, Lee e I land B k , 1980, . 39-68.

Elkins, James. What Photography Is. Routledge, 2011.

Falc ni, J L i . T D ble Nega i e , The Meaning of Photography, edited by Robin Kelsey and Blake Stimson, Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute and Yale UP, 2008, pp. 130-147.

Friday, Jonathan. Aesthetics and Photography. Ashgate, 2002.

G ldbe g, Vicki. A Quarter Century of Photography, Light Matters: Writings on Photography by Vicki Goldberg, Aperture, 2005, pp. 9-19.

Harper, Douglas and Robin Lenman. S ci l g and Ph g a h , The Oxford Companion to the

Photograph, edited by Robin Lenman and Angela Nicholson, Oxford UP, 2005.

Hirsch, Julia. Family Photographs: Content, Meaning, and Effect. Oxford UP, 1981.

Hirsch, Marianne. Family Frames: Photography, Narrative, and Postmemory. Harvard UP, 1997. Jurgenson, Nathan. The Social Photo: On Photography and Social Media. Verso, 2019.

Kaplan, Louis. American Exposures: Photography and Community in the Twentieth Century. U of Minnesota P, 2005.

Manovich, Lev. The Language of New Media. MIT P, 2001.

McCauley, Anne. The T ble i h Ph g a h , Photography Theory, edited by James Elkins, Routledge, 2007, pp. 403-430.

Michaels, Walter Benn. The Beauty of a Social Problem. U of Chicago P, 2015.

Mitchell, William J. The Reconfigured Eye: Visual Truth in the Post-Photographic Era. MIT P, 1998. Pande , K i hna P. H U ef l Ph g a h I in S ci l gical Re ea che n E hnic Iden i S die ?.

Himalayan Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, vol. 7, 2016, pp. 75-95.

Pan i, Me i and S efanie Si n. The F agili f Ph -Truth. Digital Journalism, vol. 3, no. 4, 2015, pp. 495-512.

Ritchin, Fred. After Photography. W. W. Norton & Company, 2009.

Riding, Alan. An In inc for Decisive Moments; A Show and a Foundation Honor Cartier-B e n. New

York Times, 27 May 2003. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/27/arts/an-instinct-for-decisive-moments-a-show-and-a-foundation-honor-cartier-bresson.html.

R bin n, Pe e Hen . Hin n A , Classic Essays on Photography, edited by Alan Trachtenberg, Lee e Island Books, 1980, pp. 99-105.

R e, Gillian. On he Need A k H , E ac l , I Ge g a h Vi al ?. Antipode, vol. 35, no. 2, 2003, pp. 212-221.

(10)

Critical Histories of Photography, edited by Richard Bolton, MIT P, 1989, pp. 303-342.

---. P -Documentary, Post-Photography?, Decoys and Disruptions: Selected Writings, 1975-2001, by Martha Rosler, MIT P, 2004, pp. 207-244.

Ryan, James R. Picturing Empire: Photography and the Visualization of the British Empire. U of Chicago P, 1997.

Sch a , J an M. and Jame R. R an. In d c i n: Ph g a h and he Ge g a hical Imagination,

Picturing Place: Photography and the Geographical Imagination, edited by Joan M. Schwartz, James R.

Ryan, Tuaris, 2002, pp. 1-18.

Solomon-Godeau, Abigail. Photography at the Dock: Essays on Photographic History, Institutions, and

Practices. U of Minnesota P, 1991.

S eichen, Ed a d J. Ye Fake , Camera Work, no.1, 1903, pp. 48.

S l an, La . E idence http://larrysultan.com/gallery/evidence/. Accessed 20 April 2020.

Tagg, John. The Burden of Representation: Essays on Photographies and Histories. U of Minnesota P, 1988.

---. The Disciplinary Frame: Photographic Truths and the Capture of Meaning. U of Minnesota P, 2009. Talb , William Hen F . A B ief Hi ical Ske ch f he In en i n f he A , Classic Essays on

Photography, edi ed b Alan T ach enbe g, Lee e I land B k , 1980, . 27-36.

Thompson, Jerry L. Truth and Photography: Notes on Looking and Photographing. Ivan R. Dee, 2003. T che , Andie. I belie e in faking : The Dilemma f Ph graphic Realism at the Dawn of Photojournalism. Photography and Culture, vol. 10, no.3, pp. 195-214.

Wilde , Kelle E. Ph g a h and he A f Science. Visual Studies, vol. 24, no. 2, 2009, pp. 163-168.

Agnes Neier is a Phd student at the University of Tartu, Estonia. Her research interests include word and

image studies, narrative theory, and lyric poetry. Her doctoral research focuses on the function of photographic images in post-Soviet Estonian fiction.

Email: agnes.neier@ut.ee

Nancy Pedri is Professor of English at Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada. Her major fields

of research include photography in literature, word and image studies, and comics studies. She has edited several volumes and has published many articles in her fields of interest. Her co-authored article,

F cali a i n in G a hic Na a i e, n he 2012 A a d f he be e a in Narrative. Email: npedri@mun.ca