Assignment Four – planning and preparation

My planning and preparation for the essay required for this assignment divided itself naturally into three areas:

• Research into image analysis and essay structure
• Research into my chosen image
• Research on the planning and writing of an essay at first year undergraduate level.

Research into image analysis and essay structure

In order to keep this post fairly concise, I have written separately on this topic and my thoughts can be found here.  I also found the following books useful with regards to thinking about image analysis:

• ‘Camera Lucida. Reflections on Photography’ by Roland Barthes (1982)  London: Jonathan Cape
• ‘Context and Narrative’ by Maria Short (2011)   Lausanne: AVA Publishing SA
• ‘Reading Photographs: An Introduction to the Theory and Meaning of Images’ by Richard Salkeld (2014) London: Bloomsbury Publishing plc
• ‘Semiotics: the basics’ (2^nd ed.) by Daniel Chandler (2007) Abingdon: Routledge

Research into my chosen image

I began by carrying out an initial analysis of the image based on parts of a checklist provided by OCA in the Level Two photography course ‘Progressing with Digital Photography’ (Freeman, 2011) as a basic structure in order to look objectively at the photograph. This analysis can be read here.

Looking deeper into the image, my research material mainly came from books and the internet and these have been listed either as direct references or in my bibliography.   I was very conscious from the beginning of the importance of using reputable sources and was pleased to find Henri Cartier-Bresson: The Modern Century written by Peter Galassi in the library.  Galassi is the former Chief Curator of Photography at The Museum of Modern Art in New York and organised exhibitions with Cartier-Bresson for MoMA in 1987 and 2010 so I was comfortable with his credentials.  Indeed this book became the central point of my research.

It was serendipitous to be able to view Juvisy first-hand at the A Decisive Collection exhibition of Cartier-Bresson’s work held at Beetles + Huxley gallery in London in March.  Physically seeing the print made me much more aware of its quality, its details and tones and I was able to stand back both physically and metaphorically from it and consider it in conjunction with the earlier research that I had gathered.  I found it also helpful to view it in context alongside Cartier-Bresson’s other work.

I soon discovered that Juvisy had a lot of substance and scope for my critical review and found that my research spiralled off into different areas, from leisure to politics, from paintings to picnics.  Whilst much of this research was not included in my essay due to the word-count limitation, I feel that it has benefited me both with regard to this assignment as well as for my studies beyond so I will record it, albeit in note form, in a separate post on my blog.

Research on the planning and writing of an essay at first year undergraduate level

Whilst I am used to writing reports and papers, albeit in purely factual form, as part of my job, I soon realised that both preparing a critical essay and writing it to the required standard was not going to be as easy as I initially thought it might be.  I very quickly found that I was creating a growing heap of notes detailing my research which if I could see could end up out of control if I was not careful and be difficult to collate.  I therefore decided to stop work on the assignment for a week and get organised.  I borrowed an arts study guide from the library which helped a great deal, both with making/collating notes and managing the writing process as well as with the art of essay writing. Although this did delay my assignment submission, this additional learning has been extremely worthwhile and I consider it to be time well spent both for this assignment and for my future studies.

The course notes suggested that we read Singular Images: Essays on Remarkable Photographs (Howarth, 2005) as a guide to the level of critical analysis that is expected by the assessors and I found this to be useful as to the style of writing to adopt, even if the book is rather difficult to get hold of (I ended up with various chapters downloaded from the internet as well as a couple kindly provided by a fellow student).

Another suggested read from the course notes which proved useful was an article on essay writing published online by the University for the Creative Arts (UCA, n.d.) which covers aspects from developing your research area through to presentation and format.

References:

Barthes, R. (1982) Camera Lucida. Reflections on Photography.  London: Jonathan Cape

Chambers, E and Northedge, A. (2008 )  The Arts Good Study Guide (2^nd ed.)  Milton Keynes: The Open University

Chandler, D. (2007) Semiotics: the basics (2nd ed.)  Abingdon: Routledge

Freeman, M. (2011) Photography 2: Progressing with Digital Photography

Galassi, P. (2010) Henri Cartier-Bresson: The Modern Century.  London: Thames & Hudson Ltd

Howarth, S. (ed.) (2005) Singular Images: Essays on Remarkable Photographs.  London: Tate Publishing

Salkeld, R. (2014) Reading Photographs: An Introduction to the Theory and Meaning of Images London: Bloomsbury Publishing plc

Short, M. (2011) Context and Narrative.  Lausanne: AVA Publishing SA

University for the Creative Arts (n.d.)  Essay Writing [online].   Available from http://community.ucreative.ac.uk/index.cfm?articleid=12239  [accessed 13 April 2015]

Part Four – reflection

I’ve now completed the fourth part of the Context and Narrative course so, as is my usual practice, I’ve taken some time to review how I think this section went, what worked well and what didn’t and to make a note of areas which I need to work on going forward.

What I’ve done:

• Finished the exercises and course-directed research and chosen my image to be discussed in the assignment essay
• Conquered ‘Ways of Seeing’ by John Berger and done some other additional reading around the course material
• Reintroduced myself to semiotics and semiology and dug deeper into these topics
• Enjoyed deconstructing an advert
• Attended an OCA study visit to the Time. Photography exhibition at the Tate Modern
• Visited four other exhibitions and now need to finish writing them up
• Become more active on the OCA student forums
• Attended an OCA Thames Valley Group study day in March, where I received some useful ideas and leads from Group members with regard to my forthcoming assignment
• Finally ordered some furniture (storage unit and bookshelves) for my photography room (aka the third bedroom) – not really part of the course I know but definitely motivating. It will be nice to move everything off the floor!

How it went:

Part Four is all about the language of photography and how to deconstruct and read an image and I found this extremely interesting even if some of the more in-depth theoretical reading did make my brain hurt a little at times.  I particularly enjoyed looking at advertising and the mind-games that the advertisers play in order to convince us that we want to buy something.  During Part Three of the course I found a better balance between study and the rest of my life and I’ve managed to keep this up.  I’ve also managed to catch up with my self-imposed timetable although that I am aware that this may slip again a little as I do not want to rush the assignment to its detriment.

At the end of my reflection on Part Three I noted down some things that I planned to do next. I’ve achieve the majority of these however I still haven’t revisited the Ipswich Waterfront and there is still a huge pile of books waiting to be read (no inroads made this month I’m afraid.

What I’ve learned:

• How to read and deconstruct a photograph
• Looked at the linguistic semiotic models of Saussure and Peirce and how these can be applied to photographs
• Learned about Barthes’ approach to semiotics
• How to include communication in my image through deliberate and careful composition and also the use of semiotics
• Through additional reading, the basics of how to prepare and write a critical analysis.

What I’ve noticed:

• I seem to have moved from books that I would read from cover to cover to books that I dip in and out of. I think this is because my current reading requirements are more directed to researching specific areas/photographers /essays than previously
• The reading of theoretical texts is becoming a lot easier. I still need to read most of them at least twice before gaining an understanding but it’s definitely a case of the more practice the easier it gets.

What I could do better:

• I do still struggle with theoretical texts (although, as noted above, they are getting easier) so there is definitely room for improvement here
• At the time of submitting my assignment for Part Three I was still five weeks behind my original study timetable.  I’ve made a huge effort to catch up during this section, however this has been at the expense of my own self-selected reading and study (although I have dug deeper into semiotics in order to gain a better understanding of this subject).
• I am increasingly conscious that I need to complete my Level One studies by the beginning of September 2016 and that I have one more module to do after this one.  Therefore planning my study time – and sticking to my timetable – is really important going forward
• My sketchbook has really suffered during this part of the course – it is scanty to say the least.  I also need to ensure that it doesn’t just become a home for leaflets and cuttings and that I include some developmental notes.  I succeeded with this during Part Three of the course, however to date there are only blank pages for Part Four.  I will make an effort to write down my assignment planning notes rather than just keep them in my head
• I’m aware that I don’t find some aspects of critical thinking and analysis particularly easy so in preparation for the assignment and also my future OCA studies I’m reading ‘Critical Thinking Skills: Developing Effective Analysis and Argument’ (Cottrell, 2011) to help me improve these aspects
• I need to keep taking photographs – I’ve not taken a single photograph so far during March.

What I plan to do next:

• Seek out information about how to write a critical review (the course notes give us some useful leads) with regard to the assignment
• Plan, research and draft my essay, complete the assignment and then start Part Five of the course
• Start applying what I’ve learned to my own images.  Over the past two assignments I’ve developed my work into being more metaphorical and I realise that the deliberate use of communication in my images can take this a stage further
• Read, read, read.  I have tried the idea of not buying or borrowing any more books until I’ve read the ones that I’ve got. It didn’t work.
• Continue my foray into visual culture
• Start thinking about what to choose for my next (and final) Level One course.  At the moment I’m inclined towards ‘Understanding Visual Culture’ (‘UVC’) as I think that this will be beneficial for my Level Two and Level Three studies.  Also, to be honest, People and Place just doesn’t appeal.  However I do have concerns as to whether I might struggle with UVC so will have a chat with my tutor and also some other UVC students before I make my final decision
• Check into my Ipswich Waterfront project once the evenings become lighter at the end of this month
• I’m tentatively thinking about starting a new personal project.  I live near Icklingham Plains in Suffolk, an area of open-access heath and woodland and for some reason (I’m not sure why) I feel drawn to photograph it (I shot one of the exercises in Part Two of the course ‘Metaphorical and visceral interpretations’ there).  The weather has thwarted my recent attempts to go back shooting there and I’m itching to get back.  To be honest, I’m not sure where this will lead and I have no specific plan in mind at the moment, just this feeling that I need to go there and take photographs.  Maybe practice for Landscape in Level Two?

References: Cottrell, S. (2011)  Critical Thinking Skills: Developing Effective Analysis and Argument  (2^nd ed).   Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan

More on semiotics – looking at photographs

Having looked at the linguistic semiotic models of Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Sanders Peirce (see my post here), my next step was to learn how to apply these to a photograph.   The course notes tell us that Roland Barthes was ‘the father of semiotics in the world of photography’ (Boothroyd, 2012, p.101) and from reading ‘Elements of Semiology’ (Barthes, 1964) it is evident that Barthes mainly followed the Saussurean analysis in his own approach to semiology.

Saussure’s linguistic approach was that a sign is constructed of two components;

• the signifier (being the physical form that the sign takes and which carries the meaning, the thing that we read) and
• the signified (the mental concept or idea that is the meaning)

For example :

– the words ‘red rose’ (signifier) suggest a flower (signified) or alternatively love  / passion (signified).

– if ‘cat’ is the sign, the idea of a cat is the signifier, and the feline domestic pet sitting on the mat is the signified.

How are semiotics are applied to a photograph?

The signifier

Bate (2009) tells us that the photograph itself is an indexical signifier as it is caused by its referent.  Dzenko (2009, p.19) elaborates on this concept by commenting that in film-based photography the photographic process requires ‘the presence of the object in front of the camera in order to record its image through projected light’ whilst Barthes (1982, p.76) discusses his opinion of the referent by writing that

‘I call “photographic referent” not the optionally real thing to which an image or sign refers but the necessarily real thing which has been placed before the lens, without which there would be no photograph’.

Photographs are perceived to have a direct causal link to the object that was in front of the camera the moment the image was taken.

The signified

This is the concept of the image, what we ‘read’ from it, the meaning that we perceive, and described by Bate (2009, p.33) as ‘a ‘psychological image’ in our head’ (author’s italics). For example a picture of a horse signifies ‘horse’/’horsiness’ to an English-speaker whilst the same picture would signify ‘pferd‘ to a German.  Bate (2009) comments also on how the signified meaning of an image is also dependent upon viewer’s cultural knowledge and understanding.

The sign

The image itself, together with the idea we take from the image, together make the sign.

Denotation and connotation

Denotation is the straight-forward, objective approach to looking at the image and its visual elements.  Descriptive in nature, we look at what is depicted in the image; its visual content.  Bate (2009, p.38) refers to denotation as ‘the visual signifiers’.

Connotation relates to the viewer’s interpretation of the image and is therefore subjective.  What do the various elements mean? What is implied?  Connotation is arbitrary  as the meanings that the viewer takes from the image will largely depend upon their own cultural knowledge.  Bate (2009, p.38) describes connotation as ‘the cultural signified’.

Barthes discusses the denotation and connotation of images in more depth in his essays The Photographic Message (Barthes, 1977) and The Rhetoric of the Image (ibid.).  In the latter, he deconstructs an advertising image through the use of semiotics (see my earlier post here).

Studium and punctum

In his book Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography (1982) Barthes introduces the reader to his concept of two elements that he considers are present in an image – studium and punctum.

The studium is the overall interest of the image, whether it be cultural, political, historical etc., with Barthes describing it as ‘a kind of general enthusiastic commitment … but without special acuity’ (Barthes, 1982, p. 26).

Punctum on the other hand is that point of the image that attracts us, the one we gravitate to without really knowing why, the one which gives a personal connection to the viewer. It pierces the studium, breaking into the narrative of the image and being described by Barthes as ‘that accident which pricks me (but also bruises me, is poignant to me)’ (Barthes, 1982, p.27)

From the reading that I have done on semiotics I now feel comfortable with the basics but I am aware that there is still a lot of ground that I have not yet covered on what I’ve found to be a vast and complex topic. Chandler (2007) has provided me with a good starting point and I will continue with my reading step by step.

References:

Barthes, R. (1968) Elements of Semiology.  New York: Hill and Wang

Barthes, R. (1977) Image-Music-Text.  London: Fontana Press

Barthes, R. (1982) Camera Lucida. Reflections on Photography.  London: Jonathan Cape

Bate, D. (2009)  Photography: the key concepts.  New York: Berg

Boothroyd, S. (2014) Photography 1: Context and Narrative.  Barnsley: Open College of the Arts

Chandler, D. (2007) Semiotics: the basics (2nd ed.)  Abingdon: Routledge

Dzenko, C. (2009) Analog to Digital: The Indexical Function of Photographic Images.  Afterimage: The Journal of Media Arts and Cultural Criticism.  37 (2) pp. 19-23)

Assignment 2 research – the representation of memory and remembrance through photography

Following my earlier research on the concepts of remembrance and remembering I then decided to look in particular at the representation of memory and remembrance through photography.  I began by looking at some of the core theoretical texts and it soon became apparent that many question the usefulness of photography as an aide-memoire.

Kracauer (1995) writes that

‘An individual retains memories because they are personally significant.  Thus, they are organised according to a principle which is essentially different from the organising principle of photography.  Photography grasps what is given as a spatial (or temporal) continuum; memory images retain what is given insofar as it has significance’ (p. 50),

arguing that a photograph captures far too much information in order to function as a memory.

Barthes (1999) comments that

‘Not only is the photograph never, in essence, a memory … but it actually blocks memory, quickly becomes a counter-memory’ (p.91)

whilst Sontag (1973) notes that the photograph is

‘not so much an instrument of memory as an invention of it or a replacement’ (p. 121).

Benjamin, cited in Keenan (1998), supports these arguments by stating that as a photograph is an image of the past representing the appearance of an event and not its significance it cannot therefore be a true memory-image.  These writers are of the opinion that ‘true’ memories are different from those memories offered by a photograph and to an extent I agree with this view however I can also see that the photograph as object has the ability to trigger true’ memories, something that I have experienced personally during this assignment.

Forget Me Not: Photography and Remembrance (Batchen, 2004) is a book about the relationship between photography and memory and how photographs were embellished in various ways in order to strengthen their emotional appeal.  Not all of the content was relevant to this assignment but I found it an extremely interesting read and it has added to my knowledge of photographic cultural history.  Batchen is another author who asks whether photographs are a good way to remember things – ‘can you ever really know someone from a photograph?’ (p. 15, author’s italics) and argues that on occasions a photograph is not strong enough to stand on its own as an aide-memoire:

‘Photography does not enhance memory – involuntary, physically embracing and immediate memory – but rather replaces it with images – images that are historical, coherent, informational.  To induce the full, sensorial experience of involuntary memory, a photograph must be transformed.  Something must be done to the photograph to pull it (and us) out of the past and into the present.’ (p.94).

I don’t really agree with Batchen on this point; when I look at photographs of my family the images themselves are sufficient to prompt me to recall other aspects of the people concerned; their bearing, their smell, their personalities.

Through my readings I came to realise that there is a difference between memory and postmemory. Hirsch (2008) defines postmemory as a second-generation memory,

‘the relationship of the second generation to powerful experiences that preceded their births but that were nevertheless transmitted to them so deeply as to constitute memories in their own right’ (p 103).

A fellow OCA student with whom I had briefly discussed my assignment ideas recommended that I read the book Family Frames: Photography, Narrative and Postmemory (Hirsch, 1997) and here Hirsch makes a clear differentiation between memory and postmemory;

‘Postmemory … is mediated not through recollection but through an imaginative investment and creation’ (p.22).

Postmemory is particularly pertinent to the concept of remembrance and I can see from this research that my assignment series will develop from postmemory (I have no direct recollection of the First World War) through to memory (my direct memories of my father).  I then moved on to look at contemporary photographers whose work might be of influence to me for the assignment.  I looked at a number of photographers but the two that I discuss below I found to be of the most interest.

Susan Hiller 

Hiller is an artist who was suggested to me by my tutor as someone whose work might be of interest with regard to this assignment.  I hadn’t come across her name before but through my research I discovered that the main theme of her work is how people absorb memories, both personal and cultural (Hubbard, 2011).  Of key interest to me is her installation Monument (1980-1), a collage of photographs of plaques from the George Frederic Watt’s Memorial to Heroic Self-Sacrifice situated  in Postman’s Park London and which commemorates ordinary people who died in saving the lives of others.  I work not far from Postman’s Park so walked over to have a look at the original plaques, taking a couple of snapshots for reference:

Photo: Carol Street

Photo: Carol Street

Monument was put on display at the Tate Britain in 2011 as part of a retrospective of Hiller’s work (Dorment, 2011) and I was interested to see how Hiller had chosen to present the piece.  Documentary in style, she had photographed the plaques face-on from a functional, objective viewpoint.  The viewer looks, absorbs the words and considers.  The viewer is also invited to sit on a bench in front of the installation and listen to a tape recording through headphones where Hiller spoke about how the matter-of-fact inscriptions can be ‘experienced as channels though which the dead live on in our imagination’ (ibid).   In an interview with Frieze Magazine (Morgan, 1995), Hiller explains her rationale:  ‘Since that person [the listener] is seen by other viewers against a backdrop of photographic images, the piece exists as a tableau with a living centre, while the person is also part of the audience for the work.’

Questions that arise for me from Monument are that I need to consider who my audience will be and decide on my method of presentation.

Christine Hinz Lenzen

I first came across Lenzen during my research on the representation of memory and remembrance through photography as she had written a MA thesis on the relationship between photography and memory that provided useful background reading (see Bibliography).  I discovered from her website that she is also a talented visual artist, using photography, sculpture and collage and who is interested in exploring the mnemonic implications of the photograph, the ideas of memory and forgetting.  I particularly liked her series Shadow for a Memory for its presentation and also (Untitled, 1970s) for its out-of-focus style.  I briefly considered the latter as a style option for the assignment as I felt that this could be a way of communicating the past but discounted it pretty early on in my planning process as not being what I was looking to achieve.  However I was inspired by Lenzen’s ideas of not forgetting but not fully remembering either; although these are ultimately not obviously reflected in my assignment images they stayed in my head during my planning process and were in my mind when out shooting.

References:

Batchen, G. (2004) Forget Me Not: Photography and Remembrance.  New York: Princeton Architectural Press

Barthes, R. (1999)  Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography.  New York: Hill and Wang

Dorment, R. (2011) Susan Hiller at Tate Britain: hidden voices, lost worlds [online].  The Telegraph.  Available from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-reviews/8311816/Susan-Hiller-at-Tate-Britain-hidden-voices-lost-worlds.html  [accessed 19 November 2014]

Hiller, S. (1980-1)  Monument [online image].  Tate.  Available from http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/hiller-monument-t06902  [accessed 19 November 2014]

Hirsch, M (2008) The Generation of Postmemory [online]. Poetics Today 29:1 (Spring 2008)  Available from http://www.fsf.ane.ru/attachments/article/157/mar.pdf [accessed 12 December 2014]

Hirsch, (M) (2012)  Family Frames: Photography, Narrative and Postmemory   Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Hubbard, S. (2011) Only in dreams: Susan Hiller at the Tate Britain [online].  New Statesman.  Available from http://www.newstatesman.com/art/2011/02/tate-britain-hiller-surface         [accessed 19 November 2014]

Keenan, C. (1998) On the Relationship between Personal Photographs and Individual Memory [online].  History of Photography, 22, (1, Spring 1998).  The Shpilman Institute for Photography.  Available from http://www.thesip.org/assets/Keenan-photography-and-indvidual-memory-clean-version.pdf  [accessed 10 December 2014]

Kracauer, S. (1995) The Mass Ornament: Weimar Essays.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Lenzen, C.H. Artist & Contact Information [online]. Available from http://www.christinehinzlenzen.com/contact/   [accessed 21 November 2014]

Lenzen, C.H.  Shadow for a Memory [online images].  Available from                                 http://www.christinehinzlenzen.com/shadow-for-a-memory  [accessed 21 November 2014]

Lenzen, C.H. (Untitled, 1970s) [online images].  Available from http://www.christinehinzlenzen.com/untitled-1970s  [accessed 21 November 2014]

Morgan. S. (1995)  Beyond Control. An interview with Susan Hiller [online].  Frieze Magazine.  Issue 23.  Available from http://www.frieze.com/issue/article/beyond_control/ [accessed 10 December 2014]

Sontag, S. (1973) On Photography [online].  Electronic edition 2005.   New York: RosettaBooks LLC.  Available from http://art.buffalo.edu/coursenotes/art314/sontag.pdf       [accessed 10 December 2014]

Essay: ‘Rhetoric of the Image’ by Roland Barthes

‘Rhetoric of the Image’ (Barthes, 1977) is a classic semiotic text in which Barthes analyses an advertising image and discusses the way that various messages are relayed to the audience through the use of signs. He writes of three distinct message types:The linguistic message (i.e. the text) which anchors the imageThe literal message with its literal (denotive) interpretations

The symbolic message with its implied (connotative) interpretations

In the case of the linguistic message Barthes writes that it is usual for the text to provide the desired context to the image, a process he refers to as anchorage.  Arguing that all images are polysemous, with signifieds that have the capacity for multiple meanings, anchorage allows that ‘the text directs the reader through the signifieds of the image, causing him to avoid some and receive others; by means of an often subtle dispatching, it remote-controls him towards a meaning chosen in advance’ (Barthes, p.118, italics in original text).

Alongside anchorage, Barthes discusses the concept of relay where ‘text… and image stand in a complementary relationship; the words, in the same way as the images, are fragments of a more general syntagm and the unity of the message is realized at a higher level, that of the story, the anecdote, the diegesis’ (ibid. p.118).

In the literal message the relationship between signifier and signified is one of recording and provides the understanding of objectivity in an image.  This is derived from the understanding that for an image to have been made mechanically, the object recorded must have been present.

For the viewer to recognise a symbolic (connotative) message, they will need to have an understanding of any relevant codes (e.g. cultural, historical, political).  According to Barthes, any interventions by the photographer such as framing, lighting also fall under the umbrella of connotation.

By his own admission, Barthes has used an advertising image for his analysis in this essay as this type of image is specifically constructed to convey certain messages to an audience and therefore is ideal for deconstruction purposes.  I am not sure however if Barthes’ analysis would work as well on other genres where there were most likely no deliberate connotations included by the photographer but where the viewer could themselves construct a meaning that was not intended by the maker.

References:

Barthes, R. (1977) Rhetoric of the Image In Wells, L. (ed.). The Photography Reader.  Abingdon: Routledge

Essay: ‘The Death of the Author’ by Roland Barthes

The course notes in Part Two look briefly at postmodern narrative and introduce us to Barthes’ critical essay ‘The Death of the Author’ (1967) as being a key text stating the poststructuralist position which challenges the traditional ideas of narrative and authorship control (Boothroyd, 2014)

In ‘Death of the Author’ Barthes argues that the author’s intentions and biographical context should not be taken into consideration when the reader is forming their interpretation of the text.  He presents the postmodernist view that the author (as creator of the text) and the text itself are unrelated and that the meaning of the text should be drawn by the reader based on their own impressions, not from any influence raised by the author’s identity and background (‘it is the language that speaks, not the author’ (Barthes, p.3)).  His argument is that the author is an impediment to free writing and therefore leads to constricted interpretation; ‘To give an Author to a text is to impose upon that text a stop clause, to furnish it with a final signification, to close the writing’. (ibid. p.5)

Barthes’ main point is that it is the reader who holds more responsibility to the text than the author.  Whilst the text itself will comprise a number of writings and experiences which come from the author, these are in effect flattened into one impersonal layer when they reach the reader.  It is the reader who determines the meaning of the work from this flattened form, not the author from his various inputs.

Whilst I agree in the main with Barthes’ view that the reader should formulate their own opinion and make their own sense out of what they see, I find from a personal perspective that I like to discover the author’s intentions.  I will still form my own views but I feel short-changed if I don’t know the original context of the work; at this current stage of my studies I find this knowledge provides an anchor on which to begin my thoughts and considerations about the work I am looking at.

References:

Barthes, R. (1967)  The Death of the Author.   Source: Ubu Web | Ubu Web Papers.  Available from  http://www.tbook.constantvzw.org/wp-content/death_authorbarthes.pdf  [accessed 07 October 2014]

Boothroyd, S. (2014)  Part Two, Photography 1: Context and Narrative.  Open College of the Arts