Understanding a Photograph John Berger.
John Berger in his essay Understanding a Photograph outlines his view of photography being compared or equal to fine art of the Renaissance. He advocates photography is not a fine art such as works of the Renaissance but an activity that requires some recognition as an activity. His view is one which is a pragmatic stance as he sees the popularity of photography due to it outliving painting as "we think of it in Rennaissance terms". Berger argues also that unlike the scarcity of a painting, photography can be replicated over and over. This means that there can be thousands of copies of one image-thus contributing to the intrinsic worth of a photo being 0. He argues that photographs are "records of things seen" (Understanding Photography). However, Berger agrees with the move that galleries now exhibit photographic works and recognise it in an artistic canon on its own.
The photo, as Berger argues is a recording of a particular event where the person taking the photo has several choices such as when to press the shutter button, what to include on the image and light levels. The painter however has much more agency than the photographer such as perspective, tone, texture, iconography and symbolism included on the image to name but a few. He argues that painting and art has a language that refers and governs art, photography has not. In fact, Berger compares photos to looking at footprints and cardiograms. However, Berger points out that a film director and a painter "can manipulate that confluence of the events he picks" (Understanding Photography) where the photographer cannot. According to Berger " Yet this apparent limitation gives the photograph its unique power. What it shows invokes what is not shown. One can look at any photograph to appreciate the truth of this. The immediate relation between what is present and what is absent is particular to each photograph"(Understanding Photography)
Berger argues that art galleries in the past have been responsible for promoting art by displaying it. This makes the art more desirable and gives it the audience- the paying public. Galleries have until recently excluded photography from being observed by the general public. They recognise that photography will outlive art and therefore, there needs to be a place where photography can be viewed.
In conclusion to Bergers remarks, I find his view is a pragmatic one which sees a place for photography but in terms of technical and conventions aside, he views art as a higher artform then photography.
Comments
Post a Comment