The following is from an article written by Michael Gregory
for Aperture Magazine.
"It is important to understand that the photograph is
not merely the recording of that experience, but rather its symbolic
equivalent."
"What do we mean by “symbolic equivalent?” The nearest
definition, I think, is that which T.S. Eliot provided for poetry: that poetry
is the “objective correlative” of an experience which is in itself
unveralizable, beyond rational, logical language. The poem, Eliot says, is a
kind of formula for the experience which, though it uses language, surpasses
it, and enables the poet to communicate the incommunicable."
"The same hold true, I would assert, for photography.
How do we know when we are in the presence of a photograph which is symbolic
equivalent for an experience—a photograph possessing “style”? We know it by the
quality of our response: the depth and intensity and unspeakableness of the
emotional reaction we feel within us as we view the photograph.. We can tell,
too, by the uniqueness of that response. If we feel what we have never, in just
the same way, before, we know we are confronting style. For style can never be
cliché: these are the old irreconcilable enemies. If we are viewing, let us
say, the photograph of a forlorn child holding a torn and grimy doll and we
say, “the poor thing!” we are in the presence of cliché, not style. If, on the
other hand, we say nothing and feel a strange and unique admixture of emotions
to which the cliché exclamation would be blasphemy, we know that we are in the
power of photographic style—the exact equivalent of an indescribable, memorable
emotional response."
No comments:
Post a Comment