In John Berger’s book Understanding a Photograph, he argues that there is a distinct discontinuity between an individual viewing a photo, and the actual photo. A picture solely preserves a single moment in time, and while they often act to tell a story, the medium cannot be fully interpreted without knowing the story that surrounds it. Although there is a definite connection between a photograph and the narrative that corresponds with it, the photo is only a visual aid for the story; it does not tell us everything like the written piece does. I agree with Berger’s argument that photographs can shape the written story that is told about a single character through invoking various responses, emotions, feelings, and interpretations between the
…show more content…
The photograph itself does not narrate; it is the storyteller that formulates what will be said. In Berger’s book, he states the following: “The formal arrangement of a photograph explains nothing. The events portrayed are in themselves mysterious or explicable according to the spectator’s knowledge of them prior to his seeing the photograph” (Berger 25). This is significant because it shows that while a photograph captures and preserves a specific and detailed moment in time, we don’t necessarily know what story it intends to tell. Berger argues that a photograph delivers two messages: one regarding the time the photograph was taken, and one about the time of the photograph’s viewing. This gap in time between the taking of the photograph and its presentation among viewers creates discontinuity. Different mediums can also convey alternative meanings to various people depending on their prior knowledge of the subject. For example, in my picture, all we see is a smiling, middle-aged woman sitting down for a meal as she gazes off into the distance. We don’t know what she’s thinking, nor do we know what’s happening outside …show more content…
In his book, Berger states: “[…] unlike memory, photographs do not in themselves preserve meaning. They offer appearances—with all the credibility and gravity we normally lend to appearances—prized away from their meaning” (48). This is important because it shows the distinct discontinuity between a photo, and someone who is viewing it. For example, an outsider viewing my photo may take in the smile on the woman’s face, the food on the table, and the outdoor setting, and simply think that she is out for a nice dinner on the town. However, as the storyteller, I know that the actual narrative tells much more. I know the value held in the evening between the mother and her daughter, and the thoughts that go beyond her smile. The visual details of this photo will never be able to tell us the depth of what the lady may be thinking, and just why she has that expression on her face. The photo simply shows us one moment in time, while the written narrative tells the entire story. The photograph captures the memory of the moment and turns it into many possible stories. Any one of these stories is then interconnected with what is told in the photo and what is not told outside the true narrative. While the photograph gives the general appearance of what took place during that night at that particular moment, it fails to go beneath the surface and tell us the significance
The photograph itself does not narrate; it is the storyteller that formulates what will be said. In Berger’s book, he states the following: “The formal arrangement of a photograph explains nothing. The events portrayed are in themselves mysterious or explicable according to the spectator’s knowledge of them prior to his seeing the photograph” (Berger 25). This is significant because it shows that while a photograph captures and preserves a specific and detailed moment in time, we don’t necessarily know what story it intends to tell. Berger argues that a photograph delivers two messages: one regarding the time the photograph was taken, and one about the time of the photograph’s viewing. This gap in time between the taking of the photograph and its presentation among viewers creates discontinuity. Different mediums can also convey alternative meanings to various people depending on their prior knowledge of the subject. For example, in my picture, all we see is a smiling, middle-aged woman sitting down for a meal as she gazes off into the distance. We don’t know what she’s thinking, nor do we know what’s happening outside …show more content…
In his book, Berger states: “[…] unlike memory, photographs do not in themselves preserve meaning. They offer appearances—with all the credibility and gravity we normally lend to appearances—prized away from their meaning” (48). This is important because it shows the distinct discontinuity between a photo, and someone who is viewing it. For example, an outsider viewing my photo may take in the smile on the woman’s face, the food on the table, and the outdoor setting, and simply think that she is out for a nice dinner on the town. However, as the storyteller, I know that the actual narrative tells much more. I know the value held in the evening between the mother and her daughter, and the thoughts that go beyond her smile. The visual details of this photo will never be able to tell us the depth of what the lady may be thinking, and just why she has that expression on her face. The photo simply shows us one moment in time, while the written narrative tells the entire story. The photograph captures the memory of the moment and turns it into many possible stories. Any one of these stories is then interconnected with what is told in the photo and what is not told outside the true narrative. While the photograph gives the general appearance of what took place during that night at that particular moment, it fails to go beneath the surface and tell us the significance