Scruton argues that when we take an interest in photographs, is actually an interest in the actual objects that were photographed rather than the photographs themselves. He claims this because he says there is no such thing as photographic representation. He says the photograph relates to the subject in that it is a phot... ... middle of paper ... ... believe makes photography an art, the individual photo may still be considered close to an ideal photograph in the sense that it is a causal relationship. However the medium as a whole is capable of much more than Scruton is willing to allow. I believe that the clear distinction lays in the fact that Scruton's argument that photography's causal relationship is equivalent to perceiving the object without the photograph.
Photography is a rather new concept, yet its importance is paramount in seeing how others live. Photos allow us to see and capture a specific moment in time, just like a wide array of already accepted art forms. I find it truly interesting that Roger challenges photography as art. I am certainly not a photographer, but I never knew some people challenged photography's artistic merit. I will argue today that Roger Scruton is wrong in his belief that photography has merely a "casual and not intentional" relationship with its subject (Scruton, 89).
The first of these, the style argument, as articulated by King, states that the “purely abstract features of a photograph” regularly appear to evoke aesthetic interest in an audience (King, 1992, 260). King thus suggests that Scruton’s argument undermines the stylistic choices which a photographer autonomously makes; it is possible to seek to engage with a photograph merely in virtue of its photographic surface, by perceiving features such as its luminosity or contrast, for example. Such appreciation is not dependent upon one having an interest in the subject photographed (King, 1992, 264). For instance, when one marvels over Ansel Adams’ photograph of a road she is aesthetically interested in the photographer’s miraculous ability to create contrast, rather than the road, and hence the photograph does more than merely act as an instrument for seeing-through to the scene (King, 1992, 264). As such, the photographer makes artistic decisions in the same way that a painter might, and these are demonstrated in the stylistic elements of the photographic surface.
Gombrich said of photography: ‘It has drawn attention to the paradox of capturing life in a still, of freezing the play of features in an arrested moment of which we may never be aware in the flux of events.’ Along this train of thought, one can see that photography helped artists achieve something other pictorial media could not. An example of this use of photography can be seen in photorealist artist, Chuck Close. Close’s works are paintings of photographs much more than paintings of the people themselves. He relied on creating an exact copy of the photograph to compose his pictures, including details such as the slightly out ... ... middle of paper ... ...istory 1839-1900 Cambridge University Press (1997) J.Friday Aesthetics and Photography Ashgate (2002) J. Woodall ed. Portraiture: Facing the Subject Manchester University Press (1997) Sources consulted but not cited G Clarke ed The Portrait in Photography Reaktion Books (1992) M Rogers Camera Portraits Oxford University Press (1989) ---------------------------------------------------------------------  A. Scharf, Art and Photography, Penguin Books (1968) p.47  J. Friday, Aesthetics and Photography, Ashgate (2002)  E.H.Gombrich, The Image and the Eye, Phaidon, Oxford, (1982) p,116  J. Woodall ed, Portraiture: Facing the Subject, Manchester University Press (1997) p.126  Woodall, p.128  This is of course excluding editing, altering and airbrushing which can be applied to a photograph after its completion.
The Photographer and His Camera Since the invention of the camera in 1839, photography has transformed the entire nature of art in that it brought about a great revolution of the traditional arts, pushing it from depictions of a world we already knew to expressions of inward gestures and creativity. Photography conveniently replaced with images the words that were once essential to describing a visual. These images are in fact very different in nature from the continuous action of television, as well as the timeless sculpture. Abolishing the concept of time and space, the technology of the photo is thus fabricated by the desire to give permanence to daily feelings and experience. The photograph is a medium with the ability to isolate a single moment in time which in turn can be duplicated and endlessly re-created.
Postmodernism was essentially a move away from modernism. While modernism showcased structured and non-manipulated images, postmodernism was a departure from those methods in photography. Unlike modernism, postmodernism embraced the idea that if you looked hard enough, the truth would eventually break down. Not only that, but truth was seen as an illusion because there is doubt. Originality no longer exists.
A photograph may represent that delicate moment when dealing with the truth. In ‘Camera Lucida’, Roland Barthes interprets the connection between the photographic subject to the real subject as an “intractable reality”. Barthes claims that the referential truth of photography manages to distinguish photography from other representational mediums, such as painting, film or literature. Photographs can never transform nor go beyond the subject. A photograph cannot originate a subject since it is authentication itself.
(Butler 2009: 66) So, being more dependent on personal perspective, a photograph is widely open to different kinds of interpretation. Taking into consideration Roger Ballen’s opinion, that when the viewers take a look at a photograph they ought to experience that instant existed in time; that it is genuine. (Amison 2014: http://www.gommamag.com/v6/?p=1922) One can derive that regardless of the pain expressed in the image that it belongs to a life of the subject in the photograph - it is merely a moment within their life and even though it is crammed with narrative, it is only one fragment of the subject’s life. It’s like something occurred or is about to, yet in the particular instance, nothing is taking place; it is captured eter... ... middle of paper ... ..., R. 2005. Bleak Images make an exhilarating exhibition [Online] Available: www.rogerballen.com/articles/bleak-images-make-an-exhilirating-exhibition [2014, Feb. 16] Grundberg, A.
A has ceased to exist; 2. A survives as B or C; or 3. A survives as both B and C. Parfit objects to the firs... ... middle of paper ... ...ion is not an easy one to refute, though I believe that rather than disallowing all exotic thought experiments we should perhaps judge the suitability of each individual scenario on its own merits. This appears to be a more achievable task. Parfit readily admits that the idea that we can retain all that matters without identity is a counter-intuitive one.
The existence is a subjective experience of the reality of meanings, so the substance and the existence (but not the being) are on the opposite poles of the universal, like two pointed ends of the needle, which one can neither seize, nor break. Between them there lies the ideal infinity of abstract intentions; they are abstract in the sense that not a perceptive object, clear without any words, opposes it, but just the spirit, the mere idea. Otherwise the death. We cannot feel it, but we can symbolize it. Put it into shape by means of the intentional movement.