Writing about photographs

The politics that surrounds text and image has been on my mind a lot lately. Mostly, it’s due to this new medium, or format, that I’ve begun to experiment with. It’s no accident that I’ve chosen this type of website platform, the blog (and photoblog). I have had a strong desire to write about my experiences of Korea, in tandem with the display of my images, for a long time now.

However, as everyone who has considered photography at length realises, there is a strong relation between text and image. Often, even when viewed as art, photography is accompanied by text, which explains to a degree, the way in which the image “is to be” read. At its most banal, this is seen in advertising; to the more subtle form, in the gallery, as perhaps, a title, or date and place.

I first discovered the significance of this relationship, when I began taking photographs in earnest. I was eager to show my work to other artists and photographers; to learn from them, and learn about my work. I had carefully displayed my images with captions, and sometimes stories and other explanatory text. I can vividly remember showing my work to one artist, P–. Upon opening my folios, he immediately (and abruptly) covered any text he saw. I was affronted by this, on first impression; until I got a chance to think about it some more.

I later realised that P– had wanted to see the images in their plain form, without being steered by my explanations, or ideas. And is it not the case that sometimes we search, impatiently, for a meaning to the image? The text below it is a pill of instant gratification; it lets us know the meaning that we “should” be gleaning from the image. We might feel like we’ve got it now, we can proceed. And aren’t there so many images, so many things to see? How can we stay in front of one, for longer than another, and if we do, will we miss more poignant ones?

I’ve since read what Sontag and Barthes have written about text and the photographic image. I admit, sometimes I want the best of both worlds. I have a desire to write about my images, or to use images to reinforce my ideas; and I also want the images to stand on their own, without explanation.

This might explain the layout of this site. It’s separated into two distinct parts: a ‘photoblog’, without much text, and this, the blog area. Sometimes I will write about an image here, or use an image to support what I’ve written about. And I’m curious about what you think of the relationship between image and text…

2 Responses to Writing about photographs »»


Comments

  1. Comment by johannes | 2005/05/20 at 15:27:24

    Sometimes an image should stand on its own, but I guess I like to know the context of a given image and to me that makes it more interesting. In looking at an image, I feel that I am not really only interested in what I feel about it (what others may refer to as what an image “tells” them), but I am also looking at what the image maker sees in the image. An image always contains the objective elements, ie what the image is of, etc, but there is also a reason why it became an image in the first place (the subjective element). I find that an image should be viewed in both context, the subjective and the objective. To say that an image is a pure entity that should not be “contaminated” with text and explanation is to deny the extra dimension that it can have. It makes the viewer only interested in his/her own opinion and feelings.

  2. Comment by Jackson Ellis | 2005/05/26 at 09:43:21

    Cheers for your response. I must admit, I am partial to some information about an image, even if it’s just a place and year. But then, I guess that images should stand up on their own also. So the bottom line is, this platform offers both possibilities, which is exciting.


Leave a Reply »»