Sontag argues that photography has a paradoxical relation to reality in that "It offers, in one easy, habit-forming activity, both participation and alienation in our own lives and those of others--allowing us to participate while confirming alienation" (167). In other words, these photographs A) seem to allow us to understand and vicariously experience the event being photographed while B) simultaneously reaffirming that we are separate from that experience, that we are audience and separate from a reality in which others are the participants.
For this post, explain how these ideas apply to the works of Michelle Frankfurter or Kris Graves.
A) It has been said many times that one picture can not capture the whole of a person, place, or object. If we focus on one subject in a photograph it can seem quite difficult to observe what is going on or the purpose of the photo if we do not play close attention to detail. The photographs that are taken by Michelle Frankfurter, we are given insight on what it is these people are experiencing at that given time and moment. We observe more than what they are doing, but why.
ReplyDeleteB) Although we are given a photograph that lets us in a little on someone's life does not mean its our experience too. We are given the ability to see what others experience and expose ourselves to much more than our own lives. Frankfurter exposes us to other peoples real world. Giving us the opportunity to see for ourselves what some do, the risk they take, and for whatever reason it is, these photographs grab our attention. It can be outside our norm and pull us in someonelse's life for a quick moment then bring us back to our reality.
What Sontag is getting at, in the passage that this quote comes from, is that photographs allow us to observe unpleasant aspects of life without attachment to them, while simultaneously evoking stronger feelings than we may have felt witnessing it firsthand. In a sense, photography allows us to live vicariously rather than having to expose ourselves to situations which might be uncomfortable to look at otherwise. Frankfurter & Graves present work that illustrates this well. Both photographers have chosen subject matter which illuminates a grittier side of life than many are subjected to. There's nothing pretty about migrating long distances, and at great personal risk, on the hope of securing a better life. We all know that it happens, but when do we actually contemplate what it means to the people living it? If we saw it happening right before us, would our emotions be as powerful? Frankfurter & Graves both use photography in a thought-provoking, activism-centric sort of way. They bring awareness to subjects that need awareness, and remind us that we need to face the existence of issues that might not be very palatable to us.
ReplyDeleteThe paradoxical relationship that Sontag is talking about applys to Frankfurter as she brings us to participate in these people experience through her works. While being very much a participant in the experience by being there, and covering what was happening, she is also alienated from it because she is not living it. Likewise, her work helps people to share in the experience, even though they are separated from it. This gives them the opportunity to understand where these people are coming from and what the issues are.
ReplyDeleteThe work of Michelle Frankfurter shows the journal many Central Americans take on their way to cross the American border. Her work puts you right in the middle of their struggle. You see men, women and children sleeping on floors, and on top of trains. You can feel the devastation of a woman who has been separated from her husband, and does not know if she will see him again. Some of the photos are blurry, the subjects in the action of boarding trains. All of these invite the viewer to vicariously experience the journey with the subjects. On the other hand, these are clearly photographs, of a situation I have not experienced. The photographer describes herself as an adventurer. Her journey was fun, and not accompanied with the same level of unknowns as the people she is surrounded by. Her photographs exemplify the Susan Sontag quote remarkably well: "It offers, in one easy, habit-forming activity, both participation and alienation in our own lives and those of others--allowing us to participate while confirming alienation" (167).
ReplyDeleteIn Sontag’s argument, her quote has a paradoxical relation to reality by showing that in Michelle Frankfurter’s ideas she presents a further insight in their photography that allows the viewer to be part of their reality and see their experiences through her pictures. In a way you are living those experiences and struggles as the photograph illustrates. Our main focus in a photograph is the illustration being presented, therefore, we do not focus on the details of the picture that leads us to miss the main purpose of the image. That is why Frankfurter’s work it shows us to observe in detail to situations being brought for awareness.
ReplyDeleteNot everyone feels the same towards a photograph. Especially if it is a picture, that means a lot to us because we have been through it. Sympathy or empathy are two feelings we either feel. When we sympathize over something, it is because we have gone through it and it holds a stronger meaning to us. While, when we empathize, we understand but can’t really relate because we’ve never actually been through it. Michelle Frankfurter’s photos, gives us an insight on these people’s lives and the struggles they are going through. The pictures she took, I can’t relate to their struggles and hardships, but understand them. Having this empathy feeling, brings a person out of their own reality and help understand the person in the photographs reality. And then soon come back to their own reality.
ReplyDeleteMichelle Franfurter photos gives us a look at situations and struggles that the Central Americans people are going through as they are on their way to cross the American border. When looking at these photos, the emotional connection puts us right in the middle of the struggles these people are facing. Sontag’s quote is expressed very well through these photos. We observe the unpleasant experiences these people are going through creating an affection on them, but not compelling the real strong emotions we will feel if we were witnessing in real life. We, as well as Franfurter, are separated from the emotions of these people in the photographs because we are not living it. Many of us can understand the struggles these people are facing but can’t relate to them. Photographs like Michelle Franfurter’s are used to bring awareness and for us to understand the situations these people were going through.
ReplyDeleteMichelle's photos allows the viewers to see all situations in the photos. It gives people a feeling of connection and understanding of the photos; there is no relation with the photos and real life experiences, and her photos bring the understanding to us and allow us to see beyond the image. There is no way I can relate to the photo she took, but it does bring emotion to the viewers such as myself. Photographs become more of a reality to people when there is so much meaning produced inside of the photo. Not all images are so powerful and can affect people, but images such as this one allows us to understand so much more than our everyday lives.
ReplyDeleteMichelle Frankfurter captured moments of Central American migrants who hope to be in the U.S. one day and showed the struggle in which they are going through to get here. In order to get these photographs, Frankfurter had to fly to Mexico to really experience hands-on what is happening. Her photographs show us that she is in understanding of what these people are living like, but they also tell us that she is not truly living the experience because the camera is separating her from reality; or as Sontag would saying, she has alienated herself.
ReplyDeleteIn Frankfuter’s work, there is a paradoxical relation that Sontag mentions. In the photographs by Frankfuter, the viewer can notice the journey to confirming alienation. There is more than emotions for these photographs as it seems so realistic in front of the viewer. The viewer gets a glimpse at secondhand of the struggles it takes; not only in the traveler themselves, but the family left behind. In addition, we may not know the true struggle of their experiences, but we all follow similar paths when we are participants. These images allow us to focus on what is occurring in the world besides our own comfort zone.
ReplyDeleteMichelle Frankfurter’s pictures main purpose is for us to understand and experience what other people are going though in life. The pictures show us how people (Central Americans) are struggling, but although we can see the people are struggling we can not be part of their experiences because we are not there next to them living their experience and struggling with them. We might feel certain emotions by looking at the pictures but will not be able experience what they are experiencing. For example, Frankfurter traveled to Central America to capture images of others experience, but wasn’t living their experience because she wasn’t struggling with them and wasn’t going through what they were. She was able to see they were struggling but couldn’t be part of their struggle and was only there as a photographer.
ReplyDeleteSontag’s ideas apply to Michelle Frankfurter's work in that they allow us to understand such a still image of what people are going through. Emotions can be interpreted as well as their current suffering opening our eyes about the reality happening not far from our home. The empathy we feel for these people is a simple yet complicated quick experience we share with them. At the same time, we separate ourselves from that experience. As the audience we have not personally experienced the situation making us distinct in a way. Although this is the reality, as the audience we are able to connect for a split second and empathize and then return back to our current lives.
ReplyDeleteMichelle Frankfurter allows us to be in the moment with the south american migrants through her photography. She herself as a photographer experience the travel and traveled alone. However, she did not actually participate actively in what these people were undergoing. Not being a migrant herself allowed her to see things from the outside perspective as a photographer while still understanding the actual action that these people were taking. Although she noticed the action and understood what they were doing, she manages to keep her disconnect from the situation by being the photographer in the situation. By her not experiencing the struggle that they go through directly she really cannot understand the reality of the situation. She allows a minimal amount of empathy with her work but the disconnect will always be there.
ReplyDeleteMichelle Frankfurter’s photographs capture moments that allow us to see into the life of those who are struggling. Her photographs are telling the story, and showing how they are struggling. The people in the photographs are migrant. In comparison to us, we realize how we do not have to go throughout life like they do. Our reality is quite different then the reality of those in the photographs.
ReplyDeleteMichelle Franfurter’s photographs gives the audience a look at situational circumstances that people experience. At first glance, Franfurter’s photos give me the feeling that I cannot help but to hear Sara McLachlan’s songs “In the Arms of an Angel” and “I Will Remember You.” Not trying to be humorous, but that is what’s naturally playing in my head and I visualize the commercials. Sontag’s quote means that as a personal viewer of Franfurter’s photos, I do not know the feeling the individual has been through, but still understanding the actual action that they were taking. Aside from being a participant in searching for a better life or assistance, Franfurter is not only the photographer, but also part of the audience.
ReplyDeleteAs Sontag says, we can participate in a picture but are still alienated, Frankfurters work shows us just that. We can sympathize with those immigrants and fleeing wife yet we will never understand exactly how they feel. They may suffer trauma, but us as viewers won't because we detach ourselves from the picture.
ReplyDeleteWith Graves work, who takes pictures of black men to show they are just normal people, also demonstrates Sontags ideas because although we see the man in the picture, we do not know what he is like or anything else about him. The picture does not give us a full understanding of who the individual is.
Sontag mentions "we are audience and separate from a reality in which others are the participants." She is right because the images from Franfurter are migrants that go through what the picture is capturing from sleeping in top of a train to feeding your child. In these world many are viewers while others go through the rough times. Many migrants are living these now or did, and people do not realize the reality of the struggle until they see images like that because the pictures speak for themselves.
ReplyDeleteMichelle Frankfurter’s work induces comparative optimism; essentially it is a window into a world that makes those who view it more thankful for their own, less troubling circumstances. While one may see these pictures of migrants and decide to do something positive about their strife in hopes of ending their struggle, it is more likely the viewer will wrinkle their forehead and say something along the lines of “I am so blessed to have all that I do” or “Those poor people” which is exactly the response Sontag expects of us. Photos like these give viewers the opportunity to say “I know exactly what they’re going through” without ever having to experience their strife and maintaining a sense of superiority. By “superiority” I simply mean that they find themselves in better standing than those in the photo, which is Sontag’s argument. We see this picture and immediately place ourselves next to it for comparison without having to have faced such trials. Pictures like these are perfect for inciting the type of participatory alienation one might expect to find when watching a science fiction film (such as “Her”) that contain a universal message; the audience understands the message, yet are able to keep their sense of self intact and remain unchanged by it.
ReplyDeletePictures are said to be worth a thousand words (more or less), but it is only a thousand words. Our lives contain billions of these "words". A picture is an excerpt of the book of life(s) and cannot fully capture an experience for an audience. Michelle Frankfurter's photographs reflects the concept of the photographer and the audience being alienated while simultaneously being introduced into a past reality to understand. A photographer, nor the audience, can live within this reality, it is the past. A picture is always the past, even if it is depicting the future, a picture is always the past.
ReplyDeleteThe ability to get a glimpse into another’s word with our actually being in it. The photos taken by Michelle Frankfurter have that very effect, allowing us to see the pain and suffering of those people without having to personally experience it. It allows us to stay safe in out beds while still experiencing something devastating of sad. Depending on the background of the audience can change the outlook on the photograph. These photos can mean something totally different to me then they do to my neighbor. That is where a picture means 1000 words really holds some truth, because everyone will have a different viewpoint so everyone will have something different to say.
ReplyDelete