Barrett Chapter 3: Interpreting photographs
1. The author's thesis is that to interpret a photo the viewer must observe the art work and then attempt to understand its meaning, the bigger picture. The viewer has to look at how the photo affects them and what it means to them, but interpretations are subject to change!
2. Barrett uses examples of interpretations from Jeff Wall and Susan Sontag's review to introduce the concept of interpretation. He also gives a list of questions that viewers should consider while interpreting photos as well as quotes from Szarkowski, Eauclaire, Rice, Green, and Bryant where they interpret photos.
3. Barrett says that interpretation is saying the meaning or the point of the picture using what you see in the photo. It can also be the mood of a picture and how it makes the viewer feel, but feelings alone are not enough to fully interpret a photo. Understanding the photo and why the photographer wants the viewer to see the photo leads the viewer to their feeling.
4. Interpretation is important in criticism because critics use what is shows in the photo to talk about what they do and don't understand about the photo. Critics want to tell others what they think the photo is about and what is most important about it, so their interpretation of the photo has a lot of worth. A critic can't attempt to critique a photograph before interpreting it first.
5. The Feminist interpretation really interests me because of the way Eleanor said she hoped to "immortalize" her subject like Alfred Stieglitz and Emmet Gowin did with pictures of their wives and children. She talks about the difference of ownership of a wife and the ownership of a husband and how they are barely even comparable. Bringing her husband and son into the photo did not create the same experience as the pictures of Georgia O'Keeffe or other wives. This is a very narrow view on interpreting photos, for I cant imagine that it applies to that many photos, but it is an interesting concept nonetheless.
6. Although interpretations can change and evolve there is a certain amount of validity that have to come from those interpreting the photo. Simply stating your opinion of a photo, "I like it", has no value to other viewers, nor does it help the artist. In order to correctly interpret you have to have an understanding for the photo practically as well as emotionally. You need to be able to talk about the photo and have the "facts" to back up your claims and opinions.
7. While an artist always has vision, artist don't always have any real intentions for a photo and what it "means". Intention is a valid way of interpretation and criticism, but we the viewer don't always know for sure what the artists intentions truly were. Whether is be because they are not alive to tell us or they don't want to answer any questions about the piece, the artists intention is not always clear. Barrett goes on to say that because of these circumstances the critics view of the piece is more valuable than the artists because the view of the critic is more obtainable than that of the artist.
8. I think Barrett does a really great job discussing the relationship between interpretations and feelings. The "gut feelings" that a critic first feels when looking at an image are incredibly important because those feelings lead you to critique the photo. What in the photo brings you to these feelings? Are these feelings intended to be provoked from this piece? Why does the artist want you to feel this way when looking at the image? Our feelings help guide us to a well rounded interpretations of the photo. I also really liked the idea that no one has an innocent eye. Everyone has a different understanding of the word and come into the room with different experiences, and that is really all the viewer has to relate the art to. Every interpretation is warped by the experience of that viewer, so every opinion brings something new to the table.
9. Barrett concludes this section by talking about the interpretation community and the importance of being educated in your interpretations, but reemphasizes that interpretations are flexible thoughts that can change over time. The more we talk about and interpret photos (and art in general) the more we understand it and benefit from it. There is so much value in the process of interpretation and how you reach your conclusion of a piece.
2. Barrett uses examples of interpretations from Jeff Wall and Susan Sontag's review to introduce the concept of interpretation. He also gives a list of questions that viewers should consider while interpreting photos as well as quotes from Szarkowski, Eauclaire, Rice, Green, and Bryant where they interpret photos.
3. Barrett says that interpretation is saying the meaning or the point of the picture using what you see in the photo. It can also be the mood of a picture and how it makes the viewer feel, but feelings alone are not enough to fully interpret a photo. Understanding the photo and why the photographer wants the viewer to see the photo leads the viewer to their feeling.
4. Interpretation is important in criticism because critics use what is shows in the photo to talk about what they do and don't understand about the photo. Critics want to tell others what they think the photo is about and what is most important about it, so their interpretation of the photo has a lot of worth. A critic can't attempt to critique a photograph before interpreting it first.
5. The Feminist interpretation really interests me because of the way Eleanor said she hoped to "immortalize" her subject like Alfred Stieglitz and Emmet Gowin did with pictures of their wives and children. She talks about the difference of ownership of a wife and the ownership of a husband and how they are barely even comparable. Bringing her husband and son into the photo did not create the same experience as the pictures of Georgia O'Keeffe or other wives. This is a very narrow view on interpreting photos, for I cant imagine that it applies to that many photos, but it is an interesting concept nonetheless.
6. Although interpretations can change and evolve there is a certain amount of validity that have to come from those interpreting the photo. Simply stating your opinion of a photo, "I like it", has no value to other viewers, nor does it help the artist. In order to correctly interpret you have to have an understanding for the photo practically as well as emotionally. You need to be able to talk about the photo and have the "facts" to back up your claims and opinions.
7. While an artist always has vision, artist don't always have any real intentions for a photo and what it "means". Intention is a valid way of interpretation and criticism, but we the viewer don't always know for sure what the artists intentions truly were. Whether is be because they are not alive to tell us or they don't want to answer any questions about the piece, the artists intention is not always clear. Barrett goes on to say that because of these circumstances the critics view of the piece is more valuable than the artists because the view of the critic is more obtainable than that of the artist.
8. I think Barrett does a really great job discussing the relationship between interpretations and feelings. The "gut feelings" that a critic first feels when looking at an image are incredibly important because those feelings lead you to critique the photo. What in the photo brings you to these feelings? Are these feelings intended to be provoked from this piece? Why does the artist want you to feel this way when looking at the image? Our feelings help guide us to a well rounded interpretations of the photo. I also really liked the idea that no one has an innocent eye. Everyone has a different understanding of the word and come into the room with different experiences, and that is really all the viewer has to relate the art to. Every interpretation is warped by the experience of that viewer, so every opinion brings something new to the table.
9. Barrett concludes this section by talking about the interpretation community and the importance of being educated in your interpretations, but reemphasizes that interpretations are flexible thoughts that can change over time. The more we talk about and interpret photos (and art in general) the more we understand it and benefit from it. There is so much value in the process of interpretation and how you reach your conclusion of a piece.
Comments
Post a Comment