bu,-5a\3 ioh.' . u)?z *- ?v,4wrrfU- US,t. *V<,'1|.,,nJ, , ZZptO& // dnrd,rn ,.Iu." LDI Uses of Photography For Susan Sontag I want to writc down some of my responses to Susan Sontag's book Oz Pbotography lryZZT. All the quotations I will usc are from her text. The thoughts are sometimes my own, but all originate in the cxperience of reading her book. Thc camera was invented by Fox Talbot in 1839. Vithin a mere thirty years of its invcntion as a gadgct for an elite, photography was being used for police filing, war reporting, military reconnaissance, pornography, cncyclopcdic documcntation, family albums, postcards, anthropological records (oftcn, as with the Indians in the United States, accompanied by gcnocidc), scntimcntal moralizing, inquisitivc probing (the wrongly named "candid camera"), aesthetic effects, ncws rcporting, and formal portraiture. The first cheap popular camcra was put on the markct, a limle larer, in r888. The specd with which the possiblc uses of photography were seized upon is surcly an indication of photography's profound, central applicability to indusrrial capitalism. Marx camc of age thc year of thc camera's invention. It was not, howcvcr, until the twcntieth ccnrury and thc pcriod bctwcen thc two world wars that the photograph became thc dominant and most "narural" way of refcr- ring to appearances. It was then that it rcplaced the word as immediate tcstimony. Ir was thc pcriod when photography was thought of as being most rransparent, offcring dircct access to the real: the period of thc great witncssing masrers of the medium like Paul Strand and !flalker Evans. It was, in the capitalist countries, the frcest momenr of photography: it had been libcratcd from rhe limitacions of fine arr, and ir had becomc a public medium which could be used democratically. Yct the momcnt was brief. Thc vcry "truthfulness" of the new medium encouraged its dclibcrate usc as a mcans of propaganda. The Nazis were among rhc first to use sys- tcmatic photographic propaganda. Photographs arc pcrhaps the mosr mysterious of all the objects that make up, and thicken, thc environment we recognizc as modern. q6 Uscs of Phott,gr.rlrlrr 'l ?c\. 6,€[email protected]*, Photographs really are experience capturcd, and thc canrcr:1 is tlrt' i.l,'.rl arm of consciousness in its acquisitive mood,. '[hc new film indusry. The invention of the lighmcight camcra-so tlt:it tlrr' l,tlrrrrli ,l a photograph ccased to bc a ritual and becamc a "reflex." The discovrrry ()l plr()t()lnrrl nalism-whcreby the tcxt follows the picturcs instcad of vice vcrsa. 'l'ltc ctttctl',,'rr, ,' ,,1 advertising as a crucial economic forcc. Through photographs, the world becomcs a serics of unrclttt'.1, frcc-standing particlcs; and history, past and prcscnt, a sct ()l .urt'r'rl.tr", and faits diaers.The camera makcs rcality atomic, managc,tlrlc, .rrr,l opaquc. It is a vicw of the world which denics interconncctc,lrt,'.t. continuity, but which confcrs on cach momcn ...

1. bu,-5a3 ioh.' . u)?z *- ?v,4wrrfU-
US,t. *V<,'1|.,,nJ, , ZZptO&
// dnrd,rn
,.Iu." LDI
Uses of Photography
For Susan Sontag
I want to writc down some of my responses to Susan Sontag's
book Oz Pbotography
lryZZT. All the quotations I will usc are from her text. The
thoughts are sometimes my
own, but all originate in the cxperience of reading her book.
Thc camera was invented by Fox Talbot in 1839. Vithin a mere
thirty years of
its invcntion as a gadgct for an elite, photography was being
used for police filing,
war reporting, military reconnaissance, pornography,
cncyclopcdic documcntation,
family albums, postcards, anthropological records (oftcn, as
with the Indians in the
United States, accompanied by gcnocidc), scntimcntal
moralizing, inquisitivc probing
(the wrongly named "candid camera"), aesthetic effects, ncws
rcporting, and formal
portraiture. The first cheap popular camcra was put on the
markct, a limle larer, in r888.
The specd with which the possiblc uses of photography were
seized upon is surcly
an indication of photography's profound, central applicability to

2. indusrrial capitalism.
Marx camc of age thc year of thc camera's invention.
It was not, howcvcr, until the twcntieth ccnrury and thc pcriod
bctwcen thc two
world wars that the photograph became thc dominant and most
"narural" way of refcr-
ring to appearances. It was then that it rcplaced the word as
immediate tcstimony. Ir
was thc pcriod when photography was thought of as being most
rransparent, offcring
dircct access to the real: the period of thc great witncssing
masrers of the medium like
Paul Strand and !flalker Evans. It was, in the capitalist
countries, the frcest momenr of
photography: it had been libcratcd from rhe limitacions of fine
arr, and ir had becomc a
public medium which could be used democratically.
Yct the momcnt was brief. Thc vcry "truthfulness" of the new
medium encouraged
its dclibcrate usc as a mcans of propaganda. The Nazis were
among rhc first to use sys-
tcmatic photographic propaganda.
Photographs arc pcrhaps the mosr mysterious of all the objects
that
make up, and thicken, thc environment we recognizc as modern.
q6 Uscs of Phott,gr.rlrlrr 'l
?c. 6,€[email protected]*,
Photographs really are experience capturcd, and thc canrcr:1 is
tlrt' i.l,'.rl

3. arm of consciousness in its acquisitive mood,.
'[hc new film indusry. The invention of the lighmcight camcra-
so tlt:it tlrr' l,tlrrrrli ,l
a photograph ccased to bc a ritual and becamc a "reflex." The
discovrrry ()l plr()t()lnrrl
nalism-whcreby the tcxt follows the picturcs instcad of vice
vcrsa. 'l'ltc ctttctl',,'rr, ,' ,,1
advertising as a crucial economic forcc.
Through photographs, the world becomcs a serics of unrclttt'.1,
frcc-standing particlcs; and history, past and prcscnt, a sct ()l
.urt'r'rl.tr",
and faits diaers.The camera makcs rcality atomic, managc,tlrlc,
.rrr,l
opaquc. It is a vicw of the world which denics
interconncctc,lrt,'.t.
continuity, but which confcrs on cach momcnt the charirctcr ol
a mystery.
'Ihc first mass-mcdia magazine was startcd in thc Unitcd Statcs
in r9i(,. At k',trl lttl
things wcrc prophcdc about thc launching of Life, thc
prophccics t() bc l tr llv I , .'lr z,'' l
in thc postwar telcvision agc. Thc ncw picturc magazinc was
financctl rxrt lrv tt. .,tlt',
but by thc advcrtising it carried. A third of its images werc
dcvotcd to ptrbli. ir r. '1 1,,

4. sccond prophccy lay in its titlc. This is ambiguous. It may mean
that tltc [)i( l rrr (' rrrr{1,
areaboutlifc,Yctitsccmstopromiscmore:thatthesepicturcs
arclile.'l'lrt'lirrt 1'lr'
tograph in thc first numbcr playcd on this ambiguity. It showed
a ncwlrot tt l,.rl'r' 'l'lr,
captionunderneath rcad: "Life bcgins... "
ffhat scrvcd in placc of the photograph, before thc camcra's
irtvcttri.trri'l'lr,
cxpcctcd answcr is thc cngraving, the drawing, thc painting,
The morc rcvc,tlitrl', ,t ttt,r','t
might bc: memory. What photographs do out therc in space was
prcviottslt' ,1,',,,
within rcflcction.
Proust somewhat misconstrucs what photographs arc: not so
Iltttclt ,t"
instrumcnt of mcmory as an invcntion of it or a replaccmcnt.
Unlikc any othcr visual imagc, a photograph is not a rendcring,
.n i11111;11i1r11, r,r ,tt
intcrprctation of its subject, but actually a trace of it. No
painting or drawitrg, ltt,tv,'r','t
naturalist, belongs to its subject in thc way that a photograph
docs.
A photograph is not only an image (as a painting is an imagc),
,u
interpretation of thc rcal; it is also a trace, something dircctly
stcnci letl

5. off thc rcal, like a footprint or a dcath mask.
t.
rl.
i**
Human visual perccption is a far more complcx and sclective
process than that by which
a 6lm rccords. Nevcrthelcss the camera lcns and thc cyc both
rcgister images-bccausc
of their sensitivity to light- at great speed and in the facc of an
immcdiatc cvcnt. IilFhat
the camera does, however, and what the eyc in itself can never
do, is to fix thc appearancc
of that cvcnt. It removcs its appcarancc from the flow of
appearances and it prcscrvcs
it, not pcrhaps forcvcr but for as long as thc film cxists. Thc
essential character of this
prcservation is not depcndcnt upon thc image bcing static;
uncdited film rushcs prescrvc
in cssentially the samc way, Thc camera saves a sct of
appearanccs from thc othcrwise
incvitable supcrsession of further appcaranccs. It holds thcm
unchanging. And bcforc
the invcntion of the camcra nothing could do this, except, in the
mind's cyc, the faculty
of mcmory.

6. I am not saying that memory is a kind of film. That is a banal
similc. From thc com-
parison film/memory wc lcarn nothing about the lattcr.'What we
learn is how strange
and unprecedentcd was the proccdure of photography.
Yct, unlike memory, photographs do not in themselvcs prcscrvc
meaning. They
offcr appearanccs-with all thc crcdibility and gravity we
normally lcnd to appear-
ances-prized away from thcir meaning. Meaning is the result of
undcrstanding
functions.
And functioning takcs placc in timc, and must be explaincd in
timc.
Only that which narratcs can makc us undcrstand.
Photographs in themsclvcs do not narratc. Photographs prcservc
instant appearances.
Flabit now protccts us against thc shock involvcd in such
prcservation. Comparc thc
exposurc time for a film with the life of thc print madc, and lct
us assume that the print
only lasts ten ycars: thc ratio for an avcrage modcrn photograph
would bc approxi-
mately 2o,ooo,ooo,ooo: r- Pcrhaps that can scrvc as a rcmindcr
of thc violcncc of thc
fission whcrcby appearanccs arc separated by thc camcra from
their function.

7. 'We must now distinguish bctwecn two quitc distinct uscs of
photography. Therc
are photographs which belong to private cxpcricnce and thcrc
are those which arc uscd
publicly. Thc private photograph-thc portrait of a mothcr, a
picturc of a daughter, a
group photo of onc's own team-is apprcciatcd and rcad in a
context which is con-
tinuous with that from which the camcra removcd it. (Thc
violcnce of thc removal is
somctimes felt as incrcdulousncss: "flas that rcally Dad?")
Nevcrtheless such a pho-
tograph rcmains surrounded by the meaning from which it was
scvcrcd. A mcchanical
dcvice, the camcra has bcen used as an instrument to contributc
to a living mcmory. Thc
photograph is a mcmento from a lifc being lived.
Thc contcmporary public photograph usually prcsents an cvcnt,
a scized sct of
48
appcarxnces, which has nothing to do with us, its readers, or
with the original mc.rrrirrli
of thc cvent. It offers information, but information scvercd from
all lived expcricrrr'c. ll
thc ptrblic photograph contributcs to a memory, it is to
thc'memory of an unknow,rl,l,,
and total strangcr. Thc violence is exprcssed in that strangeness.
It rccords irrr irrrt,rrrt
sight about which this srrangcr has shoutcd: Look!

8. Vho is thc stranger? One might answcr: thc photographcr. Yet if
onc consitlt'r s r lr,'
cntirc usc-systcm of photographed images, thc answcr of "the
photographcr" is .' l...rr lv
inadcquatc. Nor can one rcply: those who use the photographs.
It is becausc rlrt. l,lr,'
tographs carry no certain meaning in themselves, bccause they
arc likc inrirgcs irr tlr,,
memory of a total srangcr, rhat thcy lend themsclvcs to any usc.
Daumicr's famous cartoon of Nadar in his balloon suggcsrs an
answcr. N.rr.l,rr rt
travclling through the sky above Paris-the wind has blown off
his hat-rnd lrc is 1'lr,'
tographing with his camcra thc city and its pcoplc bclow.
Has thc camera rcplaccd the eye of God? Thc declinc of religion
corrcsl'xln(ls ,rr lr
the rise of the photograph. Has the culrure of capitalism
tclcscoped God into photr,1ir.r
phy? Thc transformation would not be as surprising as it may at
firsr sccm.
Thc faculty of mcmory led mcn cvcrywhcre to ask whcthcr, just
as rhcy thcrrrsclr,'r
could prcscrvc ccrtain evcnts from oblivion, thcrc might not bc
othcr cycs rrotirrli .rrrtl
rccording otherwisc unwitncssed events. Such cycs they thcn
accrcditcd to tht,ir ;rrrr r,,,
tors, to spirits, to gods or to thcir single dcity. Vhat was scen by
this supcrrr.rtur',tl cr,,,
was inseparably linked with thc principlc of justicc. It was
possible ro cscapc thc jrrrti, r.
of mcn, but not this higher justice from which norhing or little
could bc hid.lcrr.

9. Memory implics a ccrtain act of redcmption. Vhat is
remembercd has bccn s.rv,'.1
from nothingncss. What is forgotten has been abandoncd. If all
evcnts arc sccu, irrsl.rrr
tancously, outside time, by a supernatural cye, thc distinction
betwecn rcmcnrb,.r'rr'1q
and forgctting is transformed into an act of judgmcnt, inm the
rcndcring ol jrrstilt..
whereby recognition is closc to bcing remembered, and
condemnation is closc to [r,rrrri
forgotten. Such a presentiment, cxtractcd from mant long,
painful expericncc ol rirrrr',
is to be found in varying forms in almost cvery cukure and
rcligion, and, vcry e lc.u 11,
in Christianity.
At first, thc sccularization of thc capitalist world during the
nincrccnth ccrrtrrrr'
clidcd thc judgment of God into thc judgmcnr of History in the
name of Progrcsr.
Dcmocracy and Science bccamc thc agcnts of such a judgment.
And for a bricf rrrourcrrr,
photography, as wc havc seen, was considered to be an aid to
these agcnts. It is srill r,,
this historical momcnt thar photography owcs its cthical
reputation as Trurh.
During thc second half of thc twcntieth ccnrury the judgmcnr of
history lr,r.
bccn abandoned by all cxccpt thc underprivileged and
dispossessed. Thc irrtlusrri
alizcd, "dcvcloped" world, tcrrificd of the past, blind to the
fururc, livcs wirhiu .rrr

10. Uscs of Photogr,rphy 4e
opporrunism which has cmptied the principlc of justice of all
credibility. Such
oPPor-
,,rnir* turns everyrhing-naturc, history, suffcring, other pcoplc,
catastrophes, sport,
sex, politics-into spcctaclc. And the implcmentused to do this-
until the act becomcs
so habitual rhat thc conditioned imagination may do it alonc-is
thc camcra.
Photographs have o{ten bccn uscd as a radical wcapon in
Postcrs'
rlcws[).1[)('r s' P'rrrr
phlets,r.rJroo.,. Idonotwishtobelittlcthevalucof suchagitational
ptrhlislrirrt',.
''t
,h..,rrr.n, sysrcmaric public usc of photography necds to bc
challcngctl, rtt't
r'irrrlrlt
by turning it round iikc a cannon and aiming it at diffcrent
targets, but
by ch'rrrliir'1i
'r,'
practicc. How?

11. .wc ncecl to rcturn to thc disdnction I made bctwecn thc privatc
ancl ptrlrlit
tl(' (rl
photography. In thc privatc usc of photography, thc contcxt of
thc
inst:rnt t'cet'ttl"l t'
pr.r.*.j ro ,l.,n, thc photogrrph lives in an ongoing continuity'
(lI yorr 1'tvt' 't 1'lt"
iogr^pl, o{ pctcr on your wall, you are not likely to forgct what
pctcr rtrt'.ttts l() }.tr )
TIie p,rblic photograph, by contrasr, is torn from its contcxt,
and bcc.rtrcs
.r tlt .ttl "l'ir'' t
which, cxactly becausc it is dcad, lends itsclf to any arbitrary
usc'
In thc most famous photographic exhibition cver organiz.cd,'l'ht
lt,rtrtilr'"l 'll'rtt
(put together by EdwarJ Stcichcn in r95 5), photographs from
all
()vcr tlr(' rv"r l'l t''' t ''
i..r..,*d as though thcy formcd a univcrsal {amily album-
Stcichcrr''s irttttiti.tr *'tr
,brolrt"ly corrcct: ,h. p.irrt" usc of photographs can bc
cxcmpl:rry lrtr tlrt'ir 1'rrl'lr'
usc. Un{ortunatcly thc rho.r.r, hc took in treating the existing

12. cl:rss-divitletl
rv"t l'l 't'
i{ it wcrc a family incvitably made thc wholc cxhibition, not
ncccssirrily
c'tr'lt f ir lrrr"
scntimcntal and complaccnt. Thc truth is that most photographs
t:rkctt
ol Pt'trrlr' '111',
about suf{cring, and most of that suffcring is man-made'
Onc,sfirstcllcountcr[writcsSusanSontag]withthcplrototr,rl.,lric
inventoryofultimatch<lrrorisakindofrevclation,thcprottltyl'i..'rllr
modcrn rcvclation: a ncgatiYc cpiphany' For mc' it was
photogt'rtpltr "l
Bcrgcn-BclscnandDachauwhichlcamcacrossbycharrccirtlrlrtr.'lli
storc in Santa Monica inJuly r941' Nothing I havc sccn-in
irh<'tt'
graphs or in rcal lifc-cvcr cut me as sharply, dceply'
instartanctrttslv'
Indccd, it seems plausible ro me to dividc my life into two
Pilrts,
lrt'l.'t
''
I saw thosc photographs (I was twelvc) and aftcr' though it rv:rs
scvct 'tl
ycars beforc I undcrstood fully what thcy were about'
photographs arc rclics of thc past, traccs of what has happcncd.

13. If thc livinq l'rlit'
tlr'rt
p.rr rpon thcmsclvcs, if the past bccomcs an intcgral part of thc
proccss
til 1't'"1'l''
making thcir own history, thcn all photographs would rcacquirc
a living
ctttttcxl' llr' r
would continue to.*irt i1 timc, instcad of bcing arrcstcd
moments, It is iust 1''t'sstl'lt'
that phorography is thc prophccy of a human mcmory yct to bc
socially
antl Polit it 'rllr
achicved. Such a memory *o"ld cncompass any imagc of the
past, howcvcr trrttiit',
ltt 'rr
cvcr guilty, within its own continuity, Thc distinction bctwecn
thc
privatc rrtrtl 1'rtl'lr'
,r., of photography would bc transccndcd' Thc Iramily of Man
would cxist'
our vcry sense of situation is now articulated by the camcra's
intcrvcn-
tions. Thc omniprcscnce of camcras pcrsuasivcly suggcsts that
tirnc
consists of intcrcsting cvcnts, cvcnrs worth photographing' This'

14. in
turn, makcs it casy to feel that any evcnt, oncc undcrway' and
whatcver
its moral characrer, should bc allowcd to complctc itsclf-so that
something elsc can bc brought into the world, thc photograph'
Thc spcctacle crcatcs an ctcrnal presenr of immcdiate
cxPcctation: mcmory
ccascs to
b" ,,"..r.o.y or desirablc. $fith thc loss of mcmory thc
continuitics o{ mcaning and
judgmcnt arc also lost to us. Thc camcra rclicvcs us of thc
burden of mcmory. It survcys
,. Iik. God, and ir survcys for us. Yet no other god has bccn so
cynical, for thc camcra
rccords in ordcr to forgct.
Susan sontag locatcs this god very clcarly in history. Hc is thc
god of monopoly
capitalism.
A capitalist society rcquircs a cuiturc bascd on imagcs' lt necds
to
furnish vasr amounts of entcrtainmcnt in ordcr to stimulate
buying and
anacsthctiT.c the injuries of class, racc, and scx' And it nceds to
gather

15. unlimited amounts of information, thc bctter to cxploit thc
natural
rcsources, increase producdvity, kccp ordcr, make war, givc
jobs to
burcaucrars. Thc camcra's twin capacities, to subicctivizc
rcaiity and to
objcctifyit,idcallyscrvcthcscnccdsandstrcngthcnthcm'Camcras
dc6nc rcality in thc two ways csscnt;al to thc workings of an
advanccd
industrial society: as a spcctaclc ({or masscs) and as an objcct
of
survcillancc (for rulcrs). Thc production of imagcs also
{urnishes a
ruling idcology. Social changc is rcplaccd by a changc in
imagcs'
Hcr thcory of thc current usc of photographs lcads onc to ask
whether photography
.,right scrr" a diffcrcnr funcrion. Is thcrc an altcrnativc
photographic practicc?
Thc
qr"rrion should nor bc answcrcd naivcly. Today no alternativc
profcssional Practicc
(if
onc thinks o{ thc profession of photographer) is possiblc. Thc
systcm can

16. accommo-
datc any photograph. Yct it may bc possiblc to bcgin to usc
photographs according
to a
pracricc
"ddr.r."d
ro an aftcrnarive futurc.'fhis futurc is a hope which wc nccd
now, if
wc arc ro nraintain a strugglc, a'rcsistancc, against the socicties
and cuiturc
o{ capitalism'
,o
,ir
rii:b
:,
t
il;
:ii,l
::.1:
-:.
,ir
I
jJ'
;,:

17. .$
Uscs of Plrr>t.riir.r1,lr ', I
Meanwhile wc live today in the world as it is. Yct rhis possible
prophecy of pho-
graphy indicates thc dircction in which any alternative use of
photography nccds to
'velop. The task of an altcrnativc photography is to incorporate
photography into
cial and political mcmory, instcad of using it as a substitute
which cncourages the
rophy of any such mcmory.
Thc task will dctcrmine both the kinds of pictures taken and thc
way thcy are used.
rere can of coursc bc no formulac, no prcscribed practice. Yct in
rccognizing how
rotography has come to bc uscd by capitalism, we can dcfine at
least somc of the
inciples of an alternativc practicc.
For thc photographcr this means thinking of hcr- or himself not
so much as a
porter to thc rcst of thc world but, rathcr, as a rccorder for thosc
involvcd in the
cnts photographed. The distinction is crucial.
'$flhat makcs photographs likc this so tragic and cxtraordinary
is that, looking at
em, onc is convinccd that they wcre not takcn to plcasc
gencrals, to boost thc morale

18. a civilian public, to glorify hcroic soldiers, or to shock the
world prcss: thcy wcre
Lages addrcsscd to those suffering what thcy dcpict. And given
this integrity toward
d with their subjcct matter, such photographs latcr became a
tncmorial, to thc twcnty
rllion Russians killcd in thc war, for thosc who mourn thcm.
Thc unifying horror of
:otal peoplc's war madc such an attitudc on thc part of the war
photographcrs (and
cn thc ccnsors) a natural one. Photographcrs, howcver, can work
with a similar atti-
Ce in less cxtrcme circumstanccs.
tt
o
I.
9
F
-t
Thc altcrnative usc oI photographs which alrcady cxist lcnds
tts l)trck ()rre (' rrr()r (' l()
thc phenomenon and frarlty of mcmory. The aim must bc to
collstruct
rt cotttt'xt lot'

19. a photograph, to construct it with words, to construct it
with'othcr Ph()to!{ritPlrs'
l()
construct it by its place in an ongoing text of photographs and
imagcs' ilow? Nor"rrr'rllt'
photographs arc uscd in a vcry unilincar way-thcy arc uscd to
illustratc
an r1r'lltlrlr('rll'
o. to d...tonrtrate a thought which gocs likc this:
Vcry frcqucnrly also thcy are uscd tautologically so that thc
photograph mercly rc1""'l'
what is bcing said in words. Memory is not unilinear at all'
Memory works rarii:rllv' t'r'rt
is to say with an enormous numbcr of associations all lcading
to thc same cvt'trt',llrt'
diagram is likc this:
)l'-
I{ wc want ro put a photograph back into thc contcxt of
expcricncc,
social cxpclicrrt r''
social mcmory, wc havc rJr*rp.., thc laws of mcmory.
tWe havc to situatc thc prirrtt'rl
photograph so thar it acquires so-"thing of thc surprising
conclusivcness

20. of th:rt rvlrit lr
was and is.
vhat Brecht wrote abour actirrg in onc of his pocms is
applicablc to
such a practict" lrr r r
instantone can read photography, for actingthc rccrcating of
contcxt:
Uses t>f Photognl'hY I
S() y()rr rlr,,trltl siurply rnrkc thc instant
St,rrrtl ,rul, without in thc proccss hiding
!(hat you arc rnaking it stand out from. Give your acting
'Ihat progrcssion of onc-thing-after-another, that attitude of
florking up what you have taken on. In this way
You will show the flow of events and also rhe course
Of your work, permitting the spcctator
To expericnce this Now on many levcls, coming from
Previously and
Merging into Afterwards, also having much else Now
Alongside it. He is sitting nor only
In your thcatre but also
In the world.
There are a few great photographs which practicaliy achievc
this by themsclves. But
any photograph may become such a "Now" if an adequate
context is crcated for it. In
general the bctter the photograph, the fullcr rhe contexr which
can be created.

21. Such a context re-places the photograph in time-not its own
original time for that
is impossible-but in narrated timc. Narratcd time becomcs
historic time when it is
assumed by social memory and social action. The constructed
narratcd time needs to
respect thc process of memory which it hopes to stimulate.
There is ncver a single approach to somcthing rcmembcred. The
remembered is
not like a tcrminus at the cnd of a line. Numerous approaches or
stimuli converge
upon it and lead to it. flords, comparisons, signs need to create
a contcxr for a printed
photograph in a comparable way; that is to say, they must mark
and lcave open divcrse
approachcs. A radial system has to be constructed around the
photograph so that it
may be seen in terms which arc simultaneously personal,
political, economic, dramatic,
everyday, and historic.
August r978
EDITOR'S NOTE
Quotations from Susan Sontag, On Photography
(Harmondswonh, UK: Pcnguin, r977), in order of cita-
tion, arc from pp. l-4, :1, t61, r54,23, r r, r78, and r9..-.2o.
54
Appearances
The Ambiguity of the PhotograPh

22. What makcs photography a strangc invention-with
unf<lrcscc,rblc ct,tlsc,1ttctr,,'. ti
tl.rat its primary raw matcrials are light and timc.
yet lct us begin with somcthing morc tangible. A fcw days irgo;t
lrirrrtl ul tttrtt'
lound this photograph and showcd it to me.
I know norhing abour it. Thc best way of dating it is probably
by its photogr .r1,1il,
tcchniquc, Bctwccn rgoo and rgzo? I do not know whethcr it
was takcn in carratl,r, tlr'
Alps, South Africa. All one can scc is that it shows a smiling
middlc-aged man witlr lri
horse. flhy was it taken? flhat meaning did ir have for thc
photographcr? v/otrltl i
havc had thc same meaning for the man with thc horsc?
o
o
ga
'o
F-
3
o
4
d

23. o
o
o
Appcarlncer r
Understanding a Photograph
John Berger
For over a century, photographers and their apologists have
argued that photography deserves to be considered afine art. It
is hard to know how far the apologetics have succeeded. Cer-
tainly the vast majority of people do not consider photography
an art, even whilst they practise, eqioy, use and value it. The
argument of apologists (and I myself have been among them)
has
been a little academic.
It now seems clear that photography deserves to be consid-
ered as though it were not afrne art. It looks as though photog-
raphy (whatever kind of activity it rnay be) is going to outlive
painting and sculpture as we have thought of them since the
Renaissance. It now seems fortunate that few rnuseums have
had sufficient initiative to open photographic departments, for it
means that few photographs have been preserved in sacred
isola-
tion, it means that the public have not come to think of any
photographs as being beyond them. (Museums function like
homes of the nobility to which the public at certain hours are
admitted as visitors. The class nature of the 'nobility' may vary,

24. but as soon as a work is placed in a rnuseum it acquires the
rnystery of a way of life which excludes the mass.)
Let me be clear. Painting and sculpture as we know them are
not dying of any stylistic disease, of anything diagnosed by the
professionally horrified as cultural decadence; they are dying
because, in the world as it is, no work of art can survive and not
become a valuable property. And this implies the death of paint-
ing and sculpture because property, as once it was not, is now
inevitably opposed to all other values. People believe in prop-
erty, but in essence they only believe in the illusion of
protection
which property gives. All works of fine art, whatever their con-
tent, whatever the sensibility of an individual spectator, must
now be reckoned as no more than props for the confidence ofthe
world spirit of conservatism.
By their nature, photographs have little or no property value
because they have no rarity value. The very principle of photog-
raphy is that the resulting image is not unique, but on the con-
trary infinitely reproducible. Thus, in twentieth-century terms,
photographs are records ofthings seen. Let us considerthem no
e,r-nprr, Ioh n .
t
U nds sh^^ )t ^f a ?hotnq
ra4Vl -/ cl, ng rezl t
o drr"as ar, ?t ^Lq.fphu €X. AtnnGactaL^bcrq.l'law tlntver"t,
d**e'e Cr^r^a PD(Ks, Lqb. zqt-+.ftr+nT.
(*^ ril "^[
ZsvLl w
"

25. r sot''
lrbb .f^"rg V€BuMr
qJN<@fiq
closer to works of art than cardiograms. We shall then be freer
of
illusions. Our mistake has been to categorize things as art by
considering certain phases of the process of creation. But logi-
cally this can make all man-rnade objects art. It is more useful
to
categorize art by what has becorne its social function. It func-
tions as property. Accordingly, photographs are mostly outside
the category.
Photographs bear witness to a human choice being exercised
in a given situation. A photograph is a result of the pholog-
rapher's decision that it is worth recording that this particular
event or this particular object has been seen. If everything that
existed were continually being photographed, every photograph
would become rneaningless. A photograph celebrates neither the
event itself nor the faculty of sight in itself. A photograph is
already a message about the event it records. The urgency ofthis
message is not entirely dependent on the urgency of the event,
but neither can it be entirely independent from it. At its
simplest,
the message, decoded, means: I have decided that seeing /&is is
worth recording.
This is equally true of very memorable photographs and the
most banal snapshots. What distinguishes the one from the other
is the degree to which the photograph explains the message, the
degree to which the photograph makes the photographer's deci-
sion transparent and comprehensible. Thus we come to the

26. little-understood paradox of the photograph. The photograph is
an automatic record through the mediation of light of a given
event: yet it uses the given event to explain its recording.
Photog-
raphy is the process of rendering observation self-conscious.
We must rid ourselves of a confusion brought about by con-
tinually comparing photography with the fine arts. Every hand-
book on photography talks about composition. The good photo-
graph is the well-composed one. Yet this is true only in so far
as
we think of photographic images imitating painted ones.
painting
is an art of arrangement: therefore it is reasonable to demand
that there is some kind of order in what is arranged. Every
relation between forms in a painting is to some degree adaptable
to the painter's purpose. This is not the case with photography.
(Unless we include those absurd studio works in which the
photographer arranges every detail of his subject before he
takes
the picture.) Composition in the profound, formative sense of
the word cannot enter into photography.
292
The formal arrangement of a photograph explains nothing.
The events portrayed are in themselves mysterigus or explicable
according to the spectator's knowledge of them prior to his see'
ing the photograph. What then gives the photograph as photo'
graph meaning? What makes its minimal messageJ have de'
cided that seeing this is worth recording-large and vibrant?
The true content of a photograph is invisible, for it derives
from a play, not with form, but with time. One might argue that
photography is as close to music as to painting. I have said that
a

27. photograph bears witness to a human choice being exercised.
This choice is not between photographing r and -v: but between
photographing at "r moment or at y moment. The objects re-
corded in any photograph (from the most effective to the most
commonplace) carry approximately the same weight, the same
conviction. What varies is the intensity with which we are made
aware of the poles of absence and presence. Between these two
poles photography finds its proper meaning. (The most popular
use of the photograph is as a memento of the absent.)
A photograph, whilst recording what has been seen, always
and by its nature refers to what is not seen. It isolates, preserves
and presents a moment taken from a continuum. The power of a
painting depends upon its internal references. [ts reference to
the natural world beyond the limits of the painted surface is
never direct; it deals in equivalents. Or, to put it another way:
painting interprets the world, translating it into its own
language.
But photography has no language of its own. One learns to read
photographs as one learns to read footprints or cardiograms' The
language in which photography deals is the language of events.
All its references are external to itself. Hence the continuum.
A movie director can manipulate time as a painter can manipu-
late the confluence of the events he depicts. Not so the still
photographer. The onty decision he can take is as regards the
moment he chooses to isolate. Yet this apparent limitation gives
the photograph its unique power. What it shows int'okes what is
not shown. One can look at any photograph to appreciate the
truth of this. The immediate relation between what is present
and what is absent is particular to each photograph: it may be
that of ice to sun, of grief to a tragedy, of a smile to a pleasure,
of
a body to love, of a winning race-horse to the race it has run.
A photograph is effective when the chosen moment which it

28. records contains a quantum of truth which is generally applica-
213
ble, which is as revealing about what is absent from the photo-
graph as about what is present in it. The nature of this quantum
of tiuth, and the ways in which it can be discerned, vary
gf,eatly'
It may be found in an expression, an action, a juxtaposition, a
visuai ambiguity, a configuration. Nor can this truth ever be
independenfof ine spectator. For the man with a Polyfoto of his
girl in his pocket, the quantum of truth in an'impersonal' photo-
iraptr must still depend upon the general categories already in
the spectator's mind.
^tti ttris may seem close to the
old principle of art transforming
the particulaiinto the universal. But photography does not deal
in constructs. There is no transforming in photography' There is
only decision, only focus. The minimal message of a photograph
rnai U" less simple than we first thought. Instead of it being: I
have decided that seeing this is worlh recording, we may now
decode it as: The degree to which I believe this is warth looking
at can be judged by all that I am willingly not shawing because
it
is contained within it.
Why complicate in this way an experience which we have
many times every day-the experience of looking ai a photg-
grapi,Z Because ihe simplicity with which we usually treat the

29. Ixperience is wasteful and confusing. We think of photographs
as works of art, as evidence of a particular truth, as likenesses,
as new$ items. Every photograph is in fact a means of testing,
confirming and constructing a total view of reality. Hence the
crucial rote of photography in ideological struggle' Hence the
necessity of oui undeistanding a weapon which we can use and
which can be used against us.
294