When a photograph is taken and an event captured, the past and future are irrelevant. Although the truth may remain disguised behind an individual?s ?invented? meaning it does not follow that the truth is nonexistent.īerger also argues that ambiguity arises because photographs break the continuity of time, which again is another falsehood. But what about the meaning of the photograph itself, alone, without Berger?s private interpretation? This meaning, the absolute truth, remains hidden from all viewers because of their previous experiences, their life. Obviously, if one places his or her own, fictitious meanings unto a photograph, there can never be a single meaning or truth. Here, Berger admits to creating meanings, based on his life experiences and his personal psychology. When discussing the ambiguity of the photograph of the horse and man, page 85, Berger can only guess as to why the photograph was taken and to what the meaning is. Berger becomes mislead when he compares an individual?s opinion of the past or future of a photograph to the actual truth of the photograph, thus surfaces ?ambiguity.? Even Berger agrees that ambiguity is the result of the viewer?s personal experiences and psychology, but he ignores what the viewer cannot see. The truth, however, is beyond the viewer?s conscious interpretation and the photograph becomes ambiguous. Yet, claiming that anything subjective within a photograph, its past and future, is personal only supports an absolute truth. All photographs communicate one absolute truth.īerger states, ?All subjectivity is treated as private? (100). Here, the validity of Berger?s assumption crumbles. As a result, no photograph can convey the same message to any two people and no two photographs can convey the same message to any one person. In John Berger?s essay ?Another Way of Telling,? Berger argues that photographs contain a ?third meaning.? Berger claims that the third meaning is personal and relies almost completely on the individual viewer.
0 kommentar(er)
