ROLAND BARTHES LA CAMERA CHIARA PDF
File:Barthes Roland La camera chiara Nota sulla resourceone.info resourceone.info (file size. Wiki for Collaborative Studies of Arts, Media and Humanities. Roland Barthes, La camera chiara - Nota sulla fotografia. Rosa Spinillo. 63 O tm U (u' OD EE X.0 - tn e o' D X. - o X(1 XX.c = to % - LJha-) =x X lb c to) X. cu.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Portuguese|
|Genre:||Children & Youth|
|ePub File Size:||27.38 MB|
|PDF File Size:||16.55 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Regsitration Required]|
Original filename: SCARICA camera chiara Nota sulla fotografia resourceone.info Title: La camera chiara. Nota sulla fotografia. Author: Roland Barthes. ALSO BY ROLAND BARTHES. ROLAND BARTHES Camera Lucida. Reflections on Originally published in French as La Chambre Claire by. Editions du. Net's Gallery: Roland Barthes' Camera Lucida Analysis. 39 - 7. Negotiating Traditional Gender Roles in Laura Ingalls Wilder's Little Town on The. Prairie.
Because what Barthes had written was neither a work of theoretical strictness nor avant-garde polemic, still less a history or sociology of photography. Instead, it was frankly personal, even sentimental: an essay in 48 fragments that deliberately frustrated readers looking for the semiotics of photography they imagined Barthes would or should write. The subjective turn in Barthes's thought and writing had come into view slightly earlier, with the publication of a ludic "autobiography", Roland Barthes by Roland Barthes, in , and his anxious anatomy of desire, A Lover's Discourse, in In truth, early and late Barthes are not so easily told apart; as Michael Wood has argued, he was throughout his career a writer who engaged head and heart at the same time.
Camera Lucida, however, was different: not so much a knowing application of semiotic methods to intimate experience as a search for the aspect of experience that evaded study or critique.
In short, it was a book about love and grief, written directly out of the loss of his mother in , and shadowed by the "mourning diary" published last year in France that he had begun to keep after her death.
Barthes had composed a ghost story of sorts, in which neither Henriette Barthes nor the book's ostensible subject, photography, could quite be grasped.
Camera Lucida is a distinctly odd volume to have attained, in the 30 years since its publication, such a canonical place in the study of photography. As the scholar Geoffrey Batchen points out in Photography Degree Zero, a recent collection of essays about Barthes's text, it is probably the most widely read and influential book on the subject.
But the nature of that influence remains obscure — what exactly does one learn from Camera Lucida? Barthes certainly shrinks from being comprehensive; he has no interest in the techniques of photography, in arguments over its status as art, nor really in its role in contemporary media or culture, which he leaves to sociologists such as Pierre Bourdieu.
He is allergic to cleverness in photography much of Henri Cartier-Bresson would surely qualify , disparages colour in the era of William Eggleston, no less as always looking as if it's been added later, and calls himself a realist at exactly the moment when postmodernist artists and critics were declaring the image a performance or sham. Worse, he risks this sort of aphoristic provocation: "in order to see a photograph well, it is best to look away or close your eyes. In the first half of the book, he elaborates a distinction between two planes of the image.
The first, which he calls the studium, is the manifest subject, meaning and context of the photograph: everything that belongs to history, culture, even to art. It's here that we learn, say, about Moscow in a William Klein street photograph from , or about the comportment of a well-dressed African-American family in a picture by James Van Der Zee.
Rereading: Camera Lucida by Roland Barthes
But it's the second category that really skewers Barthes's sensibility. He calls it the punctum: that aspect often a detail of a photograph that holds our gaze without condescending to mere meaning or beauty. In the same Van Der Zee photograph, the punctum is one woman's strapped pumps, though it later shifts, as the image "works" on the author, to her gold necklace.
This is one of a few curious moments in the book where Barthes blatantly misreads the image at hand; the woman is actually wearing a string of pearls. But his point survives: he has been indelibly touched by the poignant detail. It's this in academic terms quite scandalous embrace of the subjective which allows Barthes to begin the quest that makes his book so moving.
Having lost his mother, with whom he had lived most of his life, he goes looking for her among old photographs; time and again the face he finds is not quite hers, even if objectively she looks like herself.
At last, he discovers her true likeness, the "air" that he remembers, in a picture of Henriette aged five, taken in a winter garden in In the journal entry that recounts this discovery, Barthes simply notes: "Je pleure. Barthes, however, is a temperamentally discreet narrator, so never shows us the photograph: "It exists only for me.
But there is a danger in this, in the abundance of photography, that our memories will become extinct.
Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography
Ultimately — or at the limit — in order to see a photograph well, it is best to look away or close your eyes. My stories are a way of shutting my eyes. Photographs, unlike other arts, are too immediate, seem too real though they are unreal: Photographs do not shut the eyes, but gouge them out: Here is where the madness is, for until this day no representation could assure me of the past of a thing except by intermediaries; but with the Photograph, my certainty is immediate: The Photograph then becomes a bizarre medium, a new form of hallucination: View all 8 comments.
Apr 27, Michael rated it really liked it Shelves: This was the last book written by the renowned French master of linguistic semiotics and literary criticism before he died in It is a short page exploration of the unique qualities of photography compared to other forms of representation. The book was a rewarding book for me to think about photography in unfamiliar ways. This was most poignant by his search among his family pictures for one of his dead mother that might evoke her presence for him he lived with her his whole life.
Time after time shots he found of her failed to do the trick: I recognized her differentially, not essentially. Photography therefore compelled me to perform a painful labor; straining toward the essence of her identity, I was struggling among images partially true, and therefore totally false.
For I often dream about her I dream only about her , but it is never quite my mother … I dream about her, I do not dream her. Barthes never does share the picture of his mother he valued his privacy too much.
Personally, I tend to shoot only landscapes. But I can appreciate the power and impact of an evocative portrait. Arnold Newman is a favorite for capturing something of the accomplishment or character of a person.
Since every photograph is contingent and thereby outside of meaning , Photography cannot signify aim at a generality except by assuming a mask. It is this word that Calvino correctly uses to designate what makes a face into the product of a society and of its history. For the most part Barthes coverage of photography is personal and accessible, not abstruse and academic. Because of the importance of individual emotional response to photographs, Barthes did not feel subjecting the art form to a formal analysis with his methods of phenomenology or dissection of its place in aesthetic philosophy would be fruitful.
He puts you at ease by admitting naivete about theories of photography and steers you clear of high-flown discussions and criticism of photography as art.
La Camera Chiara Roland Barthes
Thus, for me the book has the pleasing quality of exploration with me as a reader in hand, and it pays off with a sense of discovery rather than persuasion and erection of a new dogma. His writing style includes lots of parenthetical insertions that have the feel of hypertext. He also uses colons and semicolons in nearly every sentence, which carries a sense of a logical unfolding of ideas like Russian nesting dolls.
I was moved most when Bathes marvels at the world-changing novelty of photography when it was invented by Niepce in the and reaches for poetic metaphors. I leave you with some choice quotes: And if Photography belonged to a world with some residual sensitivity to myth, we should exult over the richness of the symbol: View 2 comments.
I'd never thought much about Barthes method until I read Sara Ahmed's book Queer Phenomenology in which she draws attention to the labour that enables Husserl to sit and think at his table; the work of childcare and table clearing performed, probably, by women.
Ahmed has inspired me to ask what Barthes is doing here, and Barthes has helpfully told me; he is forthright; perhaps that is why I find his writing appealing; I am engaged by honesty and directness.
He looks at photographs; he thinks abo I'd never thought much about Barthes method until I read Sara Ahmed's book Queer Phenomenology in which she draws attention to the labour that enables Husserl to sit and think at his table; the work of childcare and table clearing performed, probably, by women.
He looks at photographs; he thinks about photographs, and he writes whatever occurs to him that seems worthy of sharing.
Strange to think that this text, famous, influential as it is, has such a personal origin, that a single standpoint can be taken as universal. I was awake to this when I read Barthes' reflections on being photographed 'I play the social game I felt the contrast with images of fashion models, who are anonymous matter, utile bodies.
And female celebrities: The more beautiful the woman is judged to be, I think, the less individual she is, the more anodyne her image, her expressionless face He says, parenthetically, discontinuously 'it is my political right to be a subject that I must protect'.
I want to follow this thought - but he drops the trail, leaves it to others feminists? Barthes considers what constitutes his interest in, his feelings about photographs, and distinguishes two classes of effect or affect they produce - a 'slippery, irresponsible' sort of general interest produced by the image's relation to fields of knowledge, culture, experience, curiosity, which he calls studium , and a piercing, emotional jolt that he calls punctum , a kind of realisation that there is life beyond the frame, but more than this, maybe even 'Pity' because the photograph speaks always of death but for other reasons, because Barthes chooses photographs like Richard Avedon's devastating photo of William Casby 'Born a Slave', and one of a Black family whose trappings of 'respectability' induce 'Pity' in Barthes because he reads, reductively, a hopeless aspiration to Whiteness.
Race thus becomes a painful emotion felt and mediated by the White viewer - Barthes describes it variously as wound, madness, ecstasy - he remembers Nietszche's 'pity' for a horse. After reflecting at length on a photograph of his mother as a child, he reflects at length on photography's defining feature, the 'this-has-been' it offers that is incontrovertible. He predicts that the astonishment at this will vanish, and I think he is right, but for more reasons than he anticipates, because hasn't the cultural status or the location of the photograph changed with the advent of social media?
In this context great numbers of people quite habitually make photographs, and while we perhaps still mainly look at photographs while alone, we do not do so in the same kind of privacy as Barthes speaks of, and we very often look at photographs that are not our own. Perhaps all this belongs to the sociological fluff that Barthes is not interested in the assertion he makes that there are few books on photography is no longer true!
The transition from private to public, the arrival of celebrity culture, that the photograph attended, have passed into new stages in the digital age.
Nonetheless, I think Barthes makes an enduring point about the photograph as a document impinging on time, on the sense of time, as the photograph as measurement and memento mori.
View all 12 comments. View 1 comment. Jul 10, Ryan rated it liked it Shelves: Along with Susan Sontag's On Photography , Camera Lucida is one of the earliest and still most frequently cited analyses of the medium. This might seem strange considering how personal and 'literary' it is, but, whether for or against, academics continue to use this little book to make all sorts of exaggerated claims about visual culture.
As he acknowledges, Barthes' take on photography is determined by a phenomenological reduction. I decided to take myself as a mediator for all Photography.
S Along with Susan Sontag's On Photography , Camera Lucida is one of the earliest and still most frequently cited analyses of the medium. Starting from a few personal impulses, I would try to formulate the fundamental feature, the universal without which there would be no Photography" He splits the photograph into punctum -- a 'point of interest' within the photo that is both responsible for its aesthetic quality and unique for each individual observer -- and studium , or more or less everything else: How does one justify leaving out so much?
Barthes does it by associating several features of photography with the studium while never associating any of them with each other.
So 'taste' in the banal sense, technical knowledge Barthes doesn't actually know anything about photography , knowledge of the thing photographed, and empathy with the photographic subject are all acknowledged separately, but declined on the same grounds: So for Barthes the really radical thing is to relegate historical, political, biographical, personal, or whatever content of a given photograph to the realm of dull convention. It is 'unfortunate,' Barthes writes, though apparently necessary, that he finds Koen Wessing's photos of Nicaragua "banal.
I think the problem is that, like photography, Barthes never goes beyond surface impressions. In a sense Barthes' analysis just repeats what he says photography does: Recognizing the ease with which photography confuses experiential fact with Truth, Barthes accepts the confusion as necessary, leading to the paradoxical claim that the Real Truth of a photo is more visible the more it is 'liberated' from all explanatory context.
Its false impression of immediacy can then be reflexively experienced in idiosyncratic ways by the observer who, for instance, can go on to write about photography by writing about his mom.
Another good line, again relevant to both photography and Barthes' method of analysis: Sadece bu. Dec 29, Jon Anzalone rated it did not like it. Patronizing and solipsistic as a discussion of photography.
Barthes spends ample time assigning Latin names to elements of what is, essentially, irony, identifies their interaction as either clever or lame, and then abandons them.
Other elements of photography are not considered, and instead he marvels at the possibility that the subject of an old photo may still be alive. He so much as admits he knows not much about photography, and goes on to talk at great length about himself instead. I've be Patronizing and solipsistic as a discussion of photography. I've been looking for an intellectual discourse on the nature of photography as an art; things that are found in the moment of the place, or of the artist, or of the viewer, use of aesthetic elements as a means of expressive language, style, approach, impact, intent, unintent, application of technical approach, so on.
This book is none of those things and is not recommended under any circumstances in a meaningful study of the art.
Nov 27, Hani rated it it was amazing. This is THE real art. The photograph is literally an emanation of the referent. From a real body, which was there, proceed radiations which ultimately touch me, who am here; the duration of the transmission is insignificant; the photograph of the missing being, as Sontag says, will touch me like the delayed rays of a star.
I have found my soul on Photography. Thats it. This is a curious little book, and it really is a little book — only pages. It is curious because it is two books. The first is a kind of philosophical discussion on the nature of photography. He says many very interesting things here — interesting in a philosophical kind of way. He starts with the basics and works his way up from there. For example, he says we can have three relationships to photographs: This last relationship of us to the photograph is what most of both parts of this book is about.
He repeatedly says that there is a kind of banality to photography. A photograph shows what was there. We know photographs speak the truth, but often we are dumbfounded by the truths they say — photographs are Cassandras with their gaze fixed on the past.
I really like that image. How often have we seen a photograph of ourselves or of a loved one years after it was taken only to realise our memories are out of joint? That some sequence of events must be wrong? He sees photographs as graveyards for light. Open the shutter and the light that is reflected from a surface the apple in a bowl of fruit or the half-turned smile of a loved one reacts chemically or electrically with the mechanism so as to effectively freeze that light in time.
We literally have the power to stop time, we new gods. But this view is only partly true.
SCARICA camera chiara Nota sulla fotografia pdf .pdf
Photography is also about selection — it is always a chosen truth. Photography is also about artifice — it is about adjustments to lighting and focus that manipulate the truth of the image.
And today, with photoshop, it is hard to know what we are looking at when we look at a photograph. I have never been to New York. My only knowledge of the city comes from books and photographs and motion film. Could it be that the city itself does not exist? That the Twin Towers collapsing was really a huge fabrication in an international scale version of the Truman Show? Probably not. It is not just that we get to choose what to point the camera toward that is an ideological decision, but how we go about reading photographs is also deeply ideological.
This is our cultural understanding of photographs, what we feel when we see an image of nuns walking behind a group of soldiers on patrol. But then there is what he calls punctum.
This is something about the image that stops us. An example might help. The second half of this book is about him considering photographs of his mother and is quite moving. Looking for a photograph that has a dual impact on him — one that makes him feel it shows his mother as she was and also brings her back to life again.
Obviously, such photographs are rare. Such photographs are self-conscious and so can never be essentially us. But there is a lovely line I read somewhere — that great photographs are never taken, but are given. Given, that is, by the subject. So few of them look anything like I think I look like. I believe this is because I mostly only see myself straight-on.
When photos are not taken as direct mirror shots they stop looking like me — the me I generally see is the face-to-mirror angle me — no other. But then, our self-image has a lot in common with photographs — neither age well with time. I suspect the image we carry of ourselves in our heads is a kind of photo taken at about I enjoyed this a lot.
But the best of this was my confusion over this photo. Oh, and his line that to understand great photographs you need to close your eyes really should be where this review ends. Aug 02, David rated it it was amazing. My cousins, now dead or old, as they were when young, at birthday, Easter and Christmas parties, and my mother as an attractive young woman with her life before her.
Everything here as I glance out of the window, is already gone. Jan 07, Roya rated it it was amazing. I could give it tens of thousands of stars, and still it wouldn't be enough.
Jan 28, Sylvie rated it really liked it. Mainly because it is one of the books I go back to again and again, a book that encapsulates for me the pathos of the captured image, the inherent sadness of human life. We start off with high hopes, we think we can conquer the world with all the wonders it has to offer, and that is true of course for a time. Since the middle of the 19th century, the new technology, photography, cinema, gave people the tools to fix memories, to fix them instantaneously without the agency of the spoken or written word.
That must have felt so empowering. Roland Barthes examines the photograph philosophically; he sees it not as capturing the moment, something nothing can, because the present, as Buddhists,T S Eliot and many others know, is always the past, but one in which what was there is embedded: The detail each individual is drawn to in a photograph varies.
For me, it is often shoes that feel quite revealing and poignant. That the pictures are in black and white means that we are not distracted by colour, we experience their true emotional impact. This leads us on to the second part of this little book, which is like a memoir to his mother. He is searching for his mother, whose death he is mourning.I was moved most when Bathes marvels at the world-changing novelty of photography when it was invented by Niepce in the and reaches for poetic metaphors.
His teaching career expanded: He splits the photograph into punctum -- a 'point of interest' within the photo that is both responsible for its aesthetic quality and unique for each individual observer -- and studium , or more or less everything else: In fiction, WG Sebald admitted a profound debt to Camera Lucida; in Austerlitz, the protagonist's search for an image of his lost mother is clearly modelled on Barthes's desire for a glimpse of "the unique being".
Pax Forlag, ; Ming shi: Students and colleagues gathered at the hospital. Photographs from the Institute of Design, — Chicago: So for Barthes the really radical thing is to relegate historical, political, biographical, personal, or whatever content of a given photograph to the realm of dull convention.