Friday, December 4, 2015

Visual Anthropology: Do We See What We Were Programmed to See?


On a tour of Frank Lloyd Wright’s summer home in Scottsdale, Arizona, I was reminded of one statement he had made about architecture. He said “A wall should define space, not confine it”.  He was the most famous American architect of the last century who pursued the art of designing structures in harmony with their surrounding and the people who live in them. He called it organic architecture.

He was an architect, but also an artist who incorporated social understanding with geometrical shapes. Perhaps that is why he called his summer home in Scottsdale Taliesin west, after the 6th century Welch poet. In Middle Welch Taliesin means “shining brow”, and Wright, of Welch descent, wanted his home to be the brow of the valley in the shade of the mountain.

… As a photographer, the harmony of each photo with its context is fundamental.  This becomes crucial for a street photographer who looks for a story about people in their cultural context. Sometimes called ethnophotography, the goal of street photography is to find the moment, the frame, and the authenticity of a scene that acquires a meaning only when the actual context (culture, geography, religion) is considered.

So, I thought revisiting a book I had read many years ago by John Collier Jr. titled “Visual Anthropology: Photography as a Research Method.” To my surprise, the original 1967 book I knew has been updated in 1986, with the incorporation of more up to date topics and techniques with new photographic media. So, I was delighted to read again, for the first time.

The 1986 version is published by The University of New Mexico Press, has Malcolm Collier as co-author, and a very thoughtful Forward by Edward T. Hall who defines the central goal of the book as describing “Two interlocked processes of observation:  how to get information on film and how to get information off film.” Immediately I thought of Frank Lloyd Wright’s organic architecture: the information off the film can only be the interpretation of the observer, while the architecture is what was captured on film. These are two events (or processes) that are interpreted in a context that involved social, environmental and historical parameters. For example, Wright used the forms of the mountain chain to design the roof of his house. This kept the harmony with the environment but also the contextual authenticity. Similarly, a photographer recognizes a scene as representing a story, interprets its immediate implication for a photo and depresses the shutter. This is called “manifest interpretation” in psychology. Then, when the picture is printed, there are others who look at it and interpret it their own way. This is called “latent interpretation”.  A successful photo will have a high correlation between the manifest and latent interpretations, since the photographer would have contextualized the story of the photo just before clicking, and that manifest interpretation would closely correspond with the latent interpretation of viewers of the printed photo.

Just like the architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright who, in more than 500 projects completed over 70 years, “knew” what would please the users of his buildings given their cultural expectations.

… The 1986 version of Collier’s book being printed in Albuquerque New Mexico, borrows extensively on the South Western Native American cultures to define context and interpretation “off film”.  One such observation made me think for a while. According to the authors “Navajo observers see photographs as literal information and language as coded interpretation.”  I find this description most germane with my struggle to incorporate photography into my literary, written work. Further, my academic researcher background shapes my pursuit for representativeness and authenticity of every photo I take.  Therefore, I understood the sub-title of the book, the “Research Method” perfectly when the authors stated that:

Through photography it is possible to learn to see through native eyes. Verbally we can interview natives and share the realism of their visual context.”

… So, I went back to my photos and chose a few to represent my effort to think of the context of each photo before I depress the shutter, realizing that each culture has its own perceptual predisposition.

Notre Dame Cathedral, Paris
I saw this young woman in the crowd in front of the Cathedral. The beret is stereotypical French, but I wanted the rebellious attitude of youth to come through.



Just outside of Utah
This young woman has no beret, and is not rebellious in her attire. Her long and slim features are in harmony with the mountain range and the trees. I wanted to have her head just touch the clouds. This is a photo of horizontal and vertical lines, along with rolling mountain peaks and passing fluid clouds. It all seems in harmony though.



Prescott, Arizona
Sometimes it is not the form that challenges the contextual thinking but the inversion of the form that gets our attention. In this photo the harmony is disturbed because we expect the posture of the man to be that of the dog and vice versa. It is like seeing a military tank in the middle of rush hour traffic – we do not know if we should worry or just think that the tank was about to run out of petrol and hoping to find a gas station nearby…



San Francisco, California
I saw these chairs in the hall of a building and could not resist taking a picture. There seems to be an interrupted dialogue between them. I thought that there was a couple sitting in these just before I arrived: they were fervently discussing something; it was not just a talk. Then they left but the chairs kept the attitude. Perhaps the context. There was a story there!


… Were the chairs already the “latent interpretation” of the couple’s discussion while I was at my “manifest” stage in taking the photo? Was it visual anthropology or just anthropomorphism?

December 4, 2015

© Vahé A. Kazandjian, 2015

No comments:

Post a Comment