The first chapter of Sturken & Cartwright’s “Practices of Looking” is titled “Images, Power, and Politics,” where the authors argue that visual culture is deeply intertwined with issues of power and politics. Visual culture is somewhat of a tug-of-war between different groups competing for control over certain images. The authors state that “the power of images is derived both from the shared meanings they generate across locations and the particular meanings they hold in a given place or culture.”
They use photographer Weegee’s work to illustrate the ways images can be used to reinforce dominant narratives and ideologies. Weegee’s photographs were not just objective records of reality. His subjective choices created carefully crafted images that worked as documentation, but also showed insight into his beliefs and cultural biases. One of their biggest arguments is that images are both documents as well as powerful symbols, full of meaning. They not only document a moment in time, but more importantly, reflect the ideologies and social climate of the time.
This made me think of Dorthea Lange’s image of the “Migrant Mother,” which became a powerful symbol of the great depression and the hunger and hopelessness it brought with it, and reflects the social climate of the time.
Sturken & Cartwright discuss how images are powerful enough to spark political action. The photograph of Emmet Till, mutilated in a casket, became a powerful cry for public and political action. Things like violence or innocence are strong visual symbols that people relate to on an innate, subconscious level.
They discuss how photojournalism is vastly different than it was 75 years ago. With the majority of people carrying a camera on their person at all times, and the rise of social media, photojournalism can be mass circulated in an instant. This shifts more power into more people’s hands.
I found the section titled “Representation” interesting. The authors define representation in terms of visual culture. Representation helps us to analyze and understand an image, taking into consideration the context. The still life painting by de la Porte at face-value just looks like a table with some fruit on it, but looking deeper and taking the context into consideration, is a symbolic representation of peasant life. The example of Rene Magritte’s painting “This Is Not A Pipe” helps to illustrate the idea that representations aren’t always true to the things they’re representing. Representations are shaped by social and cultural norms and beliefs and help us look past the literal. Sturken and Cartwright point out that images can be both informative and expressive, working as both allegories and documentation.
The section titled “Vision and Visuality” discusses the distinction between vision and visuality in terms of visual culture. The authors define vision as the physical capacity to see, but visuality as the way vision is shaped through social context and interaction. Different social groups have different ways of interpreting visual images, and these ways of seeing are shaped by their positions of power or social class. I found the example of the large photograph of the child killed in a drone attack extremely powerful because of the child’s innocent face. This photo was able to draw attention to the inhumanity behind drone attacks and delivers a powerful political message.
The last section titled “The Myth of Photographic Truth” questions whether photographs are objective or subjective documents. The authors argue that they’re not truly objective, citing the ease of altering images as the main reason. Programs like Photoshop, and now AI, can create false, realistic-looking images in no time. I just read Samsung explains its ‘fake’ Moon photos yesterday about Samsung’s “fake” moon photos. Samsung is using AI called “Scene Optimizer” to add details to images taken of the moon that weren’t actually there, which is being publicly criticized. It really calls to question if we should take photographs as real evidence or truth. Maybe software that digitally alters photographs should embed a digital watermark in the image, describing how the photo was altered.
The concepts from this reading can help web developers and designers create websites that are visually compelling, as well as culturally sensitive, inclusive, and equitable. These ideas about images and visual culture will shape a lot of my future decisions as a web developer. Web designers can use the power of images to create engaging sites, but need to be aware of the potential for images to reinforce dominant narratives. By being conscious of the images we use and how we use them, web designers can help make the web more inclusive and equitable.
