preview

Relationship Between Photography In Literacy And Picturacy By Jon Kracauer

Decent Essays

I feel as if we have asked the question, “Is photography an art?” and “Can photography be considered a type of language?” many times in this quarter and we still cannot get a direct answer. Additionally, the truth of the matter is that we will never really know if it is because people have different opinions of what is art. For instance, in “Literacy and Picturacy,” Heffernan explains that there is something real behind every photograph. He explains that photographs allows to see the story that is being told instead of simply reading it. Earlier in the quarter we also read “On photography” in which Barthes claims that photography is not an art because it is simply an imitation of reality. In other words, he is saying that photography is just …show more content…

In the beginning of the book, Kracauer has classified the properties of the motion picture in two. The first is the basic property. Here, Kracauer explains that the basic property of film is very similar to that of photography. The reason is because they both try to record and imitate physical reality. However, the only difference is that films record the world as it is evolving in times whereas photography remains the same and frozen in time. Furthermore, he explains that it is this ability of the motion picture to capture movement that makes it good for recording events and protecting them. However, it cannot be considered as making use of the creative potential of the medium. As I was reading this part of the book, I realized that maybe this is what Barthes meant when saying that photography is only an imitation of reality. Taking of picture of something is not considered art because it does not take much for the photographer to take the photograph. However, I still believe that he is wrong. There is so much that goes into taking a photograph. For instance, lighting and the position of the camera are very important factors in

Get Access