FILMMAKER
The Magazine of Independent Film

FILMMAKER BLOG Blog RSS Feed

Saturday, July 21, 2007
DOES THE LENS LIE? 


Filmmaker Errol Morris is blogging for the The New York Times. His first piece, "Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire," takes the form of an essay on the concept of truth and fiction as it pertains to photography.

Here's how he begins:

Pictures are supposed to be worth a thousand words. But a picture unaccompanied by words may not mean anything at all. Do pictures provide evidence? And if so, evidence of what? And, of course, the underlying question: do they tell the truth?

I have beliefs about the photographs I see. Often – when they appear in books or newspapers – there are captions below them, or they are embedded in explanatory text. And even where there are no explicit captions on the page, there are captions in my mind. What I think I’m looking at. What I think the photograph is about.

I have often wondered: would it be possible to look at a photograph shorn of all its context, caption-less, unconnected to current thought and ideas? It would be like stumbling on a collection of photographs in a curiosity shop – pictures of people and places that we do not recognize and know nothing about. I might imagine things about the people and places in the photographs but know nothing about them. Nothing.


Bookmark and Share
# posted by Scott Macaulay @ 7/21/2007 10:52:00 AM
Comments (2)

 
"I have often wondered: would it be possible to look at a photograph shorn of all its context, caption-less, unconnected to current thought and ideas? It would be like stumbling on a collection of photographs in a curiosity shop – pictures of people and places that we do not recognize and know nothing about. I might imagine things about the people and places in the photographs but know nothing about them. Nothing."

Sort of like watching a foreign film from the '50s/'60s where, not only is it a different language and culture, but a different language and culture from a different time period.
# posted by Anonymous Anonymous @ 7/21/2007 1:46 PM  

 
Except the example you've just given has actual context. You might not have lived the 50s or 60s in a foreign culture, but you have a conception in your mind of what "foreign" and "60's" means. What if you had ZERO context to go on? No genre. No origin. No history.
# posted by Blogger Lauren @ 7/23/2007 4:17 PM  


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?



FALL 2009

Fall 2009 Cover

RECENT POSTS

POINT AND SHOOT
SUMMERCAMP!
OPPOSE THE DEAD CELEBRITIES BILL
IT ALL COMES DOWN
GET SOME SUNSHINE THIS WEEKEND
17th ANNUAL GOTHAM AWARDS ANNOUNCED
CHINATOWN FILM PROJECT KICKOFF PARTY
SUMMER ISSUE IS UP!
CURATION IS KING!
SPOTLIGHT AWARD DEADLINE EXTENDED


ARCHIVES

Current Posts
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July 2009
August 2009
September 2009


blog | back issues | buy print subscription | buy digital subscription | subscription FAQ | advertise | contact
© 2009 Filmmaker Magazine