KCI등재
사진의 담론과 역사의 담론 = The Discourse of Photography and the Discourse of History
저자
발행기관
학술지명
서양미술사학회논문집(Journal of the Association of Western Art History)
권호사항
발행연도
1999
작성언어
Korean
KDC
609
등재정보
KCI등재
자료형태
학술저널
발행기관 URL
수록면
117-130(14쪽)
제공처
소장기관
The purpose of this thesis is to compare the discourse supporting the objectivity and truthfulness in photography and that constituting the truth in history and to analyze how two discourses are upholding each other. When a historical fact is mobilized as a ground for the truthfulness of a photographic image, we are faced with a paradox. For history and photography are both narratives the objectivity of which is not self-constituted but depends on the discursive formation. History and photography both belong to the positivist system of knowledge which operates with the assumption that it reconstructs the reality in an objective way.
The meaning of the photographic image is also supported by the historicity of its codes and the historical ‘facts’ coming from other sources. It is with the help of the apparatuses that lifts the photographic image to the level of history that an image becomes a record of history. These apparatuses are the codes endowed upon the image, or the discourses of historiography. However, when the objectivity of photography begins to be doubted, the mutual relationship between photography and history is jeopardized. But the suspicion about the truth and objectivity of photography is raised on a much basic level. The objectivity of photography was critiqued by Roland Barthes when he argued that the photograph is neither transparent nor self-evident entity but a sign saturated by culturally given codes. According to him, the meaning of the photograph is inherently unstably floating but language text fixes it.
On the other hand, in the realm of historiography, there are heterogeneous rhetorics in it but they are truncated for the sake of positivist record and only ‘facts’ remain. Such a things occurs by rhetorically emphasizing the fact that “such and such things really happened” which Barthes has called it an ‘eventhood.’ Instead of dealing with facts directly related to the reality, Barthes treats them on the level of signs. All the historiographical efforts construct history by making the events in history as something that really existed. This means the history needs evidence. The biggest irony here is that in order for the status of the photograph as an evidence to be firm it should rely upon another system of evidence, i.e., history. The interdependent circular connection
between the history and photography exists in an irony in which both are upholding each other in a vacuum. As the status of the photograph as an evidence is unstable and unfixed, the attempt to explain history with the help of the photograph can occur only locally and its ground is always open to dispute.
What matters here is how to reconstitute the photograph as an object of critical reading. It can occur only by revitalizing the heterogeneous rhetorics of photography rather than reducing them. The photography of history is not only meaningful as a record of important historical events belonging to master narratives, but as records of seemingly minute but important details. Indeed, we need a different paradigm than record or evidence. To accept the photograph as evidence means that the elements residing outside the frame of the photograph yet determining what is inside it. We have to concern ourselves not only about the content of utterance but its form and strategy. Therefore what is given to us is not just an image but a discursive formation that channels the meaning of the photograph.
So, when we see history in the photograph, we have to focus on other dimensions of history, i.e., the history of the very activity of the record making, the matter of what technique and form of photography have enabled such records, how such records have come to earn credibility and truthfulness and to what audience they address. But the official history that we encounter in a text book or in a museum exerts a discursive power on the monads of history unstable and ambivalent an
서지정보 내보내기(Export)
닫기소장기관 정보
닫기권호소장정보
닫기오류접수
닫기오류 접수 확인
닫기음성서비스 신청
닫기음성서비스 신청 확인
닫기이용약관
닫기학술연구정보서비스 이용약관 (2017년 1월 1일 ~ 현재 적용)
학술연구정보서비스(이하 RISS)는 정보주체의 자유와 권리 보호를 위해 「개인정보 보호법」 및 관계 법령이 정한 바를 준수하여, 적법하게 개인정보를 처리하고 안전하게 관리하고 있습니다. 이에 「개인정보 보호법」 제30조에 따라 정보주체에게 개인정보 처리에 관한 절차 및 기준을 안내하고, 이와 관련한 고충을 신속하고 원활하게 처리할 수 있도록 하기 위하여 다음과 같이 개인정보 처리방침을 수립·공개합니다.
주요 개인정보 처리 표시(라벨링)
목 차
3년
또는 회원탈퇴시까지5년
(「전자상거래 등에서의 소비자보호에 관한3년
(「전자상거래 등에서의 소비자보호에 관한2년
이상(개인정보보호위원회 : 개인정보의 안전성 확보조치 기준)개인정보파일의 명칭 | 운영근거 / 처리목적 | 개인정보파일에 기록되는 개인정보의 항목 | 보유기간 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
학술연구정보서비스 이용자 가입정보 파일 | 한국교육학술정보원법 | 필수 | ID, 비밀번호, 성명, 생년월일, 신분(직업구분), 이메일, 소속분야, 웹진메일 수신동의 여부 | 3년 또는 탈퇴시 |
선택 | 소속기관명, 소속도서관명, 학과/부서명, 학번/직원번호, 휴대전화, 주소 |
구분 | 담당자 | 연락처 |
---|---|---|
KERIS 개인정보 보호책임자 | 정보보호본부 김태우 | - 이메일 : lsy@keris.or.kr - 전화번호 : 053-714-0439 - 팩스번호 : 053-714-0195 |
KERIS 개인정보 보호담당자 | 개인정보보호부 이상엽 | |
RISS 개인정보 보호책임자 | 대학학술본부 장금연 | - 이메일 : giltizen@keris.or.kr - 전화번호 : 053-714-0149 - 팩스번호 : 053-714-0194 |
RISS 개인정보 보호담당자 | 학술진흥부 길원진 |
자동로그아웃 안내
닫기인증오류 안내
닫기귀하께서는 휴면계정 전환 후 1년동안 회원정보 수집 및 이용에 대한
재동의를 하지 않으신 관계로 개인정보가 삭제되었습니다.
(참조 : RISS 이용약관 및 개인정보처리방침)
신규회원으로 가입하여 이용 부탁 드리며, 추가 문의는 고객센터로 연락 바랍니다.
- 기존 아이디 재사용 불가
휴면계정 안내
RISS는 [표준개인정보 보호지침]에 따라 2년을 주기로 개인정보 수집·이용에 관하여 (재)동의를 받고 있으며, (재)동의를 하지 않을 경우, 휴면계정으로 전환됩니다.
(※ 휴면계정은 원문이용 및 복사/대출 서비스를 이용할 수 없습니다.)
휴면계정으로 전환된 후 1년간 회원정보 수집·이용에 대한 재동의를 하지 않을 경우, RISS에서 자동탈퇴 및 개인정보가 삭제처리 됩니다.
고객센터 1599-3122
ARS번호+1번(회원가입 및 정보수정)