Errol Morris, in his column Liar,
Liar, Pants on Fire, discusses the relationship between words or stories and
pictures. He describes that when we look at a picture of an unknown person or
object we cannot create “true” beliefs about the picture without a caption or a
story. He uses an example of a picture of The Lusitania. Without any knowledge
of what it is we just perceive the picture as a boat. When we look at the
picture with a caption stating that it is The Lusitania we can remember what we
know about the liner and its impact on history, specifically the U.S.
involvement in World War I. He suggests that pictures cannot be fully
understood without words. If I looked at a family photo of a random Vietnamese
family I would not have any thoughts about the family other than the fact that
they look Vietnamese, or even more vague Asian. However, I could make conjectures
in my mind of what emotions they have and the relationships within that family.
I agree to certain degree with Morris. I believe that a picture means more to
us if we know what is happening in the picture or who is in the picture. Also,
I agree that without the words we are just guessing as to what the picture is.
With the words we can know what the truth about the photo is. This photo is not
from a news site or a blog but without a context it does not mean much. It appears
to be a road that only covers half of the hill. Without context you might be
questioning if it is in the process of being fully built. Just from the picture
you cannot tell where it was taken or any other defining factor about it.
However, if I were to add the caption “My Group’s Community Service Project for
an Elementary School in Vietnam” you would start to create some other ideas
about the picture. You now know that the picture was taken in Vietnam, the road
was built for an elementary school as a community service picture. This caption
still does not describe why we built the road or the gruelling process that
went into building it. However, after the caption is added you can still know a
lot about the picture and you know the context and can start thinking whether or
not it is “true or false”.
I really like the way you described concisely what Morris illustrated in his article. Even though I really liked the reading, I found it difficult to explain exactly what he was getting at. I really liked how you used a picture of your own to further illustrate his/your point. Well done :)
ReplyDeleteIt is fascinating how much my thoughts about the picture changed once I read your "hypothetical caption". Great example of Morris' words at play here!
ReplyDeleteI like how you added a picture of your own. It restated the point that a picture needs context. It's true, when I looked at the picture I did not think much of it. I thought "hmm.. looking like a walking trial." However, I was wrong and when you gave me context, I looked at the picture differently.
ReplyDeleteI like your post. I think you really understood what Morris meant when saying "a picture is nothing without any context" by your example.
ReplyDelete