In “Observing Executions”, Di Bella discusses how the absence of photography and videos in state-sanctioned executions dehumanizes the events and precludes the public from being able “to see, to criticize, and to reject” (8) the evidence, or to empathize with the death row inmate. One could say that by rendering the death row inmate invisible, this “otherizes” him.

As the executed are made invisible, the state allows only for pictures of ‘instruments’ – mainly electric chairs, gas chambers, and gurneys (for lethal injections) – and of the ‘place’ where the different phases of the execution are carried out” (181). This personalizes and universalizes the execution chamber in that the viewer may confront his own mortality and powerlessness against the law and punitive power of the state. Di Bella argues that this is a calculated move that reinforces the omnipresent power of the state apparatus to invoke fear in the public, as the instruments of death are undiscriminating and prepared to “destroy the body in the name of the law” (182).

Di Bella’s article raises important issues around censorship as a means for state control. Her essay crucially does not advocate either for or against the death penalty, and the counterpoint she introduces wherein both pro and anti-death penalty groups lobby for allowing public photographs and video of executions (under the assumption that it would further their cause) further complicates our classroom discussions of whether photographs inspire empathy and/or a call to action, and if so, what action? Ultimately, because the government opts to censor such documentation, Di Bella’s essay implies that executions are being hidden from view because to reveal them could undermine the legitimacy of the state’s monopoly over legally sanctioned violence.

The image of the execution chamber is a stark and provocative symbol of state power. However, to think of the state’s power purely as a monopoly of violence disregards another important aspect of state power, which is the capacity to provide public goods. My photograph is a different kind of image of the “instruments” of state power: a swing set in a state park (Cowen Park in Ravenna, to be exact). Like the bare gurney, the image of an empty swing set is a reminder that it is not there to be used by a particular person, but is there to be used by us all.

The intent of my photograph is certainly not to argue against Di Bella’s essay or to justify state-sanctioned violence as a necessary aspect of state power. It is merely to remember that the state has the power to not only take life, but to provide public goods.

One main idea of Elizabeth Edwards “Photography and Anthropology” that I found especially interesting was the idea that using a camera to document a people inherently sets up viewers to scrutinize and generalize about their culture at large. A photo produced through a camera, a precise, scientific machine has the “ability to appropriate and decontextualize time and space and those who exist within it” enabling one image to be taken as truth even if the story behind the image is completely different (8). “It can make the invisible visible, the unnoticed noticed, the complex apparently simple and indeed vice versa”(7). By highlighting unimportant or unrelevant moments of a place or a peoples could completely distort our perception of the culture. The article makes clear how the oversimplification of complex histories, peoples and traditions through photography has supported social Darwinism and colonial ethnocentric ideas.

I chose this photo of my roommate lying down to show how photography can fail to convey the true story of a situation. If a viewer were to analyze this photo as though it were of a distant culture they might think that the subject looks vulnerable, lazy or scared. It might appear that she is lying in a bed. The look on her face could be interpreted in a way which victimizes her. How much of this is true? The photo does not show however that in fact my roommate was only lying down for a couple minutes when she took a quick break in between grading papers. Ultimately this aims to show how the medium of a camera, a machine which represents someones “reality” through a distorted lens, neglects to show the more complicated context of the situation.

In response to John Tagg’s, “The Burden of Representation”, I particularly want to focus on this quote: “Like the state, the camera is never neutral. The representations it produces are highly coded, and the power it wields is never its own.”
I found these words especially striking because I thought of how, when I take a picture, my intention is often times not the outcome. The photograph works in extremes, capturing something beyond an expectation. One will be disappointed in the result of an image if expectations are present. In my opinion, I argue that it is best to go with the flow, both in images and in life. Let the image take its course, being whatever it may be. It will be able to stand by itself in a powerful way with its own unique representation.
When the artist has too great of an intention or expectation, the work will feel forced. The representations produced by the camera form into an objective power. It is up to the artist to interpret this in his own way.

For my image, I include a photo I took at a Dream Dance this past weekend of a light projection. I had no idea what the image would turn in to or how what I was seeing in person would be represented through this photo. Having no expectation, I was pleasantly surprised to view a (in my personal opinion) beautiful image that was able to take its own power to represent itself, without me having to carefully plan the right angle or timing.

“Presentations of torture photos in public institutions such as museums permit a common public viewing and acknowledgement of the crimes represented, shaming the communities that privately sanctioned them” (144).

Dora Apel argues in “The Public Display of Torture Photos” that presenting photos of torture to the public offers a chance to gain a completely new insight on said photographs. The pictures of Abu Graib, for example, were taken to shame the prisoners and reinforce the power of the captors. When seen on a national level, however, these photos are considered atrocious and the people who committed the crimes detestable.

My photograph is of two of my friends, one of which is being out rightly made fun of by the other. Apel would argue that this photo was taken to shame and humiliate the girl on the left, but when seen in the public view, the photo becomes a testament to the wrongfulness of “torture” and instead shame the girl on the right. I would argue the opposite though because I still feel sense of connection with the girl on the right, laughing and pointing at the girl on the left. This may be because it is such an obvious example of humiliation depicted in this photo, it is almost telling you what to feel towards the girl on the left.

“What alone unites the diversity of sites in which photography operates is the social formation itself: the specific historical spaces for representation and practice which it constitutes. Photography as such as no identity. Its status as a technology varies with the power relations which invest it. Its nature as a practice depends on the institutions and agents which define it and set it to work. Its functions as a mode of cultural production is tied to definite conditions of existence, and its products are meaningful and legible only within the particular currencies they have.” (Pg 63).

This week I read Tagg’s ‘Burden of Representation’. In the reading, I was really struck when the author talked about how much influence the photographer and the camera has on the picture, and the world. I also found it interesting how the advancement of technology lead to easier-to-handle cameras, which made photography accessible to more people. And in the reading they referred to it as “giving untrained masses the means to picture themselves.” This photo is a silly representation of how I intend to argue that the photographer has a lot of influence on the photo. They can influence the shot in many different ways including making an impact on the subject in how they act or who they are, or if they are trained or an amateur. Also, how they angle and what they choose to frame/exclude, what they decided to photograph, and who they will show it to, or who will see the photo because that specific person took it.

“Power, in this new type of society, has drained deeply into the gestures, actions, discourses, and practical knowledge of everyday lives. The body itself is invested by power relations through which it is situated in a certain ‘political economy,’ trained, supervised, tortured if necessary, forced to carry out tasks, to perform ceremonies, to emit signs. Power is exercised in, and not just on, the social body because, since the eighteenth century, power has taken on a ‘capillary existence.’” Pg 71

While reading the excerpts from John Tagg’s The Burden of Representation¬¬¬ I took exception to his views on power, its perception to the greater public, and how this unseen power can lead to people into doing tasks that they otherwise might have very little interest in. Tagg views power as a way to belittle people so that they think other people are more important than themselves. This power over others can be achieved in many ways, but the main one that Tagg refers to is to obtain it through education. A school curriculum follows very strict guidelines and also reintroduces children to the system of power that is already present in the home. At home, the one with the power is those who are older, in school that is also true.

The photo I look is of my desk in my room where I get my school work done. The reason why I chose this as my image is because as I was reading this article I couldn’t help but think back to all the classes that I had been forced to take, the ones in middle school about state history, the high school math or science class that you didn’t want to take, and the prerequisite classes in college that are seemingly unrelated to your major, but you still have to take anyways. These are all classes that we might not have perceived to be important, but someone, somewhere deemed them to be relevant and is expressing their power over the social body.

I was very intrigued by Rochelle Kolodny’s “suggested three interconnecting models which have acted in the structuring of reality in images and although in some way problematic, they provide a useful starting point in the argument” (Edwards 8). Elizabeth Edwards writes about our interpretation of anthropological photography from its beginnings. She discusses the archived images in Britain to our understanding of still frame pieces that help us to “understand” and “grasp” cultural differences. I appreciated that her “argument” was less of an argument and more of an image given to us to interpret in our own way, similar to anthropological photography.
In particular, I enjoyed the final suggest model by Kolodny which suggests “there is a a ‘documentary mode’ which is concerned with the world of action in an inspirational way” (Edwards 9). Her claim suggests that our still photograph interpretations are unclear and and have become a large cultural platform to base our understandings. Yes, we are able to see an Nigerian woman weaving a hat, but what are we really undersigning about that place that leaves the photograph to stand as a social or political platform?
The image I took is of my friend, particularly my friend Diane, we were on our way back from a concert and I took a picture of her with some balloons she found before entering the bus. Diane is from France and we laughed about how she looks very American and how we can add her image to and English textbook back home showing parities and the American lifestyle. THe image, in my opinion, completely argues the claims made by Edwards and displays cultural understanding and using images as a social platform that gives us cultural understanding. After living in America and Seattle, I have completely changed my perception of the american culture and people. The photo of Diane was laughable to us because we have preconceived ideas of parties and cute outfits. The photo I chose and the story that goes with it fully describes the the process of anthropological photography and how we are interpreting it.