Intermediate / A Level / OCN Level 3 / City & Guilds 6923 Level 3

The use of words in photographs has changed from numbers and initials scratched onto the rebate, to hand written messages adding to the narrative appearing directly on the print. How has this affected our understanding of the relationship between words and pictures? Do we separate the two, or regard the text as something integral to the final work?

My first calling to be a professional photographer occurred in a New York bookshop in the Wall Street area in 1986. I happened upon a copy of Ansel Adams’ autobiography, and opened it at a photograph he had taken of Half Dome, in Yosemite National Park, a black and white image of the face of a mountain, with a storm cloud above. In the accompanying text, he described how he felt at the time he visualized the picture, and the act of taking one of his more famous images. He also printed opposite the photograph, a letter written to his brother outlining the feelings he had at the time, and how the experience moved him. The combination of his words and pictures led me into thinking that this was something I could hope to achieve; the powerful combination of words and images could interpret my experiences and form a medium to share my vision.

Together in the book, the letter and the photograph had a significant meaning in my life, and their relationship to each other had a unique significance in that the meanings of both the photograph, and the letter were altered in a special way by appearing on the same double page spread. My luck was the moment of inspiration one feels when one discovers a path, one that I have followed for 16 years so far. The relationship between the words and the photograph was a trigger for me, perhaps uniquely, and their meaning was so derived because of my state of mind at the time. Reading the same book now (I bought it) and looking at the same pages, the feeling of inspiration felt by Adams as he describes his moment of creation, and the discovery of his calling, returns me to my moment of discovery in the bookshop, and the start of what has become a quest to examine the relationship between words and pictures.

In traditional reproduction, words and pictures had clearly defined roles in relationship to each other. This took the form of the news or magazine photo, and its caption. In other situations, for example in the context of a gallery of photographs displayed on a wall, the captions can take the form of separately mounted type placed adjacent to the relevant photograph. Notes about the ideas, themes and aspirations of the exhibition are produced on a separate sheet of paper to accompany the photographs on the walls, aiding the understanding of the visual work they compliment.

In all of these situations, the text and the photographs are complimentary; they are to be viewed as one entity, where the meanings of each are interdependent. The accompanying words can provide extra detail about the photographs, eg. the four w’s in a press/ news context- who, what, where, why, when - and explanation in photo texts, where the relationship between the words and pictures is of a more ambitious nature.

The photograph can only be defined and understood in terms of the complimentary language of words. The purely visual themes are evaluated and judged by language, our response is qualified by language, and these words define the meaning and context of the photographs in terms of individual response.

The photograph itself is an object in context, defined by the space it occupies in relationship to the viewer, and further defined in terms of the complimentary language used in its presentation. This is a relationship in a state of flux, as the caption can redefine the meaning of a photograph. One photograph with two different captions gives us two different meanings of the photograph. The caption controls the response we have to the picture presented, we derive our meaning from the implicit trust we have in the combination of words and pictures to illustrate a theme, or a point of view. These can vary, and leaves the photograph without any intrinsic meaning on its own. Can the photograph have a stable, intrinsic meaning of its own, devoid of a relationship from controlling or explaining devices, devoid of context? Or are the photographs we see always changing in terms of their context historically, or of our changing circumstances?

In isolation, the photograph invites definition - we are uncomfortable with an image on a page without context - without some form of coded meaning, or clue to where we can make our start point to understanding the inherent meaning of the closed frame. Our language of definition is through the words we use to define other things. We have invented a technical language to help us define photographs, but have failed to describe the photograph in non verbal forms. This traps us into selecting meanings based on clues provided by notes, captions, etc. as described above, at the same time, covers our discomfort with the image on its own. Nature abhors a vacuum, and so does our cognitive process. We feel insecure when faced with a purely visual abstract form in the space in front of us. We are challenged into defining the space in order to control it, and pacify our inadequacy to deal with the totally abstract. Thus the closed frame, barren and devoid of verbal and written complimentary explanation, is a threat. A narrative is compulsively formed if there is none provided. This narrative can be from our own imagination, and takes the form of an expression of meaning through language - through words. We do not imagine the next frame, or another photograph that could be next in the sequence. We fill the gaps with words, and define ourselves in the process. This completes the cycle of the artistic experience, where we are given a visual stimulus, and provide ourselves with a meaning that satisfies our interpretations. The degree of collusion with the artist is dependent on everything - the viewer and the circumstances of the viewing. If provided, words are a road the viewer can take towards the intended meaning, if not provided (a rare occurrence in photography) the viewer is free to define meaning through the only process we know to reach understanding - words and language.

So are we trapped in our own language? Are we controlled by the photograph’s context and our circumstances into a narrative we cannot escape?

Let us explore the logic of creation further.

Visualization by the artist is a primary tool. The realization of an idea by a photographer is limited to their sensibility to visual relationships that the artist creates or manipulates. Comprehension of such work is dependent on values that are recognizable at the instant, even if at another time the values are changed by different circumstances. Recognition is the key to understanding of work viewed. Looking at a photograph is a new experience, and that new experience is compared with information held as memory. Recognition is a comparison between the self after having seen and compared new information, with the old self before the new experience. The strength of experience affects the storage of the experience, its strength changing it from short term memory to long term memory. This strength is measured by the effect of the experience in the long term. An experience that is unpleasant is quickly forgotten. This recognition of experience and transformation into long term memory requires emotional or intellectual intensity to raise the experience above the normal. The artist is motivated to give us experiences that elevate their work into our memory through emotional triggers, giving us a unique contact with the artist and the work. The successful artist reaches us individually through a relationship via the work. This works both ways, as the artist needs a contribution from the viewer, through persuasion or preparation, whether the viewer is aware of this device or not. These triggers convey the message, and stimulate the response in the viewer.

Words are a trigger mechanism – as well as the dictionary meaning there is a meaning that is not fixed, but shifts subtly with emphasis and juxtaposition. Recognising signals and triggers is a process of comparing similarity or difference based on individuality. Photographs are also a trigger mechanism, for while they have no underlying meaning on their own like words have a dictionary reference, they elicit a response. The combination of words and pictures provides a drama. It is a deliberate attempt to dilute or compliment each art form. The single word has one meaning, the photograph on its own has its own intrinsic meaning - the combination of the two changes the meanings of both word and photograph, and forms a third level of meaning where each element can be viewed as separate, but also part of the greater work simultaneously.

The use of words and image combinations hasn’t restricted itself to the merely political statement, but has been used in sexual political discourse as well. Works by Barbara Kruger (amongst many others) use poster techniques with carefully chosen words and images to attack the viewer. Duane Michals uses naïve storytelling with low tech photo-novellas to gently evoke sexual messages and social commentary about homosexual and heterosexual issues.

Artists like Sherin Neshat use a powerful form of combinations of words and text to evoke the emotional landscape of Arab women. Her Arabic text is painted over the final prints, over the exposed skin, in the eyes of the subject - in very personal areas of the human body, in order to extend and reinforce the narratives the pictures on their own convey.

Earlier, I explained how I became interested in the use of words and pictures to extend narrative. My example was that of an Ansel Adams picture, coupled with a letter to his brother, and how this combination had motivated me.

I have not actually used words beyond first names in my piece, called ‘reveal’ but relied on the narrative being constructed by the subject of the photographs and myself in the picture taking process, and the intersection of that suggested narrative with the narrative invented by the viewer of the work.

Subjects are given the opportunity to choose two locations to present themselves in the context of the city of Bristol, where they all live. The portraits are taken in black & white, together with two colour pictures which provide background visuals. Each person is left with four pictures, which reveal themselves in the city in locations of their choice.

My idea was to challenge the viewers to confront someone presenting themselves through the medium of photography, aware of the photographic process and the eventual siting of the work in a public place. The challenge to the viewer was to decode the images and facts as they are presented, invent a narrative - a life of the person in the pictures, and perhaps, to question their own narrative construction - thereby questioning their own prejudices during the process of their narrative construction.

By not using words, I am hoping to avoid the anecdotal, and incidental, to free the imagination to rely on social conditioning to make these constructed narratives, and in the case of a few (I hope) to challenge their own ideas of how they view portraiture.

End

Further Reading:
Look at the following notes on individual photographers to see my comments on how they used a combination of words and pictures to express their messages.
Hamish Fulton,
Karen Knorr,
Barbara Kruger,
Duane Michals,
These can be found in the web based learning resource at:
http://www.dshed.digitised/reveal