| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
090587
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
One of the most poetic and mysterious photographic projects of the post-1945 period, Fukase Masahisa's 'Karasu' [Ravens] is here examined in relation to the photographer's entire body of work, his writings, interviews with his family and friends, and consideration of the influence of loss, melancholia, and psychological instability in his art. Although Fukase remains associated with the 'personal photography' movement of the 1960s and 1970s, it is argued that he was, above all, a committed experimenter in photographic narration and self-representation, factors important to the reading and understanding of 'Karasu'. Claims that the ravens in Fukase's images symbolically represent a life now regarded as tragically sorrowful and ill-fated are evaluated and partly challenged.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
105284
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In the 1850s photography was a nascent technology. Linnaeus Tripe's photographs and the Burmese Konbaung polity were perceived to be new and/or novel. They were defined and interpreted in relation to things that were established and better-known, as Tripe sought to understand photography and culturally locate 'Burma'. Tripe was not simply a 'colonial' functionary, but an exploratory photographer attempting to classify the subjects of visual representation-mainly Buddhist architecture-and explore photography itself. He strove to be systematic and methodical in his 'mapping' of locales: he photogenically captured specimens of architecture, which could then be compared with specimens from elsewhere and located in a 'Linnaean system'. The lack of clearly defined expectations gave him room for experimentation in his delineations of unphotographed locales, which meant that he could ultimately decide for himself what was worthy of being represented. It takes a concerted effort today to see his photographs as they might have been seen in the 1850s. They can be interpreted in myriad ways and a limitless number of meanings can be ascribed to them, reflecting the ambiguous nature of the medium. Interpretations are shaped by archival contexts and microhistories of circulation and presentation; when viewing the prints today it is important not to posthumously infer Tripe's intentions and motivations without adequately considering the circumstances in which he operated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|