Comments for The ubiquity of the image http://ubiquitat.dialegskrtu.cat/en Dialogue Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:45:49 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 Comment on Images and imagery by Polly http://ubiquitat.dialegskrtu.cat/en/2008/03/04/images-and-imagery/#comment-63 Polly Wed, 29 Oct 2008 13:19:40 +0000 http://ubiquitat.dialegskrtu.cat/en/2008/03/04/images-and-imagery/#comment-63 Good words. Good words.

]]> Comment on The most total blindness by Michael Eckels http://ubiquitat.dialegskrtu.cat/en/2008/04/16/the-most-total-blindness/#comment-11 Michael Eckels Tue, 13 May 2008 09:16:00 +0000 http://ubiquitat.dialegskrtu.cat/en/2008/04/16/the-most-total-blindness/#comment-11 I would argue for a pedagogy of photography based on the priciples of natural language learning -- photography in the language of imagery. When a child learns a language first he learns to hear, then speak, then read, then write. How could the language of imagery be modelled accordingly? I.e. shouldn't the first step in a pedagogy of photography be learning to see, not learning to write (to photograph) which is the last and most difficult step in the realm of spoken languages? Photography is by nature a public dialogue with an audience at large and that preusmption needs to be included in the pedagogy. The images in isolation you speak of are simple artefacts of what Dawkins calls the extended phenotype. Yet they still belong to the public dialogue even if the author has put no thought into how this relationship should be construed. Michael I would argue for a pedagogy of photography based on the priciples of natural language learning — photography in the language of imagery. When a child learns a language first he learns to hear, then speak, then read, then write. How could the language of imagery be modelled accordingly?

I.e. shouldn’t the first step in a pedagogy of photography be learning to see, not learning to write (to photograph) which is the last and most difficult step in the realm of spoken languages?

Photography is by nature a public dialogue with an audience at large and that preusmption needs to be included in the pedagogy. The images in isolation you speak of are simple artefacts of what Dawkins calls the extended phenotype. Yet they still belong to the public dialogue even if the author has put no thought into how this relationship should be construed.

Michael

]]> Comment on A period of idolatry by marina albu http://ubiquitat.dialegskrtu.cat/en/2008/02/28/a-period-of-idolatry/#comment-2 marina albu Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:57:56 +0000 http://ubiquitat.dialegskrtu.cat/en/2008/02/28/a-period-of-idolatry/#comment-2 From my point of view, the period of idolatry evolves/transcendes to a period of self-idolatry, giving all the slef-portraits published on-line by the new emerging generation, by means like myspace-hi5-blogger-flickr and all resembling self-promoting public websites. So, not only that the imange/photograph is part of the daily surrounding, in an external way, so-to-say, but it becomes a habbit, a mean of communication, and, nevertheless, a moral boost, a confident giver, a "show-offy", "turn-ony" cheap mobile of grabbing some attention and dilating the ego. The image is more and more accessible, less and less sacred, has no longer that aura that Walter Benjamin was speaking about, photography is not even plausible anymore, the process starting with a capture and reaching a final point in a poster/an add/a documentary image passes through too many stages to come out "clean", it's purity is deflowerd from the first touch of "Image/Adjustments/levels" From my point of view, the period of idolatry evolves/transcendes to a period of self-idolatry, giving all the slef-portraits published on-line by the new emerging generation, by means like myspace-hi5-blogger-flickr and all resembling self-promoting public websites. So, not only that the imange/photograph is part of the daily surrounding, in an external way, so-to-say, but it becomes a habbit, a mean of communication, and, nevertheless, a moral boost, a confident giver, a “show-offy”, “turn-ony” cheap mobile of grabbing some attention and dilating the ego.

The image is more and more accessible, less and less sacred, has no longer that aura that Walter Benjamin was speaking about, photography is not even plausible anymore, the process starting with a capture and reaching a final point in a poster/an add/a documentary image passes through too many stages to come out “clean”, it’s purity is deflowerd from the first touch of “Image/Adjustments/levels”

]]>