by Marshall Chisholm

Created on: April 10, 2010

"In Defense of Film and Photography"

Several arguments have been posed stating that photography and film are not arts forms unlike music and paintings. While several points have been made to support these arguments, there are equal if not more arguments that counter these attacks on media art. The primary argument on both sides revolves around creativity. Is film and photography creative, and does it bring focus to style of presentation, or to the objects and scenarios presented only.

      Of all the skeptics, the most notable would be Robert Scruton, who poses his argument around the viewer’s perception of film and photography. In Dominic McIver Lopes’ article, The Aesthetics of Photographic Transparency, Scruton’s argument is presented as “any interest we take in photographs, when we view them as photographs, is wholly an interest in the actual objects that were photographed and not an interest in the photographs themselves”. His arguments focus on the primary notion that there is no photographic representation.  What Scruton means by representation is that the subject or object is intentionally relating to what they represent. A painting done of a building for instance is not implying that the building actually exists even if it does. The painting is created depicting a scene that is fictionally competent, meaning it portrays something that could be real rather than a direct copy of something. By this, Scruton implies that there is a creative element to painting that is not present in a photograph. A photograph is a direct representation of an object or scene and proves that it exists, forcing us to acknowledge it does not have any alterations and that we are appreciating the subject of the photo, not the photo itself.  Scruton’s second argument is focused on “style”. A painter can alter how the painting is portrayed by how he or she creates the painting- with colors, brush strokes, alterations to the realism of the subject. A photographer cannot alter the objective appearance of what is being photographed, so it is impossible for a photographer to display a unique style that is specific only to him. This point argues that without the ability to be creative and express alterations and distortions of a subject, you cannot be considered an artist

            There are very obvious holes in these arguments made by Scruton,.

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>