so agree what will she say about AI? Where is the new Susan?!

I'm not sure if I'm mixing up apples and pears, but listening to the painter Patrick Heron referencing Picasso and TS Eliot on the experience of looking at a picture seems somehow pertinent kzbin.info/www/bejne/mpC1dZannr6gnLMsi=-qijsXGFgkLmL4Pn&t=2785

I'm not sure if Barthes considered photographs beyond the most generic, almost mono-syllabic in visual terms, like the photo examined here. I've often been suprised when people find opposite meanings in 'art' photographs. I think it was Joel Meyrowitz who said photographs operate at the level of a pun, which may be his take on Barthes.

I came to consideration of the 'punctum' through a cinema example gien in a Thompson & Boardwell's book many years ago. It's stuck with me that it's the often small, and slightly inconvenient bit of reality that happened during a take; something that catches our eye and punctures the smoothly controlled representation being presented that we were being carried along by. You see it most clearly in on location scenes in low budget films and none in big budget Hollywood blockbusters, as they have the money to re-shoot to get it punctum free.

i am so glad that i discovered your channel, i'm at the beginning of understanding photography, but that's just so interesting. thank you!! have a lovely day <3

Well done. An impressive expose of what presumably was the result of Sontag's embittered envy at the acclaim given to Arbus. While Sontag had huge energy and sweep in her writing it's only when you stop and think it over, drill down into each sentence, that you find it crumbles apart. 'On Photography' is a classic example of something full of noise while signifying nothing, but she had figured out that a bombastic style were what would garner attention and it worked. Most people are browbeaten into respectful silence, but there's nothing really there.

I’m glad you showed the Garry Winogrand clip. See the Winogrand talk with Barbara Lee Diamonstein video from Rice University too. Winogrand, to my way of thinking, is the best at talking about making pictures.

awesome video!!

Thanks man ❤

Sontag is not to agree or disagree with. Her job is to stir your emotions so you think more deeply on a problem. I’m not much of a Whitman fan or Sontag.

Wanted to watch other thoughts on the book before I finish the last chapter. Wow, just wow. This is an incredible recap, and is so dense with introspection its beautiful. Made me appreciate the book to an even greater level.

More deleuzeeeeeeeere❤❤❤❤

This was such a nice and comprehensive review, thank you! I do think that despite the general knowledge, that every picture and even video can be altered, people forget and take sight for reality by default sometimes. (We process sight faster than we can consciously think) Especially with all the ai stuff nowdays, that is a unsettling prospect. Still very relevant despite us „knowing better“ Amazing to think how relevant most of her takes still are to this day, again thank you for the video.

just continue please!

I'm revisiting authors that were influential to me in art school in the 80's - like Sontag and John Berger - and was wondering what younger folk have to say about these 'classic' texts today. I really like your humble approach, and appreciate the links you give. Wish you'd been a prof when I was in school! And where can we see your own photos? Cheers!

the punctum is not the photography in itself but the moment of the nuns and the soldiers. the photographer simply catch it

wonderful, wonderful video.

I am reading Camera Lucida and it is really interesting and at the same time frustrating (multiplied by the facts that English isn't my first language, but French is impossible for me and the book is sadly not translated into Swedish) The punctum seams to be, if not coincidental, something intuitive. Would you say that is a corrects interpretation? If so it makes it really difficult to succeed in photography.

great analysis !

How insane that you appear after I just finished reading the text!

I must say, im a huge fan of Sontag. But I don’t give it to her bout how he talks about the models of Arbus. And I think to understand the firce critic of Sontag towarsd Arbus we need to dig more into DIane as a person and the way she performed as a photographer. because this was in fact; a personal issue. Arbus was a white Spoild SUPER RICH child, and the most relevant works we have left from her are portraits of sufering people during the Great Depression, or queer people etc… the thing is, she wasnt using her photos to give thise people a voice, most of the times she was invasive ; like the portrait of the mother with the two children behind her, she didint care to know anything about the subjects, infact she didnt even knew this woman was a part Native American, she would go to the devastate areas in the usa or wonder around outside bars, and take pictures of vulnerable ppl and then go back to her rich privilage lifestyle. how can you as a cis woman take pictures of queer ppl and then call them freaks? thats not empowering, how can you make portraits f vulnerabl ppl and then sell those pictures in the moma without even asking if its okey? she might not make bad pictures but she dehumanizes her subjects in another way. I recomend to read femenist aesthethics in photography so you can read more about how uncool she was , and also her biography from patricia Bosworth. artist or person, i really cant find a side I like abouth her :/

She was an awful person to many people. Recently I saw a show in Montreal, a large set of Arbus' photo. I left feeling so positive about her work. I sat outside the exhibit for a while and went back. Was is wrong with Sontag.

I learned a lot from this video, thank you! ❤

Was Sontag the original 'Karen'? Arbus was fearless and insanely substantial. There is no equal.

This sounds dubious, but that's my take: Arbus was too good, but meanwhile too straight And even inspired by her "mmmman" (yuck!). inacceptable! after all, Sontag was the Director of the NY queer fem artsy hubris millieux. She has invented this sh*! Great channel man!

Nice video... You explain clearly, and well. I'm not so good with philosophy. but i'll present how i read, which i hope adds something...: i think Barthes' idea of the punctum largely stems from him wanting to put the 'thing' being photographed, back into the photograph. he seems to view photography as quite violently subjugating the 'thing' w/ myth; studium. kind of like a violation (of autonomy) of the particular. so reading the details like you did in your examples at the end, also seems like a violation. that wouldn't be as incisive without the knowledge that Barthes is really just grieving for his deceased mother, & that the book is somewhat of a eulogy to her as well. per Barthes: "The studium is the order of liking, not of loving" means NOT viewing 'loving' as just a superlative of 'liking', but something a lot more personal, &-relating-to-life. basically: he was trying to escape art... to view 'neutrally' / 'personally' to recapture the "that-has-been", which is (literally) in the realm of death, now. i don't do photography, but i understand the impulse to escape art for life. i personally cling to the feeling of growing-with-my-art. i showcase that progress to (hopefully) assert to an audience that the little details along the way are what actually constitute 'me', & that i'm not just what is to be read in my art. i am also asserting that to myself... i hope people will read my art as largely fragmented, & as a messy biography, if anything. i think this all is a huge impetus for every 'indexical' art... art denouncing its own status as art would then be its biggest honor. again: per Barthes: ". . . is this not the sole proof of its [photography's] art? To annihilate itself as a 'medium', to be no longer a sign but the thing itself?" in that sense, there is nothing helpful for photographers in this book. it's a book for spectators, only. ^^

I like that, “the figurative refers to what their kids could not do competitively,” that is brilliant, and totally hilarious.

Goodness gracious, the faults humility is suffocating!!! Don’t be proud of not understanding, especially if you are going to explain a topic to people who love that topic. Other then that you did pretty good. Don’t feel too bad, most people talk out of resentment.

Seems like Sontag was envious of Arbus achieving what Sontag could not achieve in her own field.

I’m so thrilled to discover your channel. I was lacking thorough philosophy of photography analysis.

Watching this was time well spent. I like the way you have an independent mind, which actually breeds its own clarity for you and for me as well.

Absolutely loved the way you express, explain and analyse the whole text with your own insights!

thank you so much for this video !! this book was part of my comparative literature exam syllabus and i struggled so much understanding it. this video cleared uo many things and helped me build an opinion of my own. keep up the good work !!

Great video thanks 🙏

Great video essay. Thanks for creating this series and channel!

Thanks for this! I really enjoyed it!

Thanks--a very insightful analysis of a very insightful book (which I've read and which has influenced the way I approach photography). So tragic that we lost her well before her time. It would indeed be most interesting to hear more recent commentary from her on this and other subjects, as well as more of her artistic output.

I really appreciate this discussion. Very thought provoking. Thank you

Just discovered your channel, that's exactly the type of discussion I'm looking for at this point of my photographic journey, much appreciated. 🙏🏻 I like that reverse motion he's talking about, in some instances, it has the potential to reveal a whole other level of meaning for a specific topic. Knowing why the photographer chose to show this or that, his/her background and how it affects the viewpoint/meaning of a photograph.

I appreciate your efforts at providing open commentary on a subject - and calling on me to form my opinion.

I agree with some of your points that Sontag was being harsh to Arbus in her On Photography. But, we can't denied that Arbus was taking advantage of her subjects. Sure, they were brave enough to show their "vulnerability" and privacy, but they were also being used by Arbus for her fames and political ideologies. In my onion, Arbus was definitely aware of that which might have some connections to her suicide. If she truly wanted to help and show empathy, Photography was not the best tool.

Your takes are always interesting. You manage to keep an open mind while also relaying your own opinions on the matter.

Herein lies Sontag’s deficiencies in her book and her criticism. She was not a photographer. She was married to one. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, it can give the reader an outside perspective on the subject, but, it can also show her deficiencies in understanding some aspects about the medium in my opinion. I also found Sontags critism a little too much at times, but, I just kept my thoughts on it lightly.

I’m surprised you haven’t figured out how she had such great insight into photography, she was married to Annie Leibovitz!

I'm enjoying each one of your videos. Great material and analysis. Thank you!

Is that music in the background yours or have I got something else turned on. It's annoying.

I've read On Photography but you've studied it--thanks for helping remind me that I should put it back in the queue. Winogrand's always entertaining--I'll have to check out that lecture (but next time, please flip through books more aligned with the screen--my neck hurts!)... ;)

Engaging, informative and inspiring. Thank you.

Interesting: thanks! Somehow I don't connect with Barthes the way I do with Sontag. Eg., the idea that a photo of Napolean's brother's eyes is moving or significant because they had gazed at Napoleon seems absurd...maybe even fetishistic. Sontag's concerns mostly pull me in, but Barthe's (admittedly that's based on the little I've read - though I did get on better with Mythologies) mostly repel me. So, good to get this snapshot of this writing. All the best in the coming year!

A shallow darling of NY fake intellectuals, Sontag ended up living with one of the worst if not THE worst (and thus rich and celebrated) portrait photographers of all time: Annie Leibowitz. Need anyone say more?