At the end of my last blog I wrote that selfies are
seldom taken when you feel bad. Usually it is so that photos are taken of
themes with a positive meaning; themes that are more than simply neutral let
alone negative. Selfies, and by and large photos taken of yourself (and of
other people not being you), don’t say: “That’s me ...” but “That’s me!” This
is just an instance of a common characteristic of much photography. As Pierre
Bourdieu analysed so well in his famous book An art moyen (A mean art), “You don’t photograph what you have
before you all days” (p. 57). Or rather, that’s what many people think. Of
course, what is “normal”, and so what is not photographed, depends on your
point of view. What is everyday and ordinary for me, may be a piece of beauty
or an object of interest for a tourist! The old door of my barn that almost
falls from its hinges and urgently needs to be repaired may be very attractive
for a passer-by. As Bourdieu tells us: “The tourist or the stranger are amazed,
when they photograph everyday objects or persons in the setting of their
regular activities” (ibid.). Who did
say that a thing of beauty is a joy forever? It depends on your standpoint.
This makes clear that what is considered mean,
average, ordinary, common – or how you want to call it – is not as mean,
average, ordinary or common as often is thought. Just that it is so makes a
thing meaningful – or most of the time. It says that the object or activity
concerned is a routine part of its setting: It is so well integrated in its
surroundings or flow that it is not conspicuous any longer. You need to be an
outsider in order to see it, or the object or activity need to be taken away or
stopped in order to realize its significance. Holidays change your feeling for
what is photographable, to express what Bourdieu says in other words. This is
also the case in another sense. Poverty is
seen and felt by the poor and they feel ashamed to see it on a picture – and who wouldn’t? –,
but tourist make such pictures, because they think that it is so picturesque ...
Lately someone told me that I make pictures from such
special positions, implying from such unusual, banal or ordinary viewpoints. I
see it as the compliment it was meant to be. My view on the world is not innate
but something I have learned during my education as a sociologist and
philosopher, so it is something everybody can learn. Being as it may, what is important
is that we learn to look and that we realize that not only the exceptional is
valuable but that also the mean, average, ordinary, common etc. is. For isn’t
it so that the exceptional can only exist because there is something we find
mean, average, ordinary, common etc.? That the exceptional is shaped by the
normal? Even more, if the mean, average, ordinary, common etc. wouldn’t exist,
we couldn’t live, for just these – so the routine – give what we exceptionally
do and what we positively value as an exception (but also what we negatively
see as exceptionable and reprehensible) its foundation. Maybe the mean,
average, ordinary, common etc. is the most meaningful of what we do. In the end
we need to park our car somewhere if we want to visit a restaurant.
Reference: Pier Bourdieu (ed.), Un art moyen. Essai sur les usages sociaux
de la photographie. Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit, 1975.
1 comment:
Hello Lee Woo. Thank you for your comment. However, I have problems with this definition. For what then is the fundamental difference between a hero and someone addicted to drugs? Moreover, in view of this blog, heroism is something banal. And can we say that? There is some truth in it in some such interpretations of the views of Arendt and Zimbardo.
I have also written about being a hero in my blogs. See for instance http://philosophybytheway.blogspot.nl/2011/03/hero-in-your-mind.html
Thank you for your comment anyway. H.
Post a Comment