Film, images & historical interpretation in the 20th century for those who have a general interest in history that draws on photojournalism as primary evidence, and films based on historical events.
Use of Images
Loading...
來自 University of London 的課程
镜头不会说谎
54 個評分
從本節課中
Introduction
We will explore the issues associated with the use of images as a source for historical research and consider a number of examples where image manipulation has been uncovered
與講師見面
Dr Emmett SullivanSenior Tutor
History Department, Royal Holloway, University of London
Clearly, the skills which were required to interpret a photograph or
a film are not bespoke purely to those two visual mediums.
And, in fact, it has been part of a broader canvas, if you forgive the pun,
of historical research to look at images, and the importance of images, over time.
We can gain a great deal from seeing what was represented to a culture or society,
and how that, in itself, reflected on their opinions.
You can get it through maps, pictures, drawings, and the built environment.
Now, consider the importance of the portrait, the painted portrait,
very staged, looking directly at the object,
the subject itself, to be surrounded by belongings,
or in a particular setting which is significant to the person concerned.
That will allow an individual to make a statement
through the way they that they're pained.
But also the historian to go back and interrogate that for those meanings and
help shed some light on their status and their perspective in society.
Or consider cartoons, being able to take the Mickey,
make fun of politicians of the time, to satirize them,
to make comment about their status beyond simply
a deconstruction of their speeches, their debates, or their law making.
All of this has been used widely by historians, and
will be areas of interpretation which are familiar to the public.
And it's true in the 20th century as much as any other time.
We use images from paintings and
other representations to take significance from the particular image or moment.
When we come to any image,
there is slightly a concern about what we are seeing.
If it's painted, we know that it's posed, we know that it's been taken over time.
One of the questions that's been put forward about the use of photographs as
historical record, is what happens the millisecond before?
What happens the millisecond after?
What's happened to the left and the right, above and below the frame?
We are having captured one moment, historically.
And to use a slightly flippant example,
if you go back to Steven Spielberg's film, Close Encounters of the Third Kind,
midway through the discussion, it's raised, well, if there are so
many millions of photographs taken, why have none ever shown a UFO?
Now, I know that's a slightly ridiculous and fictitious example, but
the principle applies.
If you look at, now, the 21st century, the number of images which are taken,
CCTV, the mobile phones, etc., etc.
Yet, key incidences in history are never recorded in that manner.
So, we need to think about the prevalence of the image against what
that image actually means at the time that it is taken.
And I'd just like you to just pause and
think about images which have resonated for you, your own personal histories,
your family, etc., and the circumstances around those.
How much are you invested in an image because of the memories that it triggers
as much as what it actually shows?
Now, I mentioned earlier that, as part of our course doing history,
we consider aspects of the built environment.
So, as well as images and photographs of different types, we can
also start thinking about, considering, buildings, monuments, memorials.
Anyone who's spent time walking along the Vietnam Memorial in Washington DC,
it's very striking, it's very somber, and is of a very different
nature to many of the other memorials that you will see in and around Washington.
Particularly the more recent Second World War memorial,
which might be taken more of a celebration.
So, we can also make judgements about the nature of events by the way that
they are memorialized, and the way that they're depicted through time.
Now, one consideration is how certain images become recurring,
and what I have here is, and if you'll forgive me a second,
is the Eugene Delacroix portrait or
picture of liberty leading the line, so to speak.
This comes from the 1830 French Revolution, and
very clearly embodies the idea that everyone is involved in the Revolution,
including this stylized view of Truth and
Justice through the body of a woman holding the French flag.
And something that will be familiar to millions upon millions of tourists
into New York, which is the Statue Of Liberty.
Again, a gift on the hundred years of independence of the United States, and
another embodiment through the female form of Truth and Justice and Liberty.
Now, those come from two western traditions, and
are celebrating revolution, and in a positive way.
Let's consider something that happened in 1989, and
is again an image that looks reasonably innocuous at this point in time.
This is the goddess of Democracy.
This is built by students in China in 1989, in Tiananmen Square.
Now, from what was intended as a peaceful protest, we don't think so
much of this particular image, although, we can see some lineage and
some continuation of the general themes of the purer
forms of society coming in a non-mail package, so to speak.
It's a slightly odd way of putting it, but just consider it in those terms.
Yet, the photographer that took this photograph is much more famous for
taking this one.
And this can be taken several days apart.
But this is an image of oppression.
This is an image of courage.
And this is an image of determination and hopes of might beyond understanding.
So, here we have an issue where it doesn't take too long for
one theme of linking different images through history
to become immediately changed into something else.
Same photographer, same event.
Very, very different resonance.
