Fred Ritchin's After Photography

        In his work, Fred Ritchin discusses the power of photography and the power over the individuals who view it. Interesting to me, Ritchin describes the difference in photography and in portraits as we jump from analog into the digital world. When looking at analog photography the ability to portray anything other than what has once happened, becomes super difficult, if not impossible. But thanks to this digital age, we are able to sort of tell a story of the future with images of the present, wielding the power to change the world. 

        The first quote that caught my eye was, "there are those who have photographed the stone hitting the water... there are those who focused on the ripples that the force of the stone hitting the water produces... there are others who profoundly mistrust the depiction of either stone or ripple" (146). Yes, the quote is paraphrased a bit, but here is what I take away from it: in the first part, Ritchin depicts photojournalists who use photos to describe an event. Then, photographers focusing on the ripples are documentary photographers, or those capturing the impact of events on people or places. And lastly those who focus less on the stone or ripples, those who will include a deeper meaning hidden throughout with the use of staging. I find this quote so interesting because it accurately depicts one event and three completely different ways of passing along a message. Often I think of photography as sealing a single moment, when in reality, from Ritchin's perspective, there isn't a single moment, yet an undefined amount of alternative ways to tell the story, or build a new one.

        Secondly, another quote I found interesting was, "if politicians, actors, and other people in power knew that the staged event would be exposed by a second photograph... then the subterfuge would be less worth-while" (147). After this quote, Ritchin goes into describe a scenario where politicians use $500,000 in air conditioning and photography equipment to help portray a world changing outdoor conference with world leaders. Ritchin focuses on the people in power, but from this and to his point, the photograph itself becomes unequivocally more influential and powerful. Like Ritchin, I question what better causes $500,000 could have gone to in order to truly change the world, but as for the politicians, actors, and powerful people that use their ability to paint photographs, the influence comes as viewers fail to see and blindly accept messages put in front of them. 

        Lastly, one more quote that caught my attention was, "the subject of the photograph is often voiceless, unable to contest his or her depiction. Often the photographer barely knows the person, yet the image could be used to define to person or to represent a certain theme" (150). Related slightly to the previous quote, photographs come with an extensive amount of power. I mentioned earlier how it is not a single moment in time that is frozen by light, but instead an accumulation of built perspective and meaning. The information presented in photographs are not longer analog memories but instead digital canvases that individuals use to tell the story they want. Like stated in this quote, images of people or events are usually not presented with clear cut messages, but instead arrive voiceless and lack the ability to describe themselves. The interpretations we have of these images, and the definitions we give people and events because of them, can either be positively constructed, or influentially dangerous.