|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
The Photograph's essence is to ratify what it represents. One day I received from a photographer a picture of myself which I could not remember being taken, for all my efforts; I inspected the tie, the sweater, to discover in what circumstances I had worn them; to no avail. And yet, because it was a photograph I could not deny that I had been there (even if I did not know where).[2] Barthes echoes the familiar notion that photographs are not prevaricators: they speak with resounding, if not unassailable, probity. Their truthful reputations grant them the power of conviction in courts of law. They are potent enough to precipitate chilling fear in the victims of a blackmailer who wields them as sinister weapons. Even a simple snapshot can testify with the veracity of a legal document: "Every photograph is a certificate of presence" (Barthes 87). Wherein lies the force of this photographic witness capable of extracting Barthes' reluctant assent?
Approximate Word count = 589
Approximate Pages = 2.4
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|