::j

,:\.

i -

.t:

:

.aJ:

iI-

."-

a.r

?.f

L-\f\

.1\

S

t

"G-,lmi*i

r-ra! T-\ t {_I ne rnoiofrapnN,'Ianipulated

$tddcobuh

responsc was vhrt his friend Ezn Pound called the Uattograph /3917)

11071. Based on a sen€s of mirron, Coburn photogaphed rhe subiect(a pereon or object) cast anidst the possibitiw ofan infinite oumberofreflections. The result lE ekin to Cub;t portraituft, and broke rhesu.face literalness ot edlicr photogrephy. His portralr of Pouod. inparticular, sccmcd to speak to precisely the spirn of the nodern forwhich Pound, with his own intercst io Vonicisn, wa, calling. For oncethe most mod€rn medium ofthc zns could rcflect the most modern of

In manv wals, of couree, thc photograph had beeo maaipulatcdfrom irs inception, aod cenainly the combination prinrs of Rejlander,single prints built up frcm the u* ofscveml ncgatives, points towrdsrhe larcr developrnenrs ofphotognphic colag€ and monrage. We canfind*amples ofboth forns in rhc dinetcenth century Situilar\', LouisDucos du Hauron's use of wh.t h. calcd trusfomisn' in r88eestablished the use ofdistonion 6 a basic m.thod to alter the litcrdappeannce of thc subject. Even thc nuch vaunted Rayographs'disowred' by Ma Ray arc effectively reruns of rhe ?hotog€nicdrawings ofTa.lbor We co point to oth€r samples in thc period, butperhaps what distinguishes them fron their twenticth centurycounteipffts is prccisely rhar they la.k a ndi.al philosophy, a pereisteotqucstioning ofthe means ofreprcseotation that was to b€ basic to th€

B.giDning in the rgoosw€ see a scrics ofphotographers who beginto both qucstion photog.aphic pmctice and rclate thci conce.ns to themoderrist iesihetic beginning to make itself felt in painting andlitcrature. In this view the photograph is not concerned with mirroring

103E|Lisit'q

A".er '€ru '4rr - : ig

a I'teralworld, for that is merely a surface appearance, ard feeds into a

larger mrthologr ofverisinilitude The PhorograPh i*o he seen as the

sue ofa radical aestheric, as much Psvchologi.,l is Political; a ff;tique

ofrhe dominant ideology and thus a crucial form of rePresenmrion

Drawing on the same sources es Eisensteins radicaltbeories on crncma

and filn. a new vicw of the photograph energed Much of rhN

developnent, as we might expect, took place in Revolutionlry Russia

and in rgros Ge.manl,, where the i$umptions of.ePresentatiomL arr

were aligned with a dncredited and corruri bourgeois ideolog','.

Rejecring the idea of a coher€nl and unined sociaL space' such

photographers sought to disrupt general assumptions as to how w€

srructure an a$umed natural'world, rnd in the Photogrrphl ol

Constructi*m and rhe ph osoPhv ofasr,zzrzr (or'making strange )se \ee .une or ' r . mo.t dvnu:c rrd rudicr i re r l t '

Alihough int€rradonal in signiiicince, rhe rootr .f Co. stru.tivism

lay in the rgri Russian Revolution. lt sought an art apPropriate to the

social and political ideals of rhe new order and, b! imPlication,

questioned re.lism as a mode of representation El Lissitzls (Eliez*

Markowich, r89o rgar), a Ru$ian photogfuphet,;s c€nral to its

approach. A qualified architect, his caree. in R!$ir and Germrnv

reflects the major concerns and achielemcnt ofthe ftolement in the

period, especial\' in rhe photograph. He knew Nlalevich and Tathr'

and in Berlin net Kurt Sch$',tters and Herberi Bav* h 1919 he

creared the cover for the r i.^l F t.-A,y a d had examples ofllis

XYd,

l

vork included in th€ climacri€ photographic exhibition Filn tzd Foto,

which reflccred many of the 'nw' photographic concerns a*ociated

wirh the nan;pul.ted ;nage.Tb. Coi$fu.t / Gs2i 'roal (a seif ponrait) is a centfut inage for an

uodertdding of tb€ Consmrctivisr maoifesto The imagc leca.ls

Lissinky's knowledge of dchitecture (as a constructor), bur equally

cquates th. photographervith thc figurc ofthe engineer' Both 6gur€,

build and design the basic structures of a new sociai order But the title

has lreer rcverberations, for this is literallv a manifesto on the way

we do not interpat our wond so much as construct it (or h2ve it

constructed for us).Itthus seeks a radical revision ofour own terms of

rcftrence and, Iike a political postea visualy sPe.kr our to a radical

point of vi€w. The multiple image interacts with the viewer on a

number oflevels and deliberately ask us ro re2J it in an achve context

Like much constructivist work, ir r informed bv a brash, almost

aggressive, energy, appropriate to rhe revolutionary spirit of change it

seeks to .eflect and tap. The head in the image has a dominant

presence; calculated and knowing, it looks d;.ecdl ai borh the viewer

and the world it seeks to construct. Equ,Iy. rhe eye is placed at the

certre ofrhe hand. enphasizing rhe.elation berween the inreledual

ad the physical md once again underlving the Porent signifionc of

the dtle. Theunityis tulrher suggested by the *cle' rhe compass' rnd

the exdples ofmodern g?ology. The photograph is a suPerb examPle

ofa revolutio.ary spirit instilled into I Programmatic image which

refects a multiple subject mattei ks economy of meanidg, very rnuch

a maner ofdesign, is as nuch corstructed as thc social and political

worlds atwhich it directs its attention.L;\nzhi ,m,ge. are nrl of such dvnmrc rel,rion'hrP' Jnd

mearings,ju" as the,v oft.n sugsest a scnse ofbuilding. The emphasis

is on an awareness of the terms ofrepresentation, mucb as we 6nd io

ihe rh€atre of Brecht. Figuas 6ll the fiame, often wirh a low angle

which suegesrs rhe 6gure as dominant and in control of its

cnvi.onncdt mrh.r thd passive and rcccptive. Lissitzky s world ; one

of action, and ft images esiablsh a visual $ology to reflecr his

' A frimd md associate of Lissitzlg! was the Painrer and

phorognpher Alaandr Miklrailovich Rodchenko G89r re56)- Also a

Consrructivist, he abudoned PhotoS.aPh) in the re4os for abstrlctpaotine Like his ftiend, however, Rodchenko nadf ad equalv radi.al

phor.g-phy ap.ble of -fl€cting

the social change he sought His

inae€s hac a bold md abras;ve eFect, and the came.a distorts the

mqie io ordcr to enphasize the pcsence ofthe 6gu.e- Onceagain the

focus is on a self-conscious Picnlring. so ihzt rhe reader is aware ofihe

imase; st!at.Fe\ and le&n' accordinglt lrgure 6U rl-e frame rngle

'h"i m d;.oned, wirh rhe eult rhar rhe Perpecrrve on rling r'

sen s both ndicrl and chalenging. In Rodchcnko ConsnucliviltprincipLs mergc vith Futuist tilucs, cesting humrn fuutls amidsr .gcomctry of $rrounding stluctuli Gddr, lhcs, p.tt.ft) 1' p.rr ofthc fargu dy.rtnic tb,J ;' thc ir,oderr. Piotuc @itb a Hn (r%o) Iro9)ha6 r g?icrl ndical point ofview. Thc po* is dominur ad rcflctsthc dtcnt to wiich thc tidc is Enccrcd in thc imagc. Liltc thcphotognphu, thc muicio is sc€n as a pionec/, uothcr oamplc ofaCons6uclivilt making his v/orld. But this is dso .bout ned for ryrcvolution.ry ideal to mat! it!.lf hcard. Ar mucb I postcr a 1photogtaph this trk E its placc within a radiczl pubJic rcnduing ofpolitical philmphy.

Constructivjsn .st blishcd a strid.dt sd hiSl y iadicrl stylc. ksought to conGontnthcr then r! !sur. thc sFctrtor, od its brah,ndbold confguntiom stil h.vE ,bout drcm . &tsh!6s which d.nicthcn Friod contort. Lik Rodchcnko, thc wo* of Gust vc Klutds,Scrgry Scn&iq rld V.Jvrr Stcpaoou Ed.cts m ..sthctic elrclydistinct &otrl tllt ofrnyninct .nth-ccnturyp&drsoE- Th&wo* isa vibmt rnd knowing r'.dpulrtion ofdr iorgt bzsed on a dcclendpoliticd od rocial pcrspcctivc.

Although dot r communist nor . Ru!5i4 the Hungdian-bonLasz16 MoholrNrg/ G895rga6) rcfl.ts a sinilrr concem witl drephotognph rs pan of. new mcens ofpcccption.' His wod< io Balinin thc rgros od hir rssociation with thc Bluhau! ac 6ugge5tirc ofhspcdigrec as a mentor for dr pcriod Ar rbstact p.intcr bcfoc hcbccamc iatcrcstcd h photography,tusbook Painnng Pbotogl4br Fihn

G92t nflcct his udcrstaoding or trE image. Moholy-Na$. soughtwh.t hc tcmcd drc '<:ativc utilizrtion of n* pcrceptions udprinciplcs'in which photognphy% to bc a'ptlscnt tion l,'t'rrtll€rthan ! copy ofnrturc'. Whca.s nost pcoplc 'baw r vid ofrh. mrld&ting Gom tltc pcriod ofthc EoEt Fihitir stcm-€ogin€', *+r.t hewE tcd wri a photognphy (rrd a paindig) basci upon 'chaagedconposition'l !,rincipLs' fiE fron taditionzl v:lucs. An csay from1932 cntidcd A Nd lffEMcnt of Visiori kts 'cight lrictics ofphotognphic visiorl which pcrfccrly cncapsulate the cotrfict b.trena pariw and rctivc usc ofphotognphic space. For Moholy-Nag} Allirtdprct4ions of phot%Ephy harr hithcno becn inf,uenced byd|€ acsdrctic-phifocophic coo.rpt th.t ciroms.rib.d painting'-apositioD Eacctcd in thc larying clains of .bstnct scing, 'd.cls..in& as wdl as 'dw', 'int nsif,d', pcnctrativc', 'simulancous', aad'distoncd' sccing. Thc act of lookins i5 Eld. problcnlric, md thc actofphotogrlphing actiit i! i6 powE to.hege rh. tems ofpcieption.AB e'ns insEumcnt of vision', thc cu@ dlos aawarcness ud prcgmmatic of 3.chg. Thus Moholy-Nagy seks .resolutely nodo gnphic smrctur!', pan of the g€neral and ndicalapproach which chanctcrized Colittuctivism.

rro !kd6 noholrn slelLr6y.l92A

Moholv-Nagv; 'q'le r' howevrt

''b"-"t' 'f \'' *;"'

- -*rs. A. i*n *of rh. red;ca. landrhequesr:onrng hnimage'hJve

an enrsmitr. qu.lity whlch resisr" anv rnempr ro simpLto rhem ro a

--; - ";..*, ot belef. Aba"e thP St"aahaS Calk'\ tta"\ i\

almosi po*modern rn the procedure' J'd mern;nss rt \usgecrs Jr

E J.rtar't rrot, which evrn now <ems dr|n'ult ro rccognize "

beiondnsro rqzs Both thesee' t rb l 'h *errc 'or per 'oe'r iv*and hinr

- . " - - i . ;* ' "* . , ' " *hrch corfound' oLt i r iemP'ro read them

Iircrally and )inearly. The effect n to achi*e a sense of ontuflelie 'n

*rlsi." n -

rr'"i*r ''

*hrch the rmase i' nor on\ nrdr 'rranse

but insrst. on is d,tlcrence f,qm 21 everydal uot'd 'nd

rhe erPected

conwnuons of phorographic rePrelerhtion The im'ge' $ork

through rhe jMaPosiuon of rhe obvious 'nd

rhe uldPecred rhe

Tr.lHprocMr! vaNrPULAr.o'91

"R,! '5-

clichtd and thc radic.l, ro produce a *ri€r of vibranr dd drnamic

Moholy \rs1 qperimen'ed wirh rh€ pro.e* ofp;.!re m. bng r$eI rr wrh pnture ialans H;s .phoropl2sr;k

.i -u,g*

,* .,.qampie. Dur hr phorogams (am.m-ten, imagc, bi\ed on TJbo, ,caror),?e process! lase issues distinct from thc socialv basedrnv*tiq"rim" of Con,trucivi!m. Indeed. ,\e phorognn, e.r:bl.h JDndg( beMeen rhe rwo orhcr dominant fr;srtc mowmenr. or rheperiod, Slrrealism and Dadr- Both h.d an innu€nce on his wo.k andwse insrrunenrai in opening up the nodon ofavraz enn rc

^ form of

plrdogruph) whnh mak6 use ofrn mr$r) ttui,s psychotogic.I!*,'F":

'l thF rcnrexr, o€ phorosnpher concemed wirh r

pqycrcrograr peGpcct w sou8hr an imag€ry whrch p,ctured rheI he ,mage l@

'o b. giKo *, ro an zm of Fee

se:E:D: ind

mdtiple ssssrion, not the crctul pronins ofpsvchological srares of mind as s€ saw in rhe woik oi f;r exa;de.

Diane tubus and Roben Frank. As the Dadaist poet Tristan Tzaraanounced (in rgzu),'The photographer has i.vented a new methodihe presents io space an inage rhar goes beyond it... "

Tzara wote rhis for an intoduction to the Russian-AmericanMan Ray's (r89o 1976\ Raygrans, a vetsion ofthe phorogram andrh. caloq?e which contioued the aft.npt to create an element olstrangencss in the mosr common of objects. A Ra/ Rztogtun t\rrt h^saboutita dceplv enigmatic pcsence.It creates adiscrete and enclosedspece with litde refercnce to the vorld of everyday sight, suggestingfragments of a drcamlike inrerior photographed by chance. ManRayi work in photography and pantiqg in New York and Paristhrough to the 19aos is central to the 'tradition of the nanipulated

ln many wys his work crystalizes the problcmatic of makingstrangt. lnsomeofhis imagesthe.oncept isredu.edtonothingmoretha. a pla)'ful artenpt to surprise; in others the use ofthe fenale isitsefproblematic ;n relation toh[ underlying aftitudes andapproach,rhe images exisd'g as litde more than the realization of Ray's smalfotasies. Similarlv the Ralograds, likc the solarisations', suggest anelene.t of trickery They relate ro very basic p.occsses, but they.laimfor themselves enomous significance.In the end the srrcnsth ofReyiwork is its humour, as in the wd.J-know Le l/iolan,1 lhga (1921), iowhich a female model ('Kiki') has two 'f' curlicues superimPosed uponherback. Th;s is both a commeot on the Fftn.h painter Ingres (a keenamareur violinist), aod on the academic tradition and values Rayattacks. However, although the intent n on the play' on the shaPe ofthe violin, that very apect underlies the wav R1y aPproaches thefenale form (as it does the view of women in nuch Sureaiistphotographv). Like Glzr lzarr Gglo) tu2l, the me,ni'gofthe imageis based on a visual pun the unexpecred ju\tapos,tion ofdisparate

elements -but beneath the humour remains awon,ns face, and it is

this ihat isthe obj€ct ofMan\ pla/rlnes. H; choser name (i.e Man

Ra, u,as ai appropriate choice for the knd of phorography he

Other images by tuv rereal how manv of hn PreoccuParionsinvolve everydayobjects. Maa (rer8), for etample, x a hand-whhk He

t,l<es common things md transforos them to the level of nFh oricons of a lager human condition. The photograph assumes a

mctmorphosis of meaning. Ray ;s thus rhe Photographer as both

Dadaist and Sunea.list, as much .ligned wirh Tristan Tzara as he is

with his fnend Marcel Duchamp. His most radicrl inag€s Play ioto l

laget vocabulary of the sureal in which the psychological ; basic ro

their €ffect. Surrealist photograPhy, in thai sense, is besed on an

.ntirely difeftnt ind* of neming from ns lirerat equilaleni lts

imagery is giv€n or'€r to an alternative inner world in which all is

ininitcly er"andable and changing- Ard yet Surealism' ds su.h, has

an anbivalent retationship to the photograPh. To make sonething

\ureal' denands the anempt to find thar condition' so that on€

lircrallv constructs d imaee for its €fecr rather than ;ts subsrance

Mar i{ay, like Lissirzlg, Rodchenko, and Moholy-Nagv opedv

manipularcs the :m4e ard the phorogrrphrc'pace: .on'tructin8

deconstructing, cuning up, and fmgmenting tht prinaryterms ofthe

photognph;. spac" in order to suggest other levels of meaning and

iienificance. Othere wil merc1y distort in order to make th€ir Point'Bill Brandt's nude series, for *arnple, while raning orher questions

about the deDiction ofthe female body, dongates and distorts the bodv

as if in a fareround nirror' ln other contexts the surcal is esrablished

in terms oiwhat has b€en dircctly photographed Thus Cartier

Bresson and Atget (much celebrated by the Surezlists at the rim€) can

be s€€! as sur,'€alisrs, er"en rhough th€y do not maniPulate their

rmrees; 'ather, r l -ey 6nd r ' le condrr ior rn rhe -

ene i tsel f

PaJl of the di f ferencern rheir approrh : . rhe errent to uhich the

photograph \ugg$rq , Iarget Phi lo 'oPhi . . l quetroning ol iFJbje ' r \'r",.'

"r *f.-*. The phorogrdpi-' ol rhe lrlan Futun'r' Arron

Giulio Bragaglia (begun in r9tr) of fisues noviog hav€ somerhins of

this oualitiabout rhem. Indeed, to conpare them with rhe inages of

Multridgc is to sense how radical rhey are They are close in sPirit and

approach ro Mtcel Drchanp's Nudc Derendihg a Sta;l.atr lt9'r)

-h;.h, l;ke F.rn"nd l,eg.r's contemporary painting'- signaled a new

awarenes of the figure in motion and space Etienne Marevi

chronophotographs of fi8ures noving-blurred and s€miabsrract

pafterns-tvece the vieryoint of much ninet€€nth-cenrury Phoro-s '?Dhv vr: thcywernrd€'1 rhe r88os ,no are abn nottoMul

E.i..; .,* r .,riu'ar"a visual srudie of hrman movemcnt b:r ro

the nodernnn ofDuchamp and RaY.

The nineteenth centuv saw a numb€r ofdeliberate naniPulations

ofthe inage, but it is the twcnti€th.entury which sees the rise of the

manip a;d imag. proPer as Pait of a sustained aesthetic' ofte'

involvirg an actit, even aggmsive aPproach to the imag€ Ljke

Dainten workins wirh the techniques of montage and collage'

ohoroe,aphenhr. . cut rp rnd renangeJ br ic rm:ger) ror orstru ' r r

r , "" . i " r -* . 's .

Thi nwnrrc. of p l o 'o monr"ge i ' d i 'Puted

ibcrw.n Rao"l Haus-, 'n and lohn He"t tnr d ' bur r t r ' r rq e{ect

which is significant Hannah Hoch\ C,t u;/h the CaAe Kalfe (ryt9)

Iu3l is ro edtyexanple.sA colage ofd6Pdare material' this Presentsa series of photographic images in a series of diff€lcnt PqsP*tivsbound bv omnon themes- Hoftver, it .annot be read in Iireral or

ndatir; relms; nor can itbe reduc€d to rhe sun ofits Pdts The word

DADA doninates, of course, and ihe d\ of g?eface and im'ge

incrcases rhe imPcsdon of fragmentation- Although indi'idu'l

gta$ beads rl 6 a ciotoeraPr

in.g.: :rxrd out. ther can.or bc .nrde ro yicld thei. mean;ie \\,e.r.nor. ,s lln.r. cur rhe image Ui[h ir! frrgnenrc.i siru.ture indunderlring .mics m, ir reflecrs rhe mood in Eutupe one r.ar rfte. rhecnd oi d,c Fi . r tUbr ldWar

E'nersngi;on rhee{rcmisn of Dxdi.John H.riilieki Gser $.,61produ.cri ort oi rhe mosr :usuined ,nLl ri.hesr bodl ot \,\urlmoniaee. thi..enn,r| Workngfronr r de.h.ed lcti u,insponrion, hcu.ed hi: :r,rgc! ro oiier in.reasingh ;iri.i.al crtriqu€. of NrziCern,rnr: \ \ 'here: . Hainah l loch rnd Rror! Hrusma.n soLght toundeirnide tr,ern,ns through the u:c oithc imrionrl. I ha(licld rscsrhe rbsu,d ud drc ILL\r{f'osing ofditrcrent clements in ordc. ro deR.reand crpo:e. Hr perepective turns the p|oiogriph inro a blend ofthe

tC\-

.1,'

i::tr;rjej:political essar and the po[ii.al carioo. or cancrture .{j ju.h Inthe tradlrion of Hogarth and cilkN as i. ri"r oa hi! D,daijrconremporaries, He&rfield creares a sooderirXr roren! li:ual. eror; .

"h, .hJur\ . .eem., \ : , (or , . r . r1. ,"o . , , ; . . , . , , . . .ol irs chosen targei. Like the rhotographer Enyi. Btumenfeld rnd rhe,rrj* Ceorge Grosz, he ses the imagcs nd iusr io

-;t;.ize bur to

ridicule falsehoods and polri.,l touer. Bur :lrhough the .ol;t;.rhessage dominates ir cannot be reduced ro: sinstc.tie.:

Hnttuh, the B,tt.t\ Finitua ibr eramplc trgljl 1r4t t! r..iren.palHe&tlield The tide (and rhe ier ai rhc boftom of rhc,fuger reitrs ro. ope I b\ Hernrr t i ,e|nc

"- i o . ' . . t - , ' , " . , . . . i " t , . "alrvays makes a counrry sffong, burter and lard ontr make people i.tAgainst the absurdiry ofrhn claim Heanield conniu.ts a wirheingsarire on iis inplicarions ifbe[eved. The moniage.reares jts eR;.rthrcugh rbe ue of eraggeration. juraposiiion, rhc uk of rheuncxpected, and lisual h)?erbole, bur slso rtrcugh a wondertulanention to dettl which gives rhe message a r:ch ri;uJ densin: tn rheab enceo' , r"hunerrhep"t .or ; . r ,n h . ; r . , . l . rn " .hb. ; . . . , .a felst ofold iron objecrs, chains, 5ike iiancr, quri. bolrs. The babrl - -w'onDrirofrrolda\e,r teJ. : . .n. ,e d r ,or . i , . , ,o1. f l i

acure aitenlion to deiail wnhour rcducing rhe cs:enrirt mcssase. irbasic to Hcarrfeldt approach Here, ior cxrmpte, hc iohpo!rd5 rhteiTect of the msl i. rclation ro rhc wa]lpap€r (r!;th ,ts Drftern .aswasrikat and rhe porrrtr ot Hitler on rhe s,all, natchcd br rhtL ' :U|Jnl"dd| t ioaol lheembroraeredcu'hror.^ 'cr l iothe. rhan Hindenberg. ThN is a faftilr of!arr;ot! indecd. {r or..Lnitdnt and subde, this quinre$enriat Hem6etd image rel,in: ir.etlect.lts extreoe rierpoinr ftoves beyond rh€to.ic to adensjn rvhichpJ-. er r r : r a

'ocr J ano ror. l .onr*r ofrhe kr. ,d \ve wortd J, oc;r-

wnhJonarhan Ssift and .r'lexander PopeHearrfieldt ap!.oach hxs esrablished an importanr rnditbn ofthc

photographic montage used trs poliricat saiire The densin ande. orom, or hr. appro, . h hr. bpen rol lowpd bL t-e 81., h.bo,o rr . -Kennard. A consistendv trenchanr reader of ihe BrirNh scene. h,!Cn1;'e M rt;bt, made i^ ry9o, turns rhe lvagon in Cons tablej Th? ]t.1I/zn jnto a nissile launcher, as pa( of a protesr ro t<eep crusc nissrte:out of England. Equally. hk D..fedet/ to D,art GrE,) stosr rhcexceses of the (rhen) dms lace betveen rhe US-\ and rhe L'SSRKennard has an incsive st)le, and i rerv nuch a confrontarion,t disr.as hs recent Rr;tzria work reveals: a stldrofrle m\ rh ofEnglantl rndes!ablishment power

lf the streDgth of such mo'tage is the;r jmmedirdl ;o lheirwealqe$ is the limired conrext in which rhev esrabhh thei. nea.ingand cffect. Other uses ofthe montage (and coltagelrsrr from the ove.dv polirical and sarirical jn order ro sugeesr r

j

philosophical underpinrung to their vision, and offer delinitive ;h,gesof a penasivc condition associated with rwenrleth cenmry )ife. lnEurope much of this has been influenced by such philosophicalmovements as Exist€ntialism, and bv the work of Kalka :nd Freud.Herbert Bayer's (r9oo 8) Lonelr M.bo?abzr Gq,) trtsl is such uinage. Through irs play ofrhc unepected ard the absurd this echievesa poeti. density, in which dark humou gives way to a visual equiv,lentofa lrgcr condition: ennui, alienation, and looeline$ withio an urbanrealiry Thus it plays upon a ldgcr symbolic significance ro creare ahaunting and disquieting atnosphcre.

In a similar nuncr, although to very diFerenr eods, tuchardHamilton (rgrz- ) in his rg56fu'tuhat i' ir rtal hala /odat\ n.aa !.difrM|, tu a??ea/iag? lr!6) poses the question in the tide as basic to themeaningofthe inage. An obvious satire on suburbia, thisextends theirony ofthe Americu photographer Bill Owenson niddte clas lfestyles. Haniltof, exhausts the signiGers, taking them to the limit ofrheir efecq u .ffect so overthe-top as to reinvest them with culturalsigniicance. Then; a rich play ofthc banal and rhc blatant, bur all asput ofa critique ofa way oflife, ofmental aft;ndes, notofa politicalsubject as such. Th. humour belics rhe concern with lone\aod empn

lives ofthe kod we would associatc with the rvork ofle€ Friedlander

and Di'ne Arbus, for etamPle.Heurfield, Kenn*d, Bavea and Hrmilton otr€r exmples ofrhe

phorog ph u.ed to mrkc $P(,nl .rrrrik The vi'ual space i5 nide

ile rr;L of a .erie' or 'trateq,e"

devored ro puttins r'ro\s ! )rrirical

me$?ee. Orhrr monrases rdd.oUrger) however' clerre rhetr effect

[,o- ih. ,**p*r.d .o-,ng rogether or d:fferent e]'menrs without

anyobro*. .*"q" o, , .d inq ofrhe rmJge Gingo Hsawt\ ALj 'u

t l i7 i , lor qamPle. an imrge ruch "hmd or rs t ne ut one

anbiaa.l€ot ddd compld.lt bames the reade n selrch olanvnarntNe

neanine. Unconnected elenenrs, some photogriphic, some not, have

beenasimbledin a random geonerrv and presentrh€nreh* x afit-

accodtti, ^n

ol'iect, both in their oM terms (for they consh$re'

r'"*"* ,t-^g", -

.U;ct), and es the object of our see And this is

rhe po,nt. fo! h.rely phcing rwo obje.r or imrge" together {1< wrlh

any rwo rvordst , rcates th. porcnt i r l for mcaning rnd I rer

rc[tionship between readcr and image- O,Jcrl is thus d Plar on the

nature ofthe object and mean;ns, for everv'thing, in an individual ;tate,

can be rccognized, md yet in the Pattern in which rhey ue presented

thcy demand a no form of recognirion ed a new kind of anention.O/7?a nows us back into a thre.-dinensional world and rccalls us torhe play bctwcen irmgc md object which is dF basis of the

Fhotograph. AI is calculatcd, cchoing El Lisirukyi Th. Conlnsturwhile equaly lookjng toqards thc colg.s of the Arneri@ a'tist

Robcrt Rauschenbcrg in the r95os, ud ro the concePtual gmes of

JasperJohns in thc sane decade. Ironically, the more we look at this

ob.ject, the rnore it g.ins in meaning and significdccVictor Burgin, a British-born phorographer, has played a cenral

role in the .ontempor.'y deElopncnt of this tndition As mu.h a

critic as a photographer, hs Th;nAing PAaloqtuPh) lr98t which h€

edited, uodersco.es the theontical aweness which informs hr rvork

ihe inplications oflinguistic theory Pr]choanalvsis, and semiotics for

rhe way th€ image rnust be understood, in aI i$ conteats He

cons.iously manipulares the in,gc ac.ording to a declaftd critical.elationship to thc Eader vhich is chdacr.lisric ofthe postmodemperiod. His ftferences to Brechi end Benjmid suggest his liame ofreference. He denounccd thc notion of'moments oftrurh's c?rettam)stification as the notion of autonomous creaouo'. Ofrre at NiShl,Na , Ge86) I5l .eflecrs his critical posirior. This is a doious inagewhich spe,kr to a postmodcmist self-conscious auareress of irsmultiple terms of rcfercnce. The rigbt-hand side ofthe Photog.aphfeatuJes rhe inage ofa f€male ofice-worker at a fling cabinet. Behinds a second figurc, which we rccognia as raken Foh Edwa.d Hopper'spainting Wd at Nieh. The sqdzed pastiche of Hopper's paintingesrablishes both a ooint of contrast and a b;torical xnd socialperspective on the nature and convention ofthe oiicc as a pla:e of.vork and cultural insriturioD. k also raises signincant questionsconcerning the nature oftechdoiog and communicarion. The lefthand side of rhe imagc otrers examples of an monlhous rypolog)asociared with th€ computer The file', like rhe figure, i;, in its

nadirional sense, now redundan! new sigiiliels have replaced theold,to caate a new realiry And yeq rhe image asls, horv can $c representsuch realities in a visud form) The image is, in shod, a Brechtixn essaloD photographic mealingand its relation to 2larger signiiiogrroc*s.Although Burgin h6 abandoned any pretence oi rea-ltsm, hi: rmageexposes as much aboLrt the strucmrcs and relarionships of thecontemporaryworld as any documentary' photograph could.

Burgin's approach n characicristic of nuch posrmodern imagen'which, ln manipulating the photograph, moves hevond rhe nraregiesof politicrl satire and cdicature and uses rhe medium to aseri nsvatidity whilst questioning its tems ofreference. Chr;tian Boltansk

Ggaa ) is another worker ;n this dea. Aotel] a$ are of rhe Pracrice of

rhe phoroeruph, BolLJa.ki . hke Brrqin "<rrbl 'h- r d, t rncr c- ' r : ' r l

.p" ." S.*- . ' t ' .

* ,a. , rd h. . , - ge" V " t - . L t fa 'd" "1

tri,,) G985) Irrsl s chdacreristic ofhis aPProach Thn insnllation

chuse' rLe .m.rse s:r \ r ne$ r .d hc.ghrened s. ; f r . ,n.e A nJrbe-

ofphoroq,,ph. oi . t ' ; td ' . . h,vc oee, " t .ns 'd ner ' fo l :ghr" o rhr

'h; , . . ;d l . no'" . indeed. rhe eF r 'uge'r I ' r -hedr- l ard

series of ca"dles celebriring (and r.meftbering) the ildividu'ls

obotoeraDhed. Bolransk thus creates d sense of.ituil beliel and ihe

i'*d tL '--d -d -l.b-re.

whiht rr rhe srme rime que"ionins ihe

strucrures within which rhe Yerl acr of PhotosrxPhl accrues stitus

and neanirg. Ths insiall.rion extendr rhe ff;ticil concern of

contemporary photographv to a nen seriousres:, nhilsr ilerting us n)

rhe pre*xce oithe im!ge in its anthroPologicrl trs $eI as Psrthologica]coni*ts. Rat;o thrn suggestingthe €nd ofthe Fhotograph rs a merns

ofrepresentation, Burgin2nd Boltanski snt ni newsignifiurce The

manrp, l l ;on h. Ph^tog rPh rhl .onr 'nu. o n r-rcr u rn th '

"rrength, . f the ph"roErph rnd,F relJrron ro rhe qot l :n $hr ' h sr

lire. As the American Surealist PhotosraPher' Clarence lohn

LaugirlinGgoi 85) proclaioed: 'The ph\sca-lobjed tome. is merel) r

.t"pping 'trn"

to ar inner world . of subconscious drn'es So

much, then, for the mirorimage.