Heroes Not Zombies

The earliest form of photography was the daguerreotype (named after its inventor, Monsieur Daguerre). It was a process which captured images onto silver coated copper plates. It didn’t involve using negatives and every single “print” was a one off. They couldn’t be duplicated or transferred onto paper.

The daguerreotype was remarkable for the accuracy of the image produced. It was sharp and detailed (you could use a 50x magnification lens to look at part of the daguerreotype and see crisp details). Partly because of its accuracy it was initially used as a “scientific instrument” and found in laboratories, but as the technology became more portable the taking of portraits, landscapes and cityscapes soon proliferated.

As photography developed, an artistic intention was soon brought to it. The newer processes of making negatives and printing onto paper, were quickly taken up by artists.

I’m a keen photographer, as I’m sure you can tell if you browse through this site. I’m also very curious about how we experience the world and how we communicate our experiences to other people. Recently I’ve been wondering about the differences between “representation” and “manifestation”.

Just as the daguerreotypes were great for re-presenting what could be seen, I think we often believe that is what we are doing when communicate our observations and experiences to others. Certainly in scientific publication, the scientists are trying to “re-present” what they have observed as “objectively” as possible.

However, as it’s not possible to experience any “out there” from anywhere other than “in here”, there is always an aspect of “manifestation” to the “representations”. Every “re-presentation” involves some “manifestation” of the subjective experience of the person who is making the image (or writing the document).

Maybe in all Art we can see these two aspects – there is some re-presentation of what the artist experiences (including what he or she observes) – but there is always some degree of manifestation too. I wonder to what extent Art could even be said to be primarily a way of manifesting the subjective – a way of a human being making manifest the otherwise invisible, unique, personal experience of the world.

Look at the image I’ve placed at the top of this post. It’s a photo I took in a “beau village” in France. It’s a sign to show that the water here is drinkable. But it isn’t just a sign. Even the way the words “eau potable” (which means drinkable water) are carved reveals something of the creator of the piece. And what about the shell? Why is that there? The shell is the symbol of the pilgrims heading to Compostella. So this is a drinking fountain to help quench the thirst of the pilgrims. That manifests something of the artist’s world view doesn’t it?

Saint-Exupéry said

So how are you going to manifest YOUR unique, invisible, essential experience of reality?