In Barthes's terminology the 'studium' is an easer term to wrap ones head around than the 'punctum' this is because the studium is a cultural kind of understanding and is less of a personal experience of an image rather than a cultural reading of an image. Barthes relates the 'studium' to 'the order of liking, not loving' p.27 meaning that we see many images we like, that we find pleasant or that we have no real reaction to other than ambivalence. We see these images we 'read' them we get what the photographer intended us to, and nothing more, and we think to ourselves when we see those images 'all right' now what… To answer the question 'now what' is where the 'punctum' come into play. The punctum is the deeper reading or shall I say the experience of an image as ones own, meaning that when a 'punctum' arises out of an image and pierces the viewer it is a personal experience the punctum is harder to define because its such a subjective experience that changes with and through each viewer. The punctum of an image is elusive and fluid changing with every new pair of eyes that 'see' the image and take a different piece of it with them. Barthes says the punctum is often a minor detail of an image often thought of as an 'accident' in the photograph meaning it may be a small detail that at the time that the image was taken was not even 'noticed' by the photographer or (Operator). This lack of attention or noticing on the operators part and calling the punctum an accident is not Barthes way of trivializing it, but a way of celebrating it 'seeing' it and calling it out of the shadows, claiming it as his own punctum.
How, in the image at the top, Arbus's "Blonde Girl with Lipstick" do studium and punctum relate. In other words, what is the studium? Can there be a studium? Are we operating in the "blind feild," (passage 23, page 56-57). Professor Mansoor
When Barthes says there is no punctum in the Pornographic Image this is true. Pornography does what it is meant to do. Its there to please you and thats it. There is no punctum. The punctum for me is that look from the subject or a person in the image that you want to know more about. The punctum is not up in your face it is subtle as Barthes says. Such as the image of Queen Victoria and the man holdong the bridle of the horse. His facial expression is subtle but it speaks with a mytsery. Quickly there is an understanding of that expression which is for me a man who knows his place and what he is to do if needed. Tame the horse if necessary. Barthes talks about the punctum as a prick which is the feeling you get when you start to really see the image. When the image begins to speak to you then there is an understanding.
The studium on the other hand is not like this. With the studium this is all the knowledge attained through out life. Everything learned can be applied. Its not studying to understnad but studying for an overall understanding. For me its similar to being in grad school. I have read alot of things but have not understood things like i have in the past two quarters. Now when i read material I understand more about what I am reading and it is not becuase i was studdying to understnad it. Its because the knowledge that I have gained can be applied to other material. So with this knowledge I can have fuller understanding of what the photographer is tryting to convey and there my punctum can prick me and leave me with a feeling of amazement over one image, maybe more.
The first image at the top of the page captures a person with blonde hair, bangs that sweep across the left side of the forehead, light lipstick, and thick black eye liner that has been applied to the upper and lower eyelids extending out away from the center of the face towards the hair line, but stopping short by an inch. The subject in the photograph is staring straight ahead, but above and past the position of the camera (which is at a slightly lower angle since the viewer can see the underside of the chin and nostrils). The hairstyle and makeup represent a specific time in fashion, although this image could have been made at any point in time. The formal considerations, or the intentionality of the photographer, are what is described as the studium. The Studium is representation, code and intentionality on behalf of the photographer.
Though it is indefinable due to its subjective nature, the Punctum, for me, is the elements of the photograph that cannot be seen or tamed by the hand of the photographer. The image discussed above has elements of this rupture between what is intended and what is “real.” There is a blemish on the subject’s chin. Though makeup has attempted to conceal the “flaw,” the raised skin casts a shadow that implicates its existence. Similarly are the tiny hairs that are growing underneath the subject’s seemingly kept eyebrows. “The real is not passive, its always dynamic and communicative.”
This image, like any other image, regardless of the intention of the photographer or the control exercised in taking the photograph, will always be embedded with the “real.” Those “flaws” will always convulse forth violently into writing. If each photograph says “this will have been” then those “flaws” can act as an allegory for death, that which is unforeseeable, uncontrollable, and inevitable. Though I did not feel a “prick” when looking at the previously discussed image, the photograph was still a painful reminder that “this was” and will never be again. The hairs have been plucked. The blemish has gone away. Everything in that moment is dead.
Kim, thorough definition and description of the studium and punctum. You have a strong, firm grasp of those terms. The following is addressed not only to Kim, who I know is ill, but to the class: pushing a little beyond familiar intellectual terrain, again, a) what does Barthes mean by a "blind feild?" (passage 23), and how can we reconcile this with Barthes claim at the opening of the book that photography is transparency to pure referent, that we look past the medium? Finally, is there a relationship between Barthes "Puntum" and Benjamin's "Optical Unconscious?"
Louise, studying, cognition, information, all these are obviated by the Punctum, no? Elizabeth, how you mention that the "Blonde Girl" by Arbus is embedded in a specific time and place, a cultural framework, but also that it can be "timeless," can you elaborate on this seeming paradox? Also, all, to what extent do studium and punctum overlap in Arbus's "Blonde Girl," in a most contradictory way, to what extent IS the punctum the studium in Arbus? What would Carol Armstrong say?
Studium is a general enthusiastic commitment; what does this mean?, interest. Studium as I understand it is the general liking of a picture, linking our discussion from Tuesday regarding Facebook, we all look at each others photos, some we see without registering any thoughts others, however, keep our focus. It is these images that are regarded as Studium ; there is something about them that can not be defined but seems to captivate us. this liking is strictly superficial though we do not go beyond that general feeling. this general liking can not transition into the realm of loving however. Punctum on the other hand does not necessarily mean you love the image you could in fact despise it but the punctum cuts you, that is to say it strikes a feeling in you deeper than general interest. the punctum may be a mistake in the image or it may be something that strikes you personally. Memory as I see it may be the only way to understand the punctum. In order for something to make an impact on you, you must have some experience with it perhaps not physically but exposure to the stimuli in some manner must have happened. it is upon this object/feeling/etc. that you then expand; whatever it was that struck you is then internalized and applied. Antidotally, I look at a photograph taken by Ansel Adams of Lake McDonald in Glacier National Park and though I have never been there before the water reminds me of my childhood, growing up and camping with my family. the water in the photograph has become the Punctum. I don't particularly care for the picture but the water reaches out and touches me personally. The fact that this photograph contains a punctum for me and at the same time does not interest me is the core relationship between the studium and the punctum. the two stand in opposition to one and other, if I liked the image that would be all I would hold no deeper feeling towards it however the fact that I do possess these feelings render it out of the studium and in the punctum.
The studium is the study of whatever it is that sparks in the personal self as having the importance to be observed. This attempting to observe the world in which we live and to record our experiences to that world is where the archive begins. But this studium is of such a personal nature that if we all, i.e. people, had the same dislikes and likes the studium would not exist. We would find no interest in anything other than what the one beside us liked, thus never attempting to explore or collect the many facets of nature that binds the studium unto itself. The studium is a multifaceted continuum that cannot be harnessed or reined in, for how do we capture nature in its ever-vacillating manner? We cannot sum up what nature is in a sentence so how do we study or even begin to understand the authenticity of it? The studium answers these questions in a feeble attempt and in turn creates the archive. The archive goes on to pursue the ensnaring of as many facets of nature as it can. Through the use of the camera, as a means of cutting and framing, it captures nature in fragments and impresses these fragments upon a plane (paper, glass, etc.) so that it can be studied. But what is cut from nature is only that with which invokes a desire or commitment of study from within our own personalized emporium of interest (the studium); so the archive must go on. The archive must collect and study as many facets of nature as possible so that in turn we may observe those cuts as in a hope to understand the authenticity of what nature is. To understand this vested interest in the studium and in being able to differentiate between that and the punctum I have to include my own images of interests.
*sorry i could not get them up on here, just ask and i can show you them *
My own archive consists of family, places, things, and spaces. I observe and in turn participate in the oscillating nature of the studium and of nature, itself. So the archive continues on through my own practice and in turn is still trying to convey the authenticity of what nature, life in general, is.
Through our participation in archiving we begin to comb through what we have cut from nature in hopes of understanding it and in doing so come across images that for whatever reason prick at the core sensation of what it is to be alive. The punctum is found and it prods, pokes, stings, and shoots at us in a manner that awakens our senses to the unknown, to the sublime. The punctum, in such a violating manner, changes within us our take on what it is to be, to see, to observe, or to what it is we even like. It forces the image towards us so that we are no longer observing it, no longer seeing it, but we are it. The image is upon us, it is us, we are recognizing the authenticity of nature in whatever form it has taken and has been captured in. We are stung, cut, split, pierced, and even left with the residue of bruising after experiencing the violating nature of the punctum. As we have progressed the notion of this response has taken on an even more personal realm, for the punctum is not as generic as the studium it is far more explicit and connected singularly to our own personal natures. The punctum can only occur within ourselves when upon observing we are forced by the piercing effect of the punctum to be changed from the casual observing nature of the studium into the intensified nature of the punctum; of not wanting to look away, of not knowing if enough has been seen, of now not being able to be without that image within our own personal archived memory of sight. The punctum is a scar upon this memory and it is not easily hidden, resolved, or eradicated. Below I have included an image that has found the punctum for me; it has been able to capture the authenticity of nature in a manner that no one else could or would be able to recreate. The tear of the shirt to reveal the man’s nipple as in almost a delicate yet accidental strip tease of his barriers to his true self. He is standing in front of me in a manner of wanting nothing more than to not be seen, but his stance, his clothes, his chain, even his juxtaposition to the tree in the background, they all abandon him in his time of need. His shirt rips and shows a delicate glimpse of his left nipple and below lays his delicate organ of the body, the heart. The trees and sun mock his attempt at hiding his true nature for they root the photograph in the understanding that he is in the now, he is in the “real”, and that he can not have not been. Death will come, yes, but in that moment he was and was not able to not have been and through the studium he was captured and plucked from nature, “convulsed into writing”, and in being produced as a photograph rose beyond the archive through the manner of the punctum.
The “Blonde Girl” is anonymous in that she can be any girl from any time, but through that anonymity she is also and will always be irreducible. She is only ever herself. Once the photograph of her is detached from authorship or recognition, it enters the archive where it will be categorized to fit whichever organizational system the new owner has established (which of course could be organized based on cultural signifiers, gender, hair color, makeup, or style of portrait).
The punctum IS the studium for Arbus because her intention is to photograph the most intimate and seemingly uninteresting differences or “flaws” to deconstruct the standardized and gendered body. She does this by considering the natural framing that is already occurring and letting nature and the real frame itself. Her intention is not to control or hide or tame the continuum, but simply to imprint off of it. That is why the punctum, the prick, the accident, the chance, is the studium for Arbus.
NICE the standard is the exception and conversely, the exception is the standard.....(at the level of the real, not the false categories of ideology, etc.)
In last week's reading, Joselit (drawing from the ideas of someone whose name I cant recall) says that the "sign emerges from carnality--literally carved from flesh--but it retains a stain of its originally embodied state." This word "stain" is interesting in that Barthes' punctum is a kind of stain (spot) that calls forth, lying hidden (with some kind of secret message) behind the curtains of its gracious host: the studium. If the punctum is a spot that wounds, the studium is a kind of "unitary" composition of "things" that ultimately pictorialize, a kind of syntax to be approched by the intellect. Proust said in one of his essays: "Every day I set less store on the intellect," emphasizing instead the "reality" of the senses and the way in which " things" communicate to the senses with a kind of primitive semantics--lodged in the senses. It seems that BArthes has positioned these two concepts as dialectical, and this reminds me of what we've been dauling/dancing with for the past two week: Body and Sign.
Perhaps rather than dialectical, which would suggest some level of opposition, the studium and punctum form a structural couple. Each owes its existence to the other, relies on the other. The term "host" is useful. As is the notion of the specter, the ghost, about which we spoke in Tuesdays class. NICE post
Damn it. Lost my post again, crashed. And I liked that one too much. Fuck. Like some kind of sand mandala. gone. Fucking absurd. Must be Firefox. Sorry Prof. Mansoor, a new one's coming.
In last week's reading, Joselit (drawing on another writer's work whose name I can't recall) says "the sign emerges from carnality--it is literally carved from flesh--but it retains a stain of its original embodied state." This word "stain" is interesting in that Barthes refers to the punctum on more than one occasion as a spot or mark. If the punctum is a kind of spot or stain, then the studium is the patterned drapes or quilt composed of "unitary" lines and contextualized in the intellect, by the intellect, for the intellect. But the punctum persists. It will not be pinned down like a patch. It also resists "naming" as naming would indicate that it is of the studium: language, sign, education, culture. But "hwere" and "when" is the punctum? We know, at least according to Barthes, that it is of a "particle" nature, that it is a detail or a particular accident that belongs to the quasi-mystical state of existence. It calls forth, but silently. It beckons as it punctures, but the puncture occurs where? Is it contained within the image or is it more of a phenomenon that occurs "between" the beholder and the beheld? Barthes seems to hint that it belongs (or rather, happens) to something that we've already been touching on in class: the convulsions in nature occuring all the time, the abundance of minutia that manifest as a form of written message, though a "secret" message of sorts. Proust says in one of his essays, "Every day I set less store on the intellect," making room for his concern with the minute essences of "reality" and memory lodged deep within the senses, often recalled (resurrected) years later. Barthes' talk of the punctum's temporality as something that (despite its immediacy and its "already-there-ness") is often recalled later, seems to echo Proust and his concern with something "beyond" the intellect, a place that he felt he had to go in order to "resurrect" his life (or, life itself). Only a Body can be resurrected, as only a body can greet death. There is something about Barthes' talk of Death as well. Is there a kind of "deathly" quality to the punctum? Only body can be "slashed," as Barthes says it, with punctum.
Stadium for me is what you see, but may not necessarily remember, whereas punctum is the catalyst of remembering. These terms can be problematic as they relate to memory, and as I am not meaning to associate them to memory (though it is not a far association by any means). Stadium is that broad catch all of interest without passion or specific sharpness (“acuity” as Barthes says pg. 26). Barthes also connects the stadium to the photographer or Operator. The stadium allows the viewer or the Spectator to see the processes the Operator uses through the wills of the Spectator. Here we see the angles, the posing, the make-up, the mask, and the motionless.
The punctum is the detail missing in the mere stadium. It is a chance appearance that slips by some and sticks on others. The punctum can not be defined as it is so contingent (much like a photograph of its referent) on the photographer, the viewer, the environment, the anything, everything, and nothing. Barthes calls it an “addition”. I see it more as a catalyst changing something from potential to kinetic, static to active. Even in Barthes own language (i.e. “shoots out…like an arrow”, “pierces”, “pricks me”, “bruises me” *pgs. 26-27), punctum is a noun that elicits a verb. It exists in so much as it makes something happen, stir within the viewer.
The “blind field” relates back to the simultaneous death and immortality found within photography. What is caught in the moment of the photograph is referently determined to never be exactly the same (identically dead) before the photograph is even developed. Yet, the subject that emerges from that one ‘dead’ moment will continue to live on. The subject will not emerge as such without the punctum, and thus the blind field will die along with the moment captured and framed. On the contrary, when a punctum is present, the blind field is born. This blind field is a space with which the subject is given subjectivity outside of the photograph. The viewer creates stories or sub-plot to his/her/its existence. In reconciliation, though photography is the transparency of pure referent, the blind field is the opacity of materiality. Let me unpack this a bit. When I think about the blind field, I think about glancing out of a window. You see through the glass, but so much of what you see is contingent (i.e. your optical abilities, the thickness/opacity of the glass, the weather outside, the length of time allowed in a glance). Sometimes, in a glance, we imagine we see more than is referentially there and think nothing of it or are forced to double take when we ‘see’ something out of our expectations. Here there is a difference between seeing and looking. The photograph/stadium is already seeing but the viewer, in exposure to punctum , is glancing or looking. This glance formulates the blind field that we assume is there, but is really just applied.
The punctum reminds me of Benjamin’s “Optical Unconscious” as far as it is something that slips out. The difference is found in who and how it slips out. Barthes’ punctum is not something that will slip out and poke every viewer, but certain viewers in certain photographs with certain ‘fields of experience’ (or what a person has previously been subjected to). Benjamin’s “Optical Unconscious”, however, slips out to all viewers even without them knowing.
The announcement of a stadium is the punctum in Arbus. The make-up is clearly seen and even referenced in the title. The hair is placed and the head is stiff in posture for the picture. This look above the camera seems crafted, something out of the traditional real, yet in the real women are known to wear make-up and fix their hair….some writers have even announced being woman is performance; it itself is a mask or an application of make-up.
This is an out-of-the-box aside: Being female has become this mask, being seen or being touched in this light has become being female. A woman without make-up or fixed hair is more shocking than one covering up any natural or chance occurence within her body. Because females have allowed themselves to be viewed in this way for whatever period of time, it has become what female is and even what male is not.
In Barthes's terminology the 'studium' is an easer term to wrap ones head around than the 'punctum' this is because the studium is a cultural kind of understanding and is less of a personal experience of an image rather than a cultural reading of an image. Barthes relates the 'studium' to 'the order of liking, not loving' p.27 meaning that we see many images we like, that we find pleasant or that we have no real reaction to other than ambivalence. We see these images we 'read' them we get what the photographer intended us to, and nothing more, and we think to ourselves when we see those images 'all right' now what… To answer the question 'now what' is where the 'punctum' come into play. The punctum is the deeper reading or shall I say the experience of an image as ones own, meaning that when a 'punctum' arises out of an image and pierces the viewer it is a personal experience the punctum is harder to define because its such a subjective experience that changes with and through each viewer. The punctum of an image is elusive and fluid changing with every new pair of eyes that 'see' the image and take a different piece of it with them. Barthes says the punctum is often a minor detail of an image often thought of as an 'accident' in the photograph meaning it may be a small detail that at the time that the image was taken was not even 'noticed' by the photographer or (Operator). This lack of attention or noticing on the operators part and calling the punctum an accident is not Barthes way of trivializing it, but a way of celebrating it 'seeing' it and calling it out of the shadows, claiming it as his own punctum.
ReplyDeleteHow, in the image at the top, Arbus's "Blonde Girl with Lipstick" do studium and punctum relate. In other words, what is the studium? Can there be a studium? Are we operating in the "blind feild," (passage 23, page 56-57).
ReplyDeleteProfessor Mansoor
Louise ORourke
ReplyDeleteWhen Barthes says there is no punctum in the Pornographic Image this is true. Pornography does what it is meant to do. Its there to please you and thats it. There is no punctum. The punctum for me is that look from the subject or a person in the image that you want to know more about. The punctum is not up in your face it is subtle as Barthes says. Such as the image of Queen Victoria and the man holdong the bridle of the horse. His facial expression is subtle but it speaks with a mytsery. Quickly there is an understanding of that expression which is for me a man who knows his place and what he is to do if needed. Tame the horse if necessary. Barthes talks about the punctum as a prick which is the feeling you get when you start to really see the image. When the image begins to speak to you then there is an understanding.
The studium on the other hand is not like this. With the studium this is all the knowledge attained through out life. Everything learned can be applied. Its not studying to understnad but studying for an overall understanding. For me its similar to being in grad school. I have read alot of things but have not understood things like i have in the past two quarters. Now when i read material I understand more about what I am reading and it is not becuase i was studdying to understnad it. Its because the knowledge that I have gained can be applied to other material. So with this knowledge I can have fuller understanding of what the photographer is tryting to convey and there my punctum can prick me and leave me with a feeling of amazement over one image, maybe more.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe first image at the top of the page captures a person with blonde hair, bangs that sweep across the left side of the forehead, light lipstick, and thick black eye liner that has been applied to the upper and lower eyelids extending out away from the center of the face towards the hair line, but stopping short by an inch. The subject in the photograph is staring straight ahead, but above and past the position of the camera (which is at a slightly lower angle since the viewer can see the underside of the chin and nostrils). The hairstyle and makeup represent a specific time in fashion, although this image could have been made at any point in time. The formal considerations, or the intentionality of the photographer, are what is described as the studium. The Studium is representation, code and intentionality on behalf of the photographer.
ReplyDeleteThough it is indefinable due to its subjective nature, the Punctum, for me, is the elements of the photograph that cannot be seen or tamed by the hand of the photographer. The image discussed above has elements of this rupture between what is intended and what is “real.” There is a blemish on the subject’s chin. Though makeup has attempted to conceal the “flaw,” the raised skin casts a shadow that implicates its existence. Similarly are the tiny hairs that are growing underneath the subject’s seemingly kept eyebrows. “The real is not passive, its always dynamic and communicative.”
This image, like any other image, regardless of the intention of the photographer or the control exercised in taking the photograph, will always be embedded with the “real.” Those “flaws” will always convulse forth violently into writing. If each photograph says “this will have been” then those “flaws” can act as an allegory for death, that which is unforeseeable, uncontrollable, and inevitable. Though I did not feel a “prick” when looking at the previously discussed image, the photograph was still a painful reminder that “this was” and will never be again. The hairs have been plucked. The blemish has gone away. Everything in that moment is dead.
Kim, thorough definition and description of the studium and punctum. You have a strong, firm grasp of those terms. The following is addressed not only to Kim, who I know is ill, but to the class: pushing a little beyond familiar intellectual terrain, again, a) what does Barthes mean by a "blind feild?" (passage 23), and how can we reconcile this with Barthes claim at the opening of the book that photography is transparency to pure referent, that we look past the medium?
ReplyDeleteFinally, is there a relationship between Barthes "Puntum" and Benjamin's "Optical Unconscious?"
Louise, studying, cognition, information, all these are obviated by the Punctum, no?
ReplyDeleteElizabeth, how you mention that the "Blonde Girl" by Arbus is embedded in a specific time and place, a cultural framework, but also that it can be "timeless," can you elaborate on this seeming paradox?
Also, all, to what extent do studium and punctum overlap in Arbus's "Blonde Girl," in a most contradictory way, to what extent IS the punctum the studium in Arbus? What would Carol Armstrong say?
Studium is a general enthusiastic commitment; what does this mean?, interest. Studium as I understand it is the general liking of a picture, linking our discussion from Tuesday regarding Facebook, we all look at each others photos, some we see without registering any thoughts others, however, keep our focus. It is these images that are regarded as Studium ; there is something about them that can not be defined but seems to captivate us. this liking is strictly superficial though we do not go beyond that general feeling. this general liking can not transition into the realm of loving however. Punctum on the other hand does not necessarily mean you love the image you could in fact despise it but the punctum cuts you, that is to say it strikes a feeling in you deeper than general interest. the punctum may be a mistake in the image or it may be something that strikes you personally. Memory as I see it may be the only way to understand the punctum. In order for something to make an impact on you, you must have some experience with it perhaps not physically but exposure to the stimuli in some manner must have happened. it is upon this object/feeling/etc. that you then expand; whatever it was that struck you is then internalized and applied. Antidotally, I look at a photograph taken by Ansel Adams of Lake McDonald in Glacier National Park and though I have never been there before the water reminds me of my childhood, growing up and camping with my family. the water in the photograph has become the Punctum. I don't particularly care for the picture but the water reaches out and touches me personally. The fact that this photograph contains a punctum for me and at the same time does not interest me is the core relationship between the studium and the punctum. the two stand in opposition to one and other, if I liked the image that would be all I would hold no deeper feeling towards it however the fact that I do possess these feelings render it out of the studium and in the punctum.
ReplyDeleteThe studium is the study of whatever it is that sparks in the personal self as having the importance to be observed. This attempting to observe the world in which we live and to record our experiences to that world is where the archive begins. But this studium is of such a personal nature that if we all, i.e. people, had the same dislikes and likes the studium would not exist. We would find no interest in anything other than what the one beside us liked, thus never attempting to explore or collect the many facets of nature that binds the studium unto itself. The studium is a multifaceted continuum that cannot be harnessed or reined in, for how do we capture nature in its ever-vacillating manner? We cannot sum up what nature is in a sentence so how do we study or even begin to understand the authenticity of it? The studium answers these questions in a feeble attempt and in turn creates the archive. The archive goes on to pursue the ensnaring of as many facets of nature as it can. Through the use of the camera, as a means of cutting and framing, it captures nature in fragments and impresses these fragments upon a plane (paper, glass, etc.) so that it can be studied. But what is cut from nature is only that with which invokes a desire or commitment of study from within our own personalized emporium of interest (the studium); so the archive must go on. The archive must collect and study as many facets of nature as possible so that in turn we may observe those cuts as in a hope to understand the authenticity of what nature is. To understand this vested interest in the studium and in being able to differentiate between that and the punctum I have to include my own images of interests.
ReplyDelete*sorry i could not get them up on here, just ask and i can show you them *
My own archive consists of family, places, things, and spaces. I observe and in turn participate in the oscillating nature of the studium and of nature, itself. So the archive continues on through my own practice and in turn is still trying to convey the authenticity of what nature, life in general, is.
ReplyDeleteThrough our participation in archiving we begin to comb through what we have cut from nature in hopes of understanding it and in doing so come across images that for whatever reason prick at the core sensation of what it is to be alive. The punctum is found and it prods, pokes, stings, and shoots at us in a manner that awakens our senses to the unknown, to the sublime. The punctum, in such a violating manner, changes within us our take on what it is to be, to see, to observe, or to what it is we even like. It forces the image towards us so that we are no longer observing it, no longer seeing it, but we are it. The image is upon us, it is us, we are recognizing the authenticity of nature in whatever form it has taken and has been captured in. We are stung, cut, split, pierced, and even left with the residue of bruising after experiencing the violating nature of the punctum. As we have progressed the notion of this response has taken on an even more personal realm, for the punctum is not as generic as the studium it is far more explicit and connected singularly to our own personal natures. The punctum can only occur within ourselves when upon observing we are forced by the piercing effect of the punctum to be changed from the casual observing nature of the studium into the intensified nature of the punctum; of not wanting to look away, of not knowing if enough has been seen, of now not being able to be without that image within our own personal archived memory of sight. The punctum is a scar upon this memory and it is not easily hidden, resolved, or eradicated. Below I have included an image that has found the punctum for me; it has been able to capture the authenticity of nature in a manner that no one else could or would be able to recreate. The tear of the shirt to reveal the man’s nipple as in almost a delicate yet accidental strip tease of his barriers to his true self. He is standing in front of me in a manner of wanting nothing more than to not be seen, but his stance, his clothes, his chain, even his juxtaposition to the tree in the background, they all abandon him in his time of need. His shirt rips and shows a delicate glimpse of his left nipple and below lays his delicate organ of the body, the heart. The trees and sun mock his attempt at hiding his true nature for they root the photograph in the understanding that he is in the now, he is in the “real”, and that he can not have not been. Death will come, yes, but in that moment he was and was not able to not have been and through the studium he was captured and plucked from nature, “convulsed into writing”, and in being produced as a photograph rose beyond the archive through the manner of the punctum.
The “Blonde Girl” is anonymous in that she can be any girl from any time, but through that anonymity she is also and will always be irreducible. She is only ever herself. Once the photograph of her is detached from authorship or recognition, it enters the archive where it will be categorized to fit whichever organizational system the new owner has established (which of course could be organized based on cultural signifiers, gender, hair color, makeup, or style of portrait).
ReplyDeleteThe punctum IS the studium for Arbus because her intention is to photograph the most intimate and seemingly uninteresting differences or “flaws” to deconstruct the standardized and gendered body. She does this by considering the natural framing that is already occurring and letting nature and the real frame itself. Her intention is not to control or hide or tame the continuum, but simply to imprint off of it. That is why the punctum, the prick, the accident, the chance, is the studium for Arbus.
NICE
ReplyDeletethe standard is the exception and conversely, the exception is the standard.....(at the level of the real, not the false categories of ideology, etc.)
In last week's reading, Joselit (drawing from the ideas of someone whose name I cant recall) says that the "sign emerges from carnality--literally carved from flesh--but it retains a stain of its originally embodied state." This word "stain" is interesting in that Barthes' punctum is a kind of stain (spot) that calls forth, lying hidden (with some kind of secret message) behind the curtains of its gracious host: the studium. If the punctum is a spot that wounds, the studium is a kind of "unitary" composition of "things" that ultimately pictorialize, a kind of syntax to be approched by the intellect. Proust said in one of his essays: "Every day I set less store on the intellect," emphasizing instead the "reality" of the senses and the way in which " things" communicate to the senses with a kind of primitive semantics--lodged in the senses. It seems that BArthes has positioned these two concepts as dialectical, and this reminds me of what we've been dauling/dancing with for the past two week: Body and Sign.
ReplyDeletePerhaps rather than dialectical, which would suggest some level of opposition, the studium and punctum form a structural couple. Each owes its existence to the other, relies on the other. The term "host" is useful. As is the notion of the specter, the ghost, about which we spoke in Tuesdays class.
ReplyDeleteNICE post
Damn it. Lost my post again, crashed. And I liked that one too much. Fuck. Like some kind of sand mandala. gone. Fucking absurd. Must be Firefox. Sorry Prof. Mansoor, a new one's coming.
ReplyDeleteIn last week's reading, Joselit (drawing on another writer's work whose name I can't recall) says "the sign emerges from carnality--it is literally carved from flesh--but it retains a stain of its original embodied state." This word "stain" is interesting in that Barthes refers to the punctum on more than one occasion as a spot or mark. If the punctum is a kind of spot or stain, then the studium is the patterned drapes or quilt composed of "unitary" lines and contextualized in the intellect, by the intellect, for the intellect. But the punctum persists. It will not be pinned down like a patch. It also resists "naming" as naming would indicate that it is of the studium: language, sign, education, culture. But "hwere" and "when" is the punctum? We know, at least according to Barthes, that it is of a "particle" nature, that it is a detail or a particular accident that belongs to the quasi-mystical state of existence. It calls forth, but silently. It beckons as it punctures, but the puncture occurs where? Is it contained within the image or is it more of a phenomenon that occurs "between" the beholder and the beheld? Barthes seems to hint that it belongs (or rather, happens) to something that we've already been touching on in class: the convulsions in nature occuring all the time, the abundance of minutia that manifest as a form of written message, though a "secret" message of sorts. Proust says in one of his essays, "Every day I set less store on the intellect," making room for his concern with the minute essences of "reality" and memory lodged deep within the senses, often recalled (resurrected) years later. Barthes' talk of the punctum's temporality as something that (despite its immediacy and its "already-there-ness") is often recalled later, seems to echo Proust and his concern with something "beyond" the intellect, a place that he felt he had to go in order to "resurrect" his life (or, life itself). Only a Body can be resurrected, as only a body can greet death. There is something about Barthes' talk of Death as well. Is there a kind of "deathly" quality to the punctum? Only body can be "slashed," as Barthes says it, with punctum.
ReplyDeleteWow, I'm a boggled soul. I can't believe I just Re-posted. Nightmares Blogish in nature shall come tonight, I'm sure.
ReplyDeleteStadium for me is what you see, but may not necessarily remember, whereas punctum is the catalyst of remembering. These terms can be problematic as they relate to memory, and as I am not meaning to associate them to memory (though it is not a far association by any means). Stadium is that broad catch all of interest without passion or specific sharpness (“acuity” as Barthes says pg. 26). Barthes also connects the stadium to the photographer or Operator. The stadium allows the viewer or the Spectator to see the processes the Operator uses through the wills of the Spectator. Here we see the angles, the posing, the make-up, the mask, and the motionless.
ReplyDeleteThe punctum is the detail missing in the mere stadium. It is a chance appearance that slips by some and sticks on others. The punctum can not be defined as it is so contingent (much like a photograph of its referent) on the photographer, the viewer, the environment, the anything, everything, and nothing. Barthes calls it an “addition”. I see it more as a catalyst changing something from potential to kinetic, static to active. Even in Barthes own language (i.e. “shoots out…like an arrow”, “pierces”, “pricks me”, “bruises me” *pgs. 26-27), punctum is a noun that elicits a verb. It exists in so much as it makes something happen, stir within the viewer.
The “blind field” relates back to the simultaneous death and immortality found within photography. What is caught in the moment of the photograph is referently determined to never be exactly the same (identically dead) before the photograph is even developed. Yet, the subject that emerges from that one ‘dead’ moment will continue to live on. The subject will not emerge as such without the punctum, and thus the blind field will die along with the moment captured and framed. On the contrary, when a punctum is present, the blind field is born. This blind field is a space with which the subject is given subjectivity outside of the photograph. The viewer creates stories or sub-plot to his/her/its existence. In reconciliation, though photography is the transparency of pure referent, the blind field is the opacity of materiality. Let me unpack this a bit. When I think about the blind field, I think about glancing out of a window. You see through the glass, but so much of what you see is contingent (i.e. your optical abilities, the thickness/opacity of the glass, the weather outside, the length of time allowed in a glance). Sometimes, in a glance, we imagine we see more than is referentially there and think nothing of it or are forced to double take when we ‘see’ something out of our expectations. Here there is a difference between seeing and looking. The photograph/stadium is already seeing but the viewer, in exposure to punctum , is glancing or looking. This glance formulates the blind field that we assume is there, but is really just applied.
The punctum reminds me of Benjamin’s “Optical Unconscious” as far as it is something that slips out. The difference is found in who and how it slips out. Barthes’ punctum is not something that will slip out and poke every viewer, but certain viewers in certain photographs with certain ‘fields of experience’ (or what a person has previously been subjected to). Benjamin’s “Optical Unconscious”, however, slips out to all viewers even without them knowing.
The announcement of a stadium is the punctum in Arbus. The make-up is clearly seen and even referenced in the title. The hair is placed and the head is stiff in posture for the picture. This look above the camera seems crafted, something out of the traditional real, yet in the real women are known to wear make-up and fix their hair….some writers have even announced being woman is performance; it itself is a mask or an application of make-up.
This is an out-of-the-box aside: Being female has become this mask, being seen or being touched in this light has become being female. A woman without make-up or fixed hair is more shocking than one covering up any natural or chance occurence within her body. Because females have allowed themselves to be viewed in this way for whatever period of time, it has become what female is and even what male is not.
ReplyDelete