Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Phillips 2007
The real challenge for an aesthetics of photography
Dawn M. Phillips
The real challenge for an aesthetics of photography
1 Introduction
In his 1983 article, ‘Photography and Representation’, Roger Scruton
presented a powerful and provocative sceptical position. For most people
interested in the aesthetics of photography, this paper represents an
important challenge and, over the last twenty years, the many responses have
created a rich body of literature.1 I shall not attempt to survey this literature
here, but will focus on the best available response: Dominic Lopes’ 2003
article, ‘The Aesthetics of Photographic Transparency’. Lopes provides a
particularly clear formulation of Scruton’s original argument and sets out a
strengthened version of the sceptical position, in order to argue that even the
strengthened position can be defeated. I find Lopes’ argument convincing, as
far as it goes; but I shall argue that he does not go far enough. Lopes
successfully meets the sceptical challenge he sets up, but does not appreciate
that a deeper challenge deserves to be addressed.
In section 2, I outline Lopes’ analysis of Scruton’s argument and his
account of the strengthened sceptical position. In section 3, I outline Lopes’
response to the sceptic, the position he calls: ‘an aesthetics of photographic
transparency’ and explain that this position fails to meet, or even recognise,
the real challenge for an aesthetics of photography. In section 4, I introduce a
proposal for how this challenge might be met.
2 What, according to Lopes, is the sceptical challenge?
A sceptic regarding photography is one who claims that seeing a photograph
as a photograph does not engage aesthetic interest. The sceptic may concede
that there is widespread aesthetic appreciation of photographs, but will argue
that this is not truly an appreciation of photographs qua photographs; it is
merely an aesthetic interest in ancillary features of photographs, features that
many photographs may have, but that are not essential to a photograph per
se.
Scruton’s sceptical position is multifaceted and his article includes a
number of startling claims: that a photograph does not represent; that a
photograph is merely a surrogate for the photographed object; that we do not
have aesthetic interest in a photograph qua photograph and that photography
is in some sense inherently pornographic. Critics have discussed and
disputed these views at length, but Lopes is right to point out that many
critics have overlooked the sophistication of Scruton’s argument and so have
failed to fully defeat his sceptical position. According to Lopes, the main
conclusion of Scruton’s argument is what Lopes calls the ‘equivalence thesis’:
1 For example King (1992), Currie (1991), Friday (1996), Walton (1997) and Warburton (1996).
1
© Dawn M. Phillips 2007
The real challenge for an aesthetics of photography
2
© Dawn M. Phillips 2007
The real challenge for an aesthetics of photography
transparent to its subject and if it holds our interest it does so because it acts as a surrogate for
the thing which it shows”. Walton has a position that is more extreme than Scruton because
he emphasises that a photograph is not a surrogate for the photographed object, rather, it
provides real perceptual access to the object.
3
© Dawn M. Phillips 2007
The real challenge for an aesthetics of photography
4
© Dawn M. Phillips 2007
The real challenge for an aesthetics of photography
9 Lopes makes this stance very explicit: “the assumption, shared with the Scrutonian sceptic,
is that proper appreciation of a photograph is appreciation of the photograph for what it is.
The transparency thesis divulges what photographs are, namely instruments for seeing
through” (Lopes 2003 p.442). Elsewhere he re-states the same point: “an interest in a
photograph as a photograph is an interest in it as a vehicle for seeing through it to the
photographed scene” (Lopes 2003, p.445).
5
© Dawn M. Phillips 2007
The real challenge for an aesthetics of photography
6
© Dawn M. Phillips 2007
The real challenge for an aesthetics of photography
challenge is to show that photographs can have aesthetic interest solely in virtue of one
feature: namely that they are the products of a purely causal mechanism.
12 If you have concerns about issues such as processing or printing the film, then make the
7
© Dawn M. Phillips 2007
The real challenge for an aesthetics of photography
8
© Dawn M. Phillips 2007
The real challenge for an aesthetics of photography
References
Barthes, Roland. 1981. Camera Lucida. New York: Hill and Wang.
Brook, Donald. 1983. ‘Painting, Photography and Representation.’ Journal of
Aesthetics and Art Criticism 42. pp. 171-180.
Currie, Gregory. 1991. ‘Photography, Painting and Perception.’ Journal of
Aesthetics and Art Criticism 49. pp. 23-29.
Friday, Jonathan. 1996. ‘Transparency and the Photographic Image.’ British
Journal of Aesthetics 36. pp. 30-42.
King, W. K. 1992. ‘Scruton and Reasons for Looking at Photographs.’ British
Journal of Aesthetics 32. pp. 258-265.
Lopes, Dominic McIver. 2003. ‘The Aesthetics of Photographic Transparency.’
Mind 36:1. pp. 335-48.
Scruton, Roger. 1983. ‘Photography and Representation.’ The Aesthetic
Understanding. London: Routledge.
Walton, Kendall. 1997. ‘On Pictures and Photographs: Objections Answered.’
In R. Allen and M. Smith (eds.) Film Theory and Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Warburton, Nigel. 1996. ‘Individual Style in Photographic Art.’ British Journal
of Aesthetics 36. pp. 389-397.
14An extract from this unpublished article was published in Neill and Ridley (eds.) Arguing
About Art (3rd Edition) London: Routledge, 2007.