Obama: Window of Opportunity.

Obama: Window of Opportunity. Copyright 2009: Knut Skjærven. All rights reserved.

Do I have to comment on this shot? I don’t think so.

Yes, I am rather proud of this visual “combination of elements”. This is, imho, barebones photography at is best. Simple, straight, no fuzz.

Enjoy.

Introducing The Barebones Mirror Test

Doing The Barebones Mirror Test. Shot in Berlin 2008. Copyright 2009: Knut Skjærven

You need to do the barebones mirror test.

What is the barebones mirror test? Simply this: If you hold up a mirror to your project, which in  this case is the barebones communication project, you should see the same structural picture that you see when you turn the barebones investigative light source to foreign, external objects. And you should describe, analyse and judge the mirror picture by the same criteria as you do with non mirror objects.

I could do a barebones analysis of my iMac as an external object since the iMac is what is in front of me every time I occupy myself with this blog. To a certain extent I already did.

I also could do a barebones analysis of the barebones communication project, which of course is a very different object from my iMac or any Mac.

However, in some respects they are pretty similar. They are both types of objects; they are both “things” that I perceive; the are both things in which I take an interest, they are both “close” to me. I could continue this list of similarities, but it will not necessary.

The mirror test is (hereby) invented to try to assure consistence between with what I/you are saying, and what I/you are doing. I tall task, I know, but maybe this is just the right time for a thorough barebones mirror test. Even in other areas than those related to this blog.

If you pass the mirror test, you can proudly say that your work will not fall apart on being self referring inconsistent. It may fall apart for a number of other reasons, but not this very important one of being inconsistent.

So how do you perform a barebones mirror test? First thing you do is get yourself a mirror. You might do the test even without a mirrow in your hand, but leave such lofty ambitions till you get proper training in doing the test. Go get a mirror.

This post is to be continued …

Top Image

Top Image. (c)

Can’t be all bad.

The photograph that I shot, two days ago, for barebones communication, was simultaneously posted to a photo site. Know what, it was just voted top image on that site.

Remember what I said in the post on creativity, not so long ago, that enthusiasm is a part of the process of creativity? Well, if you should get enthusiasm, then take it. It is part of the fuel that makes an engine run. Even within communication.

In this case, maybe the title of the photograph was not set that bad after all: Under Construction. It could be a reminder that things always are on the move, and that again is bareboned hermeneutics. Things never get finished. But that subject for another post, another time. Once again, it is already the day after. Meaning pretty late, or very early.

Happy Easter.

The Light Enlightens

Pink Pathos (c).

I found this fantastic quote on a photo site recently. It says: “the light enlightens both the subject and the photographer”. Well, one can always hope. Some would call the quote an inventive phrase for “intentionality“.

Courtesy Federico Gentili. I picked the quote from his photosite.

And besides we had snow today. These Dutch tulips gives great aspirations of spring.

A Tribute to Winter

   

A Simple Tribute To Winter.

 

In fact, you could do as I did by pure accident, listen to Abba’s “When All Is Said And Done”. Song by Pierce  Brosnan and Meryl Streep from the Mamma Mia soundtrack album. It is not at all a bad barebones combination. One unified impression.  Listen to the tune. Congratulations Mr. Bond.

Iconic Sisters

Sometimes things turns out a little different. You get a bit more than you bargained for. At least a little more then you dared hope for. 

This can happen in every type of communication. In texts as well as in visuals. In other forms of communication as well, I would say. In commercial and non commercial communication 

We know that there are at least two levels involved in every act of communication. The first one being that content that we all can agree on. The manifest that is there for everyone to see. The horse in the field, the car on the road, the couple on the bench. This is the denotative level.

Second there is the connotative level. That overlay that always comes with denotations in the ways that denotations are presented to us. The horse that is running and connotes speed, the car that is broken and connotes damage, the people on the bench that sit close and connotes intimacy.

Are there levels beyond that. Ask Roland Barthes and he will say yes and point to at least one more level. He talks about an obtuse meaning as the third level. This is highly subjective and therefore hard to speak about in objective terms (I will have a specific post on that some other time). And Barthes even talks about a punctum as a specific item within a visual. The punctum attracts special attention.

Leave Barthes’ third meaning and his punctum aside in this post. The questions is then if there could be a third meaning other than that indicates by Barthes. I think thet there could be such an alternative third meaning. It occurs when the obvious meaning content of an image, or any other act of communication, transcends itself and move the spectator from specifics to generals. When the pair on the bench, the horse in the field and the car in the street contentwise moves beyond that of a specific pair, a specific horse and a specific car and tells a story of pairs, horses and cars in general. This is when you get that bit extra. Something more than you could hope to expect. 

I call this third level for the iconic level. Combine the word icon with that of notation and you will get icon + notation: iconnotation.

Let me show you a photograph to illustrate what I mean. It is a portrait of two sisters sitting on a bench (what coindence ).

As a picture of these sisters it is rather saying for those who know them. The more, however, I looked at the picture it took on an extra dimension. I know these people well, but the more I looked at the picture the sisters disappeared as people that I know, and took on a dimension on simply “sisters”. They could be any pair of sisters. The image turned into an icon for the notion sisters.

So here is the deal then. Pictures (let’s limit the discussion to that) consists at least of three possible levels of meaning:

1. Denotation, 2. Connotation, 3. Iconnotation

Do I hear you say that these two people does not have to be sisters? They could be anyone. Could just be friends. Well, that does not really of matter. The important thing is that their likenesses; both facial likeness and likeness of bodily position indicates strongly (connotes) they they have some kind of intimacy beyond sitting on the same bench. Right? So, if your prefer the picture be be an icon on intimacy, that would be quite ok with me. Please remark that hand that turns out behind the back of the right hand sister. It wraps up the ideas of intimacy very well, in my opinion.

Of course all of this can be contested. Please do. The good thing with blogs, however, are that they very seldom are contested.

Should I mention that denotations and connotations are default levels in all images, and all types of communication, and that iconnotations are not. The two first are a question of quantity and the latter a question of quality. As sloppy image will hardly ever aspire for iconic status, since e. g visual distractions will not likely help concentrating the message. Any message.

Stay tunes and I will return to that

You Can Pay Me Later: Husserl on Images.

Well, you will be surprised. I was.

Up till a month ago I had no idea that Edmund Husserl has written much about images. Not to speak about photography. Until I had a closer look in my bookcase and found this book: Edmund Husserl: Phantasie, Bildbewusstsein, Erinnerungen, herausgeben von Eduard Marbach, Husserliana Band XXIII, Martinus Nijhoff, 1980. 

I am ashamed that I have to admit that I have had this book since April 22, 1980. On the other hand it might have gained considerably in value since it is still in mint condition. I paid Deutsche Mark 255,00 for it at that time. And that is a small fortune. It is a brick on 724 pages written with an obscure philosophical pen. Husserl’s pen. The major parts of it about 100 years back. Don’t let that disturb you.

The good thing is, that is was translated (yes, it was) by John B. Brough in 2005 and published in a paperback edition by German publisher Springer. Goes by the title: Phantasy, Image Consciousness, and Memory (1898 -1925). And it comes at a much better price. It’s a good read.

What is even better is that the book is absolutely amazing for anyone that intents to dig into the ontology and images and photography. So, it you plan to have a career as a university professor, or simply settle for a Ph.D., or have an interest in the arts in general, you should simply start with this book. It leaves Roland Barthes and Susan Sonntag in the back row. And it does so in a couple of pages into the book.

You should move NOW, since this book and this branch of research have hardly picked up yet. But it will. You could really take the drivers seat for a while even if it will probably leave you with a 700+ pages headache. That will pass over time.

You don’t have to thank me for this recommendation now. You can pay me later. When I loaded both books to Library Thing a little while ago it turned out that I, so far, am the only one that have pointed to these books. And there are tons of books in there already. So the show is yours for the taking.

And as I said. You can pay me later, but if you are into this areas either as a researcher, student or just out of plain interest: GO FOR IT. I will – with some delay

You will find the precise references to both the original version from 1980, and to the translation from 2005 by following the links. Both ways you are in for a brick of pages. 

NB: When you are done with Husserl’s theory on images and photographs you could always send me a quick word as to why the image below might have a certain phenomenological affinity And, add a bit of semiological and gestalt psychological analysis while you are at it.

Good luck with both the books, and the picture. 

All rights reserved.

Buy the English translation of Husserl’s work. Follow the link and support the site:
Phantasy, Image Consciousness, and Memory (1898-1925) (Husserliana: Edmund Husserl Collected Works)

 

phenomenological-method