Barrett, Criticizing Photographs, Ch 3: Interpreting Photographs, 3rd ed, 2000

From a book I recently reviewed. The photos signify Guan-yin, the female goddess of compassion in Eastern Buddhism. The one on right, by including the altar, connotes sacredness through objects of ritual devotion.

Barrett begins by noting that photographs are not “facts about the world” but images in need of interpretation. Photos are about something, created for some communicative purpose.  “Each photograph embodies a particular way of seeing and showing the world.”  He quotes Ernst Gombrich on there being no such thing as an “innocent eye” and cites Barthe’s two practices of signification:  denotation and connotation (showing and implying).  A photograph may show something quite clearly, but its implications - how it is shown and for what purpose - may not be so clear.  Photos made in a straightforward, realist manner are in most need of interpretation as their intent may be concealed beneath the “reality.”  

What then is interpretation?

“To interpret is to account for all the described aspects of a photograph and to posit meaningful relationships between the aspects.  When one is acting as a critic, to interpret a photograph is tell someone else, in speech or in writing, what one understands about a photograph, especially what one thinks a photograph is about.  Interpreting is telling about the point, the meaning, the sense, the tone, or the mood of the photograph.”  

Another way to consider interpretation is to consider every photograph a metaphor that requires explanation.  “All interpretations share a fundamental principle - that photographs have meanings deeper than what appears on their surfaces.”

Barrett notes that objects of interpretation may include a single photo, a set of photos, an entire career of photos, or a historical period worth of photos.

Interpretations are more than claims.  They are hypotheses in need of supporting evidence and coherent arguments.  Among the interpretive strategies identified  are:

comparative

archetypal

feminist

psychoanlaytic

formalist

semiotic

marxist

stylistic influences and context

biographical

intentionalist

technique

(historical - not mentioned)

Regarding truth claims, Barrett quotes Margolis in arguing for interpretations that are plausible and admit the possibility of other plausible interpretations. In other words, like the scientist, the critic remains open to the possibility of of his claims being falsified, or superseded by new data.  Instead of using a word like “true,” he sees other words as more helpful in describing critiques, such as plausible, insightful, meaningful, revealing.  They can be so labeled when their interpretations correspond to the facts pertaining to the photo, and when its ideas cohere.

Regarding intent, Barrett quotes Minor White that “photographers frequently photograph better than they know.”   While Barrett sees intention as a valid approach, he warns of the difficulty of determining intention, either because that information is not available or because the photographer himself may be unaware of his intentions.  Even when he is, it is important to not overvalue the photographer’s intention such that all other possible interpretations are excluded.  
Barrett sees interpretation as more appropriate to the viewer/critic than the photographer.

While Barret notes that criticism is more than simply stating  feelings, feelings should not be ignored.  Criticism should not be overintellectualized.  

A further helpful way of thinking about interpretation is meaning in and meaning to. What the photo means to mean may not appear the same for others, or for the intended audience.  Our own meanings may be too personal or idiosyncratic to be worth much to readers.  

#