Reflecting on this reading, I am drawn to the idea of the significance of a memory, and how that can be represented through a photograph. The author mentions that in taking a photograph, the person decides whether or not this moment is considered significant and worth remembering in the future. I think this is an especially interesting way to think about it, in the sense that it gives the viewer a look into what this person values and considers to be important. Looking over the photos passed around in class today, it became clear that everyone's perspective and perception of life is so different; what I would personally consider to be important does not always hold true in the lives of other people. Also, since photos allow us to transport back to past times, they have similarly allowed us to consider the dynamism of the values of humans over time.
Throughout the article the author resurfaces this idea of photographs being "something to hold on to" that exists outside of our minds, or something that is symbolic and represents something else. I agree with this statement, however from a personal standpoint, I do not prefer to depend on photographs to construct my interpretation of reality, and solidify the past in my mind. While looking back on things to jog my memory and remind me of events that I forgot had happened can be entirely effective, I am growing more fond of letting memories within my mind speak for themselves, and not having an attachment to a physical object to do so. Therefore I pose the question; Do you think society has come to favor objects, such as photographs, as the primary way of coercing someone to reflect on life events? How might this differ from previous times where photography was not around?
No comments:
Post a Comment