“Bared life”: Looking at stereographs of South African miners produced in the early 1900s.

Description
“Bared life”: Looking at stereographs of South African miners produced in the early 1900s.

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 13
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Information
Category:

Mobile

Publish on:

Views: 0 | Pages: 13

Extension: PDF | Download: 0

Share
Tags
Transcript
  ROSEMARY LOMBARD LMBROS001 TUMBLR ADDRESS: http://lightleakage.tumblr.com/  NICK SHEPHERD AXL 4203F: PUBLIC CULTURE IN AFRICA/IMAGING THE WORLD IN PHOTOGRAPHS RESEARCH PAPER: Bared life : Looking at stereographs of South African miners produced in the early 1900s. ---    [T]he striking mine workers at Marikana have become spectacularised. It is a stark reminder that the mine worker, a modern subject of capitalism, in these parts of the world is also the product of a colonial encounter.    —  Suren Pillay (2014) We eed to udestad ho photogaph oks ithi eeda life i adaed idustial soieties: the pole is oe of ateialist ultual histo athe tha at histo.   —  Allan Sekula (2003) Plagiarism declaration: I know that plagiarism is wrong. Plagiarism is to use another's work and pretend that it is one's own. I have used the required convention for citation and referencing. Each contribution to and quotation in this assignment from the work(s) of other people has been attributed, and has been cited and referenced. This assignment is my own work. I have not allowed, and will not allow, anyone to copy my work with the intention of passing it off as his or her own work. I acknowledge that copying someone else's assignment or essay, or part of it, is wrong, and declare that this is my own work.  2 I pick up the odd wood and metal contraption. This is a stereoscope, I am told. It feels old, in the sense that there is a certain worn patina about it, and a non-utilitarian elegance to the turned wood and decoration, though not as if it were an expensive piece  –  just as if it came from an era where there was time for embellishment. It feels cheaply put together, mass-produced and flimsy as opposed to delicate, the engraving detail of the tinny sheet metal rather rough, the fit of the one piece as it glides through the other somewhat rickety in my hands. From two elevations, a stereoscope almost identical to that which I used. 1   1 Various types of stereoscopes were devised in the 19th century. The particular hand-held variety, of oak, tin, glass and velvet depicted here dates back to 1901 and was based on a design by the inventor Oliver Wendell Holmes, and perhaps the most readily available and the simplest. Source of information and pictures: http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O39988/stereoscope-underwood-and-underwood [Accessed 16 November 2014].    3 I reach for the pile of faded stereographs; flipping through them slowly. There are 24, picked up in an antique shop in a aade off Cape Tos Long Street together with the viewing device. A stereograph is composed of two photographs of the same subject taken from slightly different angles. When placed in the steeosopes ie holde, ad ieed though the eeholes, a  illusion of perspective and depth is achieved as the two images appear to combine through a trick of parallax. Susan Sontag remarks that  [p]hotographs, which cannot themselves explain anything, are inexhaustible invitations to deduction, speculation, and fantasy  2 . And Allan Sekula calls the photograph an ioplete utterance, a message that depends on some external matrix of conditions and presuppositions for its readability. That is, the meaning of any photographic message is necessarily context determined  3 . In what follows, while unable to offer definitive conclusions, I will look more closely at 2 out of these 24 pictures and, through a contextual discussion, attempt to unpack a few aspects of the complex relationships of photography with its subjects and also with public circulation. Each thick, oblong card with its rounded, scuffed edges discoloured by age has two seemingly identical images on it, side by side, and is embossed with the name of what I guess must have been the photographer or printing studio s ae  in gold down the margin: ‘AYMOND NEIL“ON, BOX , JOHANNE“BU‘G.  The images depict miners underground. Some are very faded, to the extent that the figures in them appear featureless and ghostly. There is virtually no annotation on most of the photos. On just a few of them, spidery white handwriting on the photo itself, as if scratched into the negative before it was printed, announces the name of the machinery or activity in the picture and the name of the mine: Co Mie s .  I pick up the first card, slot it into the stereoscope, and peer through the device. On the left of the two iages, the itig aoues: Igesol l hammer drill cutting box hole. C215. Crown Mines .   Photo 1: Stereographic image of miners in Crown Mines around the turn of the twentieth century. 4   2  Sontag (1973: 23).   3  Sekula (1982: 4).   4  From the private collection of Anette Hoffmann. Used with kind permission.  4 I slide the holder backwards and forwards along the wooden shaft to focus . I seeig to iages , nothing remarkable, until suddenly, at a precise point on the axis, the images coalesce into one, three-dimensional. The experience is that of a gestalt shift, the optical illusion uncanny. I lik had. It s still there. It feels magical, as if the figures in the photos are stepping right out of the card towards me. Their eyes stare into mine through over a century of time, gleaming white out of dirty, sweaty faces. Startlingly tangible, here stand two young white men in a mine shaft, scarcely out of their teens, leaning against rock, each with a hand on a hip and a jauntily cocked hat. The ae e oug… et e old  too, I immediately think: definitely dead now; and perhaps dead soon after the picture was taken, living at risk, killed in a rock fall or in World War One. A pang of indefinable emotion hits. I am amazed at how powerfully this image has flooded my imagination. Even with the difficult viewing process, the effect is astonishing. I a eided of “usa “otags otetio that all photogaphs ae memento mori:   To take a photogaph   is to patiipate i aothe pesos o thigs otalit, uleailit, utailit.  Precisely by slicing out this oet ad feezig it, all photogaphs testif to ties eletless elt 5 . I also notice that the trick of parallax (and concurrently, the evocativeness) works most pronouncedly on the figures in the foreground, probably due to the camera angle and vanishing points of the perspective. Behind the two white youngsters, almost fading into the darkness, is a black man, holding up a drill over all of their heads that seems to penetrate the tunnel of rock in which they are suspended. He appears to have moved during the shot as his face is blurred. This could also be due to the low light in the shaft. Though he is looking straight at me, I at oet ith hi like I do ith the figues i fot.  He is very much in the background, a presence without substance. The way the photo was set up and taken has placed him in that position, and this viewpoint is indelible, no matter how hard I try to look past it. I line up the next image: Photo 2: Stereographic image of Johannesburg miners around the turn of the twentieth century. 6   5  Sontag (1973:14), cf. Berger (1972) and Barthes (1981:14).  5 There is no writing on this one eept fo hat sees to e a efeee ue: C . The figure in the foreground is a black man, miming work with a mallet and chisel against the rock face, though clearly standing very still for the shot, as he is perfectly in focus, his sceptical gaze on us, a sharp shadow thrown on the rock behind him. This is no ordinary lamp light: it seems clear that these pictures have been professionally illumined by the photographer, perhaps using magnesium flares, because these shots definitely predate flash photography. To the a ith the hisels left stads a white man, face dark with dirt. He is holding a lamp in one hand, and his other grasps a support pile which bisects the shaft and also the photo. Tight-jawed, he stares beyond us, his eyes preoccupied, glazed over. Behind the two men in the foreground, there are more men  –  parts of two, perhaps three workers can be seen, one a black man crouched down at the rock face behind the man with the chisel. What strikes me most trenchantly about this picture -- the  punctum , after Barthes 7  -- is the man with the hisels bare feet. He is at work in an extremely hazardous environment without shoes. Looking at all the photographs, every white worker is wearing boots, but there are several pictures where it is visible that many of the black workers are barefoot. This is shocking visual evidence of an exploitative industry which does not take its okes safet seiousl: t hese men are placed at incredible risk without the provision of adequate protective attire: none have hard protection for their heads, and black workers are without shoes. Men not deemed worthy of protection are, by inference, expendable. From these photos, one surmises that black lives are more dispensable than white. I am really curious to find out more about these pictures. Perhaps the visual evidence here is echoed in literature? Perhaps they can tell us things the literature does not? Who were these people posing? There is nothing on the back of the photos. No captions, no dates. Who was the photographer? For what purpose were these pictures being taken? The lack of answers to these most mundane of questions lends the photos an uncanny, almost spectral quality. I have technical questions about how these pictures were taken too, such as about the lighting and the camera used. Surely it was large and difficult to manoeuvre down into the mine  –  probably an expensive exercise, too? With virtually no annotation or background information, there is little direct guidance in understanding how or why these stereographs came into being. I assume that as a viewer now, my experience and interpretation of the images would be informed by a very different paradigm to that inhabited by viewers at the turn of the twentieth century. Hence, I attempt to examine the broader historical and theoretical milieu 6  From the private collection of Anette Hoffmann. Used with kind permission. 7   Bathes :: A photogaphs  punctum  is that accident which pricks me, but also uises e, is poigat to e.  
Related Search
Similar documents
View more...
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks