Roland Barthes’ Camera Lucida

1558 Words4 Pages

This book is a note written by Roland Barthes to record the dialectical way he thought about the eidos(form, essence, type, species) of Photographs. Roland Barthes was a French literary theorist, philosopher, linguist in his lifetime, but surprisingly he was not a photographer. As Barthes had a belief that art works consists with signs and structures, he had investigated semiotics and structuralism. However, through Camera Lucida, he realized the limitation of structuralism and the impression to analyze Photography with only semiotics and structuralism. Barthes concludes with talking about unclassifiable aspects of Photography. I could sense the direction Barthes wanted to go through the first chapter ‘Specialty of the Photograph’. He tried to define something by phenomenology

In the book, the Barthes creates some terms. Operator, Spectator and Spectrum are the first one. The Operator means the photographer, the viewer who looks at the Photograph becomes the Spectator and the thing emitted by subject is called eidolon(image, phantom, ghost), in other word the Spectrum. Barthes talks about Operator’s ability to take the picture of naturalness from the situation. He says that a Photograph is closer to the Spectator than the Operator and the Spectrum is the closest one. The stream of his thought naturally moves from the subject of the picture to viewers with excluding the person taking a picture. It was interesting for the artists like me because for artists, the subject matter goes first and then the work is created later. Particularly, for me, considering viewers mostly comes at the end or sometime, I even ignore the audience. For a viewer like Barthes, seeing the work is a completely opposite way to creating the work.

Camera Lu...

... middle of paper ...

... don’t need camera lucida and camera obscura. What we see instantly becomes a Photograph.

Not only quantitative aspect, but also qualitative aspect changed. The object and its referent are no longer inevitably real. There is no indexicality. The Boundary between painting and Photograph become blurred. Especially, in my case, as I am a painter who heavily relies on Photography, it becomes hard to define genre of my works. I wonder if I follow Barthes’ thoughts, what is eidos of my works. Are they included in Pictorialism? What are they?

(Left - Oil on canvas / Right - Oil on digital printed image on canvas)

I want to finish this review with Barthes’ word I liked.

Barthes says, "Death is the eidos of that Photograph (Barthes 15).

Works Cited

Barthes, Roland. Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography. Geoff Dyer (Foreword by). Print. Apr 2014

Open Document