Challenging Artistry: Scruton's View on Photography

1309 Words3 Pages

Scruton’s Equivalency Thesis
In Photography and Representation, Scruton advances the view that photography cannot be described as a representational art form in the same sense as painting, and that the photograph is unworthy of aesthetic appreciation in and of itself. Indeed, Scruton suggests that it is not even possible to have an aesthetic interest in the photograph, as such interest is necessarily directed towards its subject. In this sense, photography is merely a facilitator of seeing. It is no more a representational art form than viewing a scene through a pair of spectacles, or observing an object through a magnifying glass. It is a simply a tool for seeing-through, and what one perceives in a photograph is quite literally the object …show more content…

The first of these, the style argument, as articulated by King, states that the “purely abstract features of a photograph” regularly appear to evoke aesthetic interest in an audience (King, 1992, 260). King thus suggests that Scruton’s argument undermines the stylistic choices which a photographer autonomously makes; it is possible to seek to engage with a photograph merely in virtue of its photographic surface, by perceiving features such as its luminosity or contrast, for example. Such appreciation is not dependent upon one having an interest in the subject photographed (King, 1992, 264). For instance, when one marvels over Ansel Adams’ photograph of a road she is aesthetically interested in the photographer’s miraculous ability to create contrast, rather than the road, and hence the photograph does more than merely act as an instrument for seeing-through to the scene (King, 1992, 264). As such, the photographer makes artistic decisions in the same way that a painter might, and these are demonstrated in the stylistic elements of the photographic surface. Whilst all of the above may be plausible, the style argument, as McIver Lopes notes, fails to address what he refers to as Scruton’s object argument, suggesting that the style argument does not endow one with a reason to “deny that the photographed object… is the object of our attention when we see a photograph and understand it as a photograph, even …show more content…

Whilst the relationship which the photograph bears to its subject may be entirely different to the relationship which the painting bears to its subject, this does not necessarily entail that one must reject the photograph as an equally worthy object of aesthetic appreciation. As a final remark, in addition to photography’s capacity to arouse an interest in the subject photographed in a manner that transcends face-to-face viewing, the fact that the photograph boasts the ability to suspend its subject in time is also indicative of its transcendence of face-to-face viewing. If one takes an aesthetic interest in Vivian Maier’s photographs of children playing in a street in the 1950’s, for instance, this would evidently not be equivalent to viewing the same subjects directly in the present moment. As such, the photograph’s ‘distance’ from its subject, both physical and temporal, is perhaps further reason to distinguish it from face-to-face seeing, and may be indicative of its worth as a visual art form. Thus, contra Scruton, paintings and photographs are equally worthy of aesthetic appreciation as visual art forms, and photographic transparency is not synonymous with photographic

Open Document