Image, do you still hold the moment?

“The image captures the present” – says Roland Barthes in his book “The Luminous Room: Reflections on Photography”. Perhaps Barth says this is why people in the past (the photographic machine was discovered in the nineteenth century and quickly replaced the artistic portrait) prepared at the moment of taking the picture, as they wore their best clothes and after the place of photography as if they were going To spend time in the hospitality of others, and then prepare with respect and reverence for this extraordinary event: Take a photo of the family at this moment in time: The family stands or now sit in carefully calculated, hierarchical proportions, with the mother and father sitting on identical chairs (it just so happens that the father’s seat is larger than the mother’s seat), while the children stand behind or next to them, depending on the age of the children, and if the family consists of only one child with the parents, he will stand in the middle between them. The image was therefore subject to social hierarchy as if it conveyed not only the images of persons, but also the image of what society was like; As if the photograph is a confirmation of the time in which it was taken, which made the choice of the place to display it in the house a very important matter, not only because the owners want to display it in front of others, but because they want to be able to expand their tongue in the face of time. The photographs captured a fleeting moment in time and trapped them in the frame, imprisoned in a small space, unable to go out and cross as their companions, or at least that’s what we imagine, as we lock that moment of time into a picture that we place within a frame of a space of small dimensions, we create our own illusions about To remain forever as we are in the picture, as we are at the moment of taking the photo, as if we own that moment in time forever, as if we insist on confirming that we are alone in that moment in time, that we realize that death will make us forget (forget As if you weren’t not) as Mahmoud Darwish said; The photograph allows us to prove who we are at a given moment as sure proof of our existence in the world of the living one day.

So we can say that a personal or family photo is a marginalization of the idea of ​​death in memory, is that true? We live and in the margin of our memory lives the idea of ​​death, it leaves its place in the margins many times and approaches the body, so we think, while the truth is that death is the body and our life is the margin, life is fleeting, changing, moving, while death is permanent and fixed, what we do in the picture is that we borrow The permanence of death and export it to the personal image, so we become stable and permanent, or at at least that’s what we want to believe through our personal or family photos, and here we made it stable from the moment of transience.

“The image captures the present” – says Roland Barthes in his book “The Luminous Room: Reflections on Photography”

In the homes I visited, personal and family photos hung carefully on the walls of the hall or placed on elegant easels on the tables always caught my eye. Then I remember that I never had a photo archive of myself, even after I had my only daughter, I never bothered to take photos of her, I didn’t know where her childhood photos of her friends went and family didn’t go. I also didn’t have a photo of my late father, nor of my mother who lives a long way from me. When I think about photos, I notice that my memory holds many photos of my life, as if it were a real archive. What does it mean to post photos of my daughter at all stages of her life? Or a picture of my late father? My daughter has a full life and many fleeting moments, and my time with her is so beautiful that no wall can contain all of her if I photograph her. Reducing my relationship with her with one photo here and another there means trying to forget a large number of happy moments with her. Likewise, my father always sees him in all stages of his life, and his image will not make me remember if I decide to forget him; It is the mind that forgets, not the eye. The eye is an instrument of seeing, while those we love live in our sight, not in our eyes. Maybe I would hang a picture of one of my loved ones or me on my wall if her portrait was made by a plastic artist. In a portrait, the artist leaves something of himself, his mood and vision, his emotions too, while a personal photograph is neutral because his instrument is neutral, no photographer can add anything to the truth before him; In composition (portrait) it does not matter how accurately we notice the additions.

Nowadays there have been great and incredible changes in photographic techniques, cameras with interchangeable lenses have become for professional photographers working in the profession of photography. While mobile smartphones with front and back lenses have turned everyone into photographers, the filters that accompany phone lenses have turned everyone into professionals. Now it is enough that I grab my phone and take the appropriate position and take a picture of myself and put it on the filter so that it is ready to display. The Facebook wall has been replaced by the walls of rooms and halls. There is now rarely a house whose owners display family photos on the walls or tables. Social network pages have become a strong competitor for the walls of houses, because the pages of the blue world are more public than the walls of houses, and the number of people who will see our personal photos has multiplied thousands of times. Our personal photos in different situations and places, those photos we were embarrassed for anyone to see, our photos in the bedrooms when we woke up, our photos in private picnic areas, our photos while dancing, our photos while we were sick and in hospitals, our dying pictures, our pictures with our loved ones, loved ones and friends. , Our extremely private photos are now exposed to everyone, so simply and with collective complicity to do so.

Just as we have replaced the walls of houses with the walls of Facebook, Instagram and others, the mobile devices with which we have great memories, which accommodate all the images we store in them that have not found a place for them, have become neither in the margins of our personal memory nor in his body. This is how the photos of our loved ones are available to us at any time, we no longer have to conjure them up on our mobile phones with just a simple touch. The image is no longer the only one that seizes the current, the current has become everything in the grip of technology that has prevailed as a wide body and shaped us people with our images, memories and illusions to the narrow margin.

In the past, the photograph prompted many philosophers and critics to talk about it and link it to the psychology of art and its relationship to death, time and physics. The photograph was a whole world like a poem or a painting. Today, with the enormous abundance of daily images, personal and public, and with this extravagance in the presentation of the moments and forms of our lives, there is nothing left in the picture that tempts philosophers to talk about it. Perhaps it is the turn of psychologists, who discovered that there (Nercis) lurks inside every A-person, and very easy modern imaging techniques have allowed him to announce himself in us and change from a legend to a vulgar creature that appears every moment falls in love with himself when he sees it on the mobile phone screen.

Leave a Comment