I have always had a strange relationship with photography: there were times when I found myself taking trips (to places like Death Valley or some other suitably photographic location) solely for the purpose of making photographs. I read her book On Photography years ago before I switched to studying anthropology, and I think I ingested a certain amount of her argument about the passivity and alienation that making photographs can engender. Thanks to the comments to my first post here*, I had Susan Sontag’s argument that photography is “essentially an act of non-intervention” somewhat stuck in my head throughout the entire road trip. And yes, this does have something to do with anthropology. Sure, we’re social science grad students-but make no mistake: we’re tourists just like anyone else out there who wields maps, guidebooks, and the desire to “see some cool stuff along the way.” So I feel like I have the appropriate experience (personal and observational) to make a few comments about the co-evolved relationship that exists between tourist behavior and photography. Of course, we did have the chance to be tourists on this cross-country trek, and both of us had our camera equipment stuffed into the truck with the rest of our necessary graduate student detritus. Mountains matter, and the battle between inclement weather and a 2000 GMC Jimmy is no contest, period. The trip reminded me, once again, that geography does matter-despite the arguments of technophiles who seem to think that the magic of the internet and other globalizing technologies have rendered silly impediments like massive mountain ranges irrelevant.
I just spent the last week (along with my wife, who is also a grad student in anthropology) driving across the country-it was a bit more eventful than either of us had expected (thunderstorms in Kansas and Missouri, brake problems at 11,00 feet in Colorado, sand storms in northeast Arizona, and ridiculously dense 3 a.m.
0 kommentar(er)
