Confernece Schedule and Reminders

Remember that Conversation Paper #1 is due by 5pm on Tuesday. We have no class on Tuesday or Thursday (so no class next week). We'll be back the following Tuesday, and I'll let you know what to do for class during your conference. 

If you didn't sign up for a conference, or want to change your time, choose a time with an X in it and let me know. See you next week! 

THURSDAY
9:30 Gable
:40 Kaden
:50 Brayden

10:00 La'Quan
:10 Trenton
:20 Dan
:30 Kensey
:40 Hailey P
:50 Haley L

2:00 Connie
:10 X
:20 Matthew
:30 Brandon
:40 X

FRIDAY
1:00 Shelby
:10 X
:20 X
:30 Megan 
:40 X
:50 X

2:00 Logan
:10 X
:20 X

MONDAY
10:50 Cody
11:00 Jamie
:10 Cece
:20 X
:30 X
:40 X
:50 X

1:00 Sofia
:10 Emily
:20: Bailee
:30-:50 X

2:00-2:40 X

For Thursday: Reading Your Image

I want you to start thinking about the paper assignment seriously now, so instead of reading more of Morris for Thursday, choose an iconic image (a photo, a painting, etc.) and answer the questions below--all FOUR. Bring these questions to class on Thursday, since we'll be discussing your answers and different approaches to answering them. 

Answer all FOUR of the following:

Q1: What is the title or name of the painting/photo? How does this shape your understanding of what the work means or is about? If you didn't know this, do you think you would have seen the same thing? Why or why not? ALSO, do you know if the artist gave the title to the work, or it came from someplace else? Why might this matter?

Q2: Morris asks in Chapter 4, "photographs function on so many different levels and mean  so many different things to different people. Are they fine works of art? Are they documentary photographs? Can they be both?" (167). Discuss how your image could be seen as a documentary photograph and a work of art. Also, could it be seen as propaganda as well? Which way do you feel is the best way to appreciate/understand it?

Q3: Morris quotes the philosopher Norwood Russell Hanson, who famously stated that "There is more to seeing than meets the eyeball," to which Morris adds, "if we believe we see a rabbit, we see a rabbit. If we believe we see a duck, we see a duck...Our beliefs can completely defeat sensory evidence" (84). Discuss two completely different ways people could view this image--as a "duck" and as a "rabbit". In other words, how could people see two very different or even contradictory readings in this one image? You might also consider what we can be fooled into seeing/thinking that isn't actually in the image.

Q4; In Chapter 3, Morris writes that "Photographs reveal and they conceal" (118). He also reminds us that a lot of things occur behind the scenes, since photographs gain power by what they don't show us as much as what they do. In your image, what isn't shown in the work of art that might be important? What don't we see? Why do you think the artist didn't include this? What story do the missing people/objects/context tell?

For Tuesday: Morris, Believing is Seeing, Chapter 4, Part 2

NOTE: Remember to choose an iconic work of art for your next paper soon! Once you pick an image, everything will get so much easier. Start researching slowly, reading an article or a website here and there. Before you know it, you'll have enough to write a paper--or two! 

Answer two of the following:

Q1: In talking to some of the experts, one of them tells Morris that photographers at that time sought "the kind of expression people are supposed to wear in documentary photos dealing with social problems" (161). What kind of expression is he talking about? How might this relate to the Migrant Mother image we looked at in class on Wednesday?

Q2: On page 173, Morris quotes Rothstein who writes of his own photo, "This picture was not controversial; it was informative--the dust storm picture. In the beginning, it was a record; after that it became a news picture, it then became a feature photograph, eventually it became a historical photograph, and now it's considered a work of art in most museums." How does a picture go from being an informative photo to a work of art in a few decades? What changes? What makes people see a different 'truth'?

Q3: If photography is art, and art is a series of rules that you  make up yourself and "follow slavishly" (167), what does it mean to make a photo 'artistic'? Should paintings and photos all follow the same rules to make them 'true' and 'legitimate'? Or can every artist follow their own rules as long as they show the world what they feel is real and true? What might be the problem with this? OR, what might be the advantage of this? 

Q4: How does the modern picture of Florence Thompson and her grown children change the context (or belief) of the Migrant Mother photo? If we put them side by side, what would we now see? Should we know the future (or the past) of an image? Or just its present?

For Thursday. Morris, Believing is Seeing, Ch.4, Part I (pp.125-157)

NOTE: There are NO questions for this reading. Instead, we'll have an in-class writing assignment based on some of the ideas in this chapter. I also want to make you write a little to help you start thinking about Conversation Paper #1 (every bit helps!). However, here are some ideas to consider as you read:

* Why did people consider the pictures 'fake' even when they were proved to not be fake? If the skull was really found in the same area as the photo, what made it fake to so many people?

* If a picture is meant to deceive, it can be considered 'fake.' But does it matter who intended to deceive? If someone added a context to make a picture lie, is the picture still 'false' or 'manipulated?' 

* What is the difference between Art and Propaganda? Can an artistic picture be used for propaganda? 

* Can a photograph have a point of view, even though it simply records what you show the camera? Can you make people 'see' an  idea without context?

* One of the photographers argued that photography, though not strictly an art form, "is an art for all that!" In other words, he felt that photographers had to be artist first, and photographers second. Why is this important?

* Why does Morris consider the clock in the photos so essential to understanding them? How does it change the photo and provide its own context?

* Morris says that our lives are often defined by our possessions and the other junk we accumulate. If someone looked into your bedroom, or your closet, or your desk, would they see the 'real' you?  Does your random stuff define who you are? Or would you  need more context to explain it?

For Tuesday: Morris, Believing is Seeing, Chapters 2-3

Answer TWO of the following for Chapters 2-3: 

Q1: In an article in The New Yorker that first introduced these pictures to the public, the writer, Seymour Hersch, wrote, "The photographs tell it all" (117). According to Morris, why can a single photograph not tell the entire story--or really, any story? What makes it especially hard to tell this story with one photo?

Q3: Morris consults a "smile scientist" to help him decode the picture of Sabrina smiling while leaning over the dead body. How does the scientist use several pictures to prove that Sabrina isn't as guilty as everyone believes she is? What does a "Duchenne Smile" have to do with it?

Q1: How does Qaissi's story relate to Fenton's from Chapter 1? Both are accused of fabricating their accounts and offering a "fake" story to the public. Yet Fenton actually took the picture, and Qaissi only claimed to be the subject of the picture. Was he intentionally "manipulating" an image for a specific effect? Or were his claims, true or not, unable to substantially change the image?

Q4: In Chapter 1, Morris writes that there is a significant difference between "information and knowledge" (63). How does this chapter prove this point once again? Why does the information around this photograph not translate into knowledge in the article? What prevented the journalists investigating the story from becoming informed? 

Conversation Paper #1 and Some Suggestions

The Conversation Paper #1 assignment is below...but first, I wanted to share some sources with you to help you find the image for the assignment. You can choose any iconic image (one that is popular and familiar enough that many people would recognize it, or has been reproduced in more than one format), either the ones below or one you find yourself. Here are a few ideas:

* Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential Pictures of All Time: http://100photos.time.com/

* CNN's Most Famous Paintings: https://www.cnn.com/style/article/most-famous-paintings/index.html

* 30 Striking Photos from the History of National Geographic: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2018/05/130-anniversary-gallery-culture-spd/

* Rolling Stone's Best Album Covers of All Time: https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-lists/readers-poll-the-best-album-covers-of-all-time-10324/10-the-velvet-underground-the-velvet-underground-nico-256611/

Conversation Paper #1: Seeing and Believing

For this assignment, I want you to choose an iconic photograph or work of art (a painting, etc.) to write about. By “iconic,” I mean a work that is fairly well known and that either most people would recognize, or that is in books, in a museum, or in advertisements. I’ll give you a list of possible works on the blog, but you’re welcome to choose your own. Then write a paper that responds to the question below:

Q: Is this work famous because of what it is, or what people think it is? In other words, do people ‘see’ this as a work of art first, or do they ‘believe’ in this work before they even see it? For example, when you see de Vinci’s Mona Lisa, you’ve seen it everywhere already—on T-shirts, coffee mugs, in advertisements, etc. So you’re seeing a manipulation of this image, what people have made you believe it is, before you ever seen it for what it is. So how do we ‘unsee’ it and learn to appreciate the work itself? Are we looking at an idea, or an artwork? How do we know?

SOME ISSUES TO ADDRESS IN YOUR PAPER:

• Where do people see this work today? How do we encounter it?
• What makes the work iconic? Is it important because people respond to it, or are we told to like it before we even see it?
• Is it used to sell anything? Is it manipulated for reasons outside the art itself?
• What context is important to know about the work? How does it change what we see, or what we think we see?
• Has the work become more “true” or more “false” over the years? How can a work of art become “false”?
• What do people say the work means? Do you agree with them? Is there more than one interpretation?
• Is there a question of the work’s authenticity? Is there more than one version of the work? Is this the “best”? Or just the one we know?

REQUIREMENTS

• Use Morris’ book Believing is Seeing as one of your main sources. Quote from the chapters so you can respond to his ideas as you write. Consider the ‘big ideas’ we’ve discussed in class and in your daily responses.
• At least 4 secondary sources about your work of art, or anything related to it, that can provide context, history, culture, or more of the conversation. You must quote these in your paper as ideas to introduce and respond to.
• You can use Humans of New York as one of these 4 sources, or as an additional source to help you discuss your image. But it has to be relevant; don’t just use the book as an empty source. Either it aids your conversation or it doesn’t.
• At least 4-5 pages double spaced, though you can do more. You might need to do more depending on your image!
• DUE Friday, February 28^th by 5pm [no class that day]

NO CLASS ON TUESDAY--SEE BELOW

Sadly, I have to cancel class on Tuesday because of ECU's Interscholastic Meet, which is taking over all of the third floor of Horace Mann. Therefore, we'll miss an entire week of class! 

* Bring your questions from Chapter 1 (on the post below) to class on Thursday. 

* Read Chapter 2 of Morris' Believing is Seeing for Thursday's class. I won't give you any new questions, but we will do an in-class writing over it when you get to class. We'll also discuss some ideas from Chapter 1 as well. I just don't want to fall further behind in class.

* I have your Paper #1s to hand back to you, but if you want to get it earlier, feel free to stop by my office during my office hours on Monday-Wednesday.

Sorry for the inconvenience! Let me know if you have any questions.

For Thursday (?): Morris, Believing is Seeing, Chapter 1 (Part Three)

NOTE: Hopefully, we'll be back in school on Thursday for these questions, but if not, we'll have to bump it to the following Tuesday. Let's see how much snow we get! 

Answer TWO of the following: 

Q1: On page 45, an expert tells Morris that the photographs have been doctored, which is the only explanation for cannon balls that are all the same size. Morris rejects this, saying that people often prefer to find a conspiracy in things that are difficult to understand. Why is this? Why would we prefer to see a 'trick' rather than the 'truth'?

Q2: How did the rocks, which Morris and others give human nicknames, ultimately unlock the mystery of the ON/OFF photos? What do they conclusively tell us about the "truth" of the photos? However, why doesn't this completely solve the mystery: or rather, why does it solve one thing and leave another unsolved?

Q3: On page 54, Morris asks an expert, "Are you saying: to interpret a picture we need more than the picture itself? We need context." Why might this idea bother Morris, particularly in pictures like these? Should the pictures themselves be enough (or just one of the pictures)? Is there a danger in insisting that we know more?

Q4: Morris also argues that every photograph is "posed because every photograph excludes something" (65). So in his mind, taking a picture is staged and makes it somewhat inauthentic. The only way to be authentic is not to take the picture. Do you agree with this? Does this idea help us appreciate the photos and their mystery?