For Monday: Pick an Image and Answer the Questions Below

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

Remember, the links to some iconic paintings and photos are a few posts down from this one, though you can choose anything iconic, or any of the images in Morris' book. 

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?