Truth is defined by the dictionary as that which is in accordance with fact or reality. Truth defined by me is the only constant of reality...that is what remains true for everybody. Truth is based on reality but reality is subjective, making it an idea. For instance, your reality might be a white picket fence with June Cleaver packing lunch inside while mine is a wire fence with dad coming home drunk every night. Your reality might be that you will be getting married someday while my reality is to travel the world and never settle down. Each and every one of us has a different reality but they are all tied together with one thing, and that is truth.
Truth is the fact that forms realities for people. Usually a current event or action that was taken, truth is always inarguable. It happened and there is no way that you can tell me it didn't. For instance, during the Civil Rights Movements many African Americans were lynched. That is the truth, no one can say that lynchings didn't happen. Truth is objective. Reality however is subjective. For the families of those who were lynched, the reality was the cruel injustices of racism and ethnic division and misunderstanding. For those who did lynch, the reality was a feeling of superiority and justice even; a feeling that whites were better than blacks...just because.
I think that images can be a very strong representation of truth because it documents things that happened in the context that they happened in (i.e. photographs of a crime scene or of war). Sometimes a picture is the only way that we'll ever be able to see or hold onto the truth. However, with digital maniupulation or any kind of manipulation for that matter, the truth may be distorted and that which we think to be fact could turn out to be not quite what we thought it was (Brian Wolski's photograph).
Photographs are also very powerful as documenting tools because we deem them to be credible. People will most often times believe what they see, especially if it is coming from a source where they would expect to be told the truth (i.e. TIME magazine or a newspaper). Sometimes, in fact, we believe what we see even if we know in our minds that it's probably not all the way real (i.e. magazine models and celebrities). By this I mean, I know that the model on the front cover of Glamour is digitally manipulated to look drop dead sexy, but for some reason i still believe that that's what she really looks like. And that might just be what i should look like too...
As far as providing evidence, the credibility of photography goes along with the photographers. Will current and future photographers be able to restrain themselves from digitally retouching or enhancing a scene to the point where it changes or skews the true content of the photograph? Whether or not they will be able to is somthing that I don't know, but only with honest journalists and photographers will we be able to trust photography as a source of evidence.
No comments:
Post a Comment