Summarize Rosler's Main Claim Or Argument

1. Summarize Rosler’s main claim(s) or argument(s). (20 points)

Rosler argues that documentary photography is not what it used to be, and certainly not for the good. She says that photographers do not want to document with the goal to change, but rather in order to know. Rosler’s says dedication to reform was swapped by exoticism, tourism, voyeurism and more. Rosler argues it’s common to accept that documentary precedes, supplants, transcends, and cures substantive social activism, that documentary of today isn’t real.

2. Summarize Hendersons’s main claim(s) or argument(s). (20 points)

Henderson states a photographer has the right to photograph anything, listing ways to apply that right for example, “in some cases a camera may reduce
According to Wells, documentary photography attracts debate in the 1970’s and 1980’s. Why? (10 points)

There were worries with the politics of representation, and more abstract philosophical debates in which Cartesian distinction between subject and object, viewer and viewed, was challenged. They worked together and undermined the two bases of the thought of documentary truth and the notion of neutrality of the observer.

4. Based on your understanding of Rosler’s viewpoints on documentary photography, how might she view the function of Ai Wei Wei’s use of photography in his art practice? (20 Points)

I got back and forth debating this question, as I have a hard time stating what others may think—there is always an exception with everyone, someone may not like apples but apple pie and vice versa. Rosler would view Ai WeiWei’s use of photography as interesting, she would probably enjoy it. In my opinion, Ai WeiWei’s photography in his art practice is very real, which is something Rosler wanted in documentary photography. But, at the same time, I feel that Rosler would not accept his use since it is substantive social activism, and see it like she does other documentary photography, as not
She captures photographs without thinking, without having an idea—she just takes them.

6. How does these essays/films relate and/or change your ideas about photography? (10 points)

I relate quite a bit with Ai WeiWei, or maybe relate is not quite the word—he inspires? He standing for what he believes is right, what he thinks to be the truth, he does so with artwork. He’s not destructive in the sense of harming others or theft, but he’s destructive with his art. Such as the photographs of him breaking a pot—I’ve always felt that sort of photography has such a blunt statement, but yet you also have to think about what it is he is stating. Such as the photos of him with his middle finger up—the statement is blunt, but I feel like we question what he is stating exactly. Why is his finger up, why is he angry? I want to research into the issue—and this is exactly what Ai WeiWei wants.
I suppose, I can relate to this. Something blunt, but yet you have to research to get the full meaning is something I’ve always admired and wanted to