"Hearing is Believing" and "Photographic Icons" are great pieces to compare considering one mainly focuses on visual arts and the other audio .A quote that stood out to me from "Hearing is Believing" is "Radio stretches the imagination". It's true radio and other media revolving around audio give the audience a creative license that television and film can't. This is interesting because television and film are more popular then radio. Video killed the radio star, right?
I liked what was said about Chuck Berry and how his music became such an influence since his music debuted. Though, I would say Chuck Berry did not become the icon he is today solely on his unique sound but also his image. His style and personality (and iconic "duckwalk") contributed greatly to his performance as well as those he influenced.
The piece on photographic icons was surprising. I had no idea most of those images had been fabricated. I do feel like when I look at a photograph I tend to believe what I see. I hardly question the circumstance of the photo. Last year I sat through a lecture on photojournalism. Part of class was a matching exercise where we had to match a list of places where the photographs were taken to the pictures. One that stands out in my memory was a photograph of a mosque, the entire class placed the picture with a middle eastern country but in reality the picture was taken in Michigan. Reading this article was a really good reminder that we need to factor in context while interpreting a photograph.
Good to see somebody integrating the two pieces together in their discussion. Good work.
ReplyDelete>>Video killed the radio star, right?<<
If you ask me...yes. More on that next week...
With respect to the photos, do you feel that they were "fabricated" outright? Certainly, we can't just assume they are snapshots of reality - but you raise another question: does the fact that pictures are "composed" rather than just taken mean that they are inherently disingenuous?