Photography, the Continuity of Modern Iconography

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Ph.D candidate in Art Research, University of Tehran, Iran.

2 PhD of film aesthetic, cinema Chief of Department and Assistant Professor of Tehran University,Tehran,Iran

3 Faculty of Visual Art, University of Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Iconography has profound origins in human’s perspective and understanding of the world. Ancient murals, Christian religious icons, and eventually the manifestations of the modern age, have been created and used in the same quality in human cultural life. They have almost the same ultimate destination and goal that can be detected in them. Iconography has constantly been accompanied by  a kind of fear, to dominating what can happen in the future, and, in order to avert disasters and death, and to achieve forgiveness, prosperity and bliss. After the invention of photography, by putting the photographs alongside the icons which in some cases are derived from religious texts, not only does photography introduce itself as an iconography device, but it has also been influential in producing paintings iconographies with creation of the photographic realism. The main question is that how photography especially those about the social issues and among them the private and family photos, as a modern medium has an iconic origin, and how photography is able to have an unrealistic and metaphysical usage in the context of today life with its inherent characteristics being clarity, accuracy in details, signifying the being-there (dasein) of the referent and as a result, the photographic realism? This issue can be studied based on the most important theories of photography in the twentieth century. It is concluded that photography, in its philosophy and existential position, not only has carried on the iconic characteristics of the past, but has also has emphasized its originality and textual identity more broadly, so that it has given a photographic originality to modern iconography.

Keywords

References

• Allen, G. (2006). Roland Barthes. Translated by Yazdanjou, P. Tehran: Markaz.
• Ayatollahi, H. & Beheshti, T. (2011). Stylistic Study of Byzantine Iconography Art. Honar- Ha- Ye_Ziba, (52):
39-48.
• Barthes, R. (2005). Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography. Translated Motaref, N. Tehran: Cheshmeh.
• Batchen, G. (2004). Forget Me Not: Photography & Remembrance. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
• Berger, J. (2001). About Looking. Translated by Mohajer, F. Tehran: Agah.
• Berger, J. (2011). Ways of Seeing. Translated by Houshmand-e Vizhe, M. Tehran: Behjat.
• Berger, J. and Mohr J. (2004). Another Way of Telling. Translated by Damandan, P & Damandan, S. Tehran: Ghou .
• Vinegar, A. (2010). Ed Ruscha, Heidegger, and deadpan photography. In: Photography After Conceptual Art. Singapore: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Grundberg, A. (2003). Crisis of the Real: Potography and Postmodernism (2nd ed). New York: Routledge.
• Grundberg, A. (2010). Crisis of the Real: Writing on Photography. Translated by Ebrahimi Moghaddam, M. Tehran: Farhangestan-e Honar.
• Metz, C. (1985). Photography and Fetish. In: October, Vol 34. New York: The MIT Press.
• Metz, C. (2004). Photography and Fetish. Translated by Delrang, J. Herfeh Honarmand, (9): 42-48.
• Moghimnejad, M. (2015). Photography and Theory. Tehran: Soure-e Mehr.
• Morris, E. (2015). Believing is seeing: Observation on the Mysteries of Photography. Translated by Nabavi, R. Tehran: Patogh.
• Nasri, A. (2013). Reading Image with Erwin Panofsky. Kimiaye Honar Quarterly, 2(6): 7-20.
• Ouspensky, L. and Lossky, V. (2009). The Meaning of Icons. Translated by Davoudy, M. Tehran: Research Institute of Culture and Islamic Art publication.
• Pinney, C. (2011). Photography and Anthropology. London: Reaktion Books Ltd.
• Sontag, S. (2013). On Photography. Translated by Akhgar, M. Tehran: Nazar Research and Cultural Institute.
• Sonesson, G. (2009). Semiotics of photography. Translated by Moghimnejad, M. Tehran: Elm.
•Vinegar, A. (2009). Ed Ruscha, Heidegger, and Deadpan Photography. Art History, 32(5) :852-873.
• Wells, L. (2011). Photography: A Critical Introduction. Translated by Khatayi-lar, S., Ghodsi, V., Mohajer, M. & Nabavi, M. Tehran: Minooye Kherad.
• Wells, L. (2013). Crucial Photography Theories of Twentieth century. Translated by Akhgar, M. Tehran: Samt.
The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar
Volume 16, Issue 73
July 2019
Pages 17-28

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics