THE ARTS IN NEW YORK CITY Fall 2017 | Baruch College | Macaulay Honors

I have always loved Photography; the taking the picture and especially being in pictures. I love when pictures of myself turn out just right and all the elements I was trying to capture –the mood, the scenery, the perfect breeze – all work together to create what I then call an Instagram worthy picture. In the reading by Roland Barthes, I understood Studium and Punctum because it is what I try to capture and portray when I take pictures or when I direct a picture being taken of me. I think it is something everyone uses when they take a picture or consider whether or not a picture is worth being shared with the world.

I will use myself as a way to understand both stadium and punctum. The picture (selfie) to the

selfie at work

right is one that I took while at my job. However, after looking at it for a minute I not only posted it on Snapchat but I also posted it on my Instagram story as well. It was studium that made me originally like the picture and do a double take when I saw how it came out. Studium describes the way I felt when I first looked at and appreciated the colors that the sunlight highlighted the way my hair was neatly a mess, and the “effortlessly cute” pose I was in. These were all surface things but first impressions are lasting impressions. And first impressions are important to catch the eye. Punctum is, for a play on words, the point of the picture. It is the tiny details that catch your attention after your eyes have been wowed. It’s smacking them with the brains after the beauty. In this picture it’s the rainbow bow in my hair, that s unlike the soft feel of the picture. It is the perfect eyeliner, pierced ears, shiny eyes and even the Tiger Schulman sign behind my head. These all point to their being a story behind the person in this picture.

In Sternberger’s photos, he definitely employs the ways of studium in his pictures. Being in white and black is especially a statement because things in black and white are often meant to be a statement. In this photo of Einstein (Below), the black and white really draws the eyes to the many wrinkles in his face and his facial expression. For Punctum, however, I believe it is not so easily seen. I personally do not see the deeper meaning or smaller details in this picture. But in the same way I was able to analyze my own picture so well, I think the objects in the picture could analyze their own pictures. Sternberger was said to be “a psychologist with a camera, capturing his subjects’ inner selves in that moment his shutter flicked.” And I think his photographs employed the skill of ‘personal punctum’. Meaning the deeper meaning of the picture could be pondered by others, but it was really up to the subjects of each picture to know.

Often when I think of art, I think of portraits, sculptures or impressionist paintings. I am always over taken with a feeling of slight awe, for I find an artistic skill rather impressive.  Perhaps this is because I am incapable of such artistic creations myself. I then think of the modern art that seems to lack detail and wonder, “Could I also create that plain black box and have it framed?” however, despite this thought, there is something about both the classical art and the modern art that seems to catch the viewer’s attention.

Photography is a means of art as well. The photographer is just like the artist in the sense that he captures and materializes that which he wishes to convey or grasp. He too has an artistic license to classify whatever he views as art. The photograph transforms into art once that which is captured veers from ordinary. One can look at the photograph and wonder, “Perhaps I can take this exact photo myself with the pressing of a button…” Yet the viewer still knows that there is something indescribably unique behind the captured simplicity.

Ronald Barthes in his Camera Lucida, explains how the photograph encompasses two novel ideas/elements. These elements are studium and punctum. First, the photo catches the viewer’s attention. The viewer is drawn in because there is something different, attractive or compelling about the photograph. Then, there is something particular about the specific photograph that causes the viewer to feel a deep emotional connection with the image. A personal connection is established between the viewer and the photograph.

Upon entering the Mishkin Gallery, there were many photos to observe. Because all the photos were black and white, I was not directing my attention towards bright colors or large shapes. Rather, I was left to observe the subjects in the photos and try to decipher their artistic brilliance.

I understood Barthes terms studium and punctum more precisely as I browsed through the galleries. There were those photos that I stopped to slowly gaze and then continue onwards. And, there were those photos that once I stopped, for some reason I was drawn further in in order to understand it’s uniqueness.

I found the photos of the children the most interesting. Not because they were the most unusual, rather, because they felt the most candid and raw to me. I found it amazing how Sternberger was able to capture the children he photographed in such a natural way. The simplicity and naivety was something I appreciated. It seemed to me that Sternberger did not only know how to work manipulate the lighting in order to capture the best results, he also knew how to work with his subjects as well resulting in portrayal of their best selves.

As I stopped to observe the photos more closely, I felt as if I knew what the child could’ve been thinking or dreaming about. A major component of Sternberger’s genius was that he often transformed the observer into a quasi active participant in his photo shoot as well.

-Yael Magder

The Sternberger exhibit is a magnificent display of photographic portraits, and these pictures perfectly exemplify Barthes’s concepts of studium and punctum. The kind of portraiture that Marcel Sternberger was known for, and really created, was the psychological portrait. The psychological portrait is pretty much what it sounds like; it is a picture of a person taken in such a way that it reveals their psychology, their essence, their exposed self. Sternberger’s process employed just a plain black backdrop and simple lighting, which allowed for full focus on the expression and emotional state of the person he was photographing. With this kind of portrait, it is possible for the outside observer to feel drawn in to the photograph, and to wonder about what was going on behind the scenes and in the subject’s head, in order for the picture to portray them in this way. And that is precisely what punctum is; it’s the personal attachment that breaks the detachment of the original view, the casual glance. This casual, detached glance or viewing is studium. It is the impression you get before becoming personally involved in a picture, and relating to it.

To further explain these concepts of studium and punctum take Sternberger’s photographic portrait of Sigmund Freud, the brilliant psychologist and developer of psychoanalysis. At first glance, it looks like any other portrait of a stuffy, old man. From far away, there’s nothing extraordinary about it, nothing that calls out to you. But step closer, and you will feel his eyes pierce you. Freud is not merely looking through you, he is looking at you, he is making eye contact with you. The depth in his eyes, and in the wrinkles around his eyes, are discernible like they weren’t before. It feels as though Sigmund Freud is with you in person. But of course, in reality, he’s not with you, and that’s what makes Sternberger’s portraiture so remarkable. In the example with Freud, he is able to capture this deep essence you would think to find in an eminent psychologist, were you to meet him in person. However, to achieve that personal relatability through a photograph is a real feat, and that is why Marcel Sternberger’s photographs so perfectly exemplify this concept of punctum. As for studium, there is studium with everything you see. Studium is merely your first impression of something, before you get close enough to it (either literally or figuratively) for it to puncture you. It is the casual glance, or glance from afar, like in the example above.

In Camera Lucida, Roland Barthes establishes his personal definition of a successful photograph. This definition helped me a lot, since understanding how to decipher photographs has been quite difficult for me. My assumption is that we are extremely saturated with photographs and it has become something too close and familiar to us. How do you question and take apart the idea of a photograph when you just took a photo of your “To-Do” list so that you don’t carry a piece of paper with you? How do you decipher and look deeply into framed professional photography when you scroll through hundreds of images and photographs on Facebook and Instagram, daily? These facts are misleading and offer the confidence that photography is nothing new to us, but the meaning and the content of photography is something incredibly far from familiar, at least to me.

So embarking on this journey has been difficult. In short, Barthes looks at studium and punctum as the main elements of a photograph. Studium refers to an “enthusiastic commitment,” Barthes writes in Camera Lucida. This is the initial attraction towards a photograph. It’s what makes you stop and engage your eyes with what you’re actually seeing. It’s what makes your eyes stick to the photograph, in opposed to ‘glancing’ at something pointlessly. The second element “punctuates” the first. Barthes explains that the punctum sticks out and pokes the observer. It is the element of purpose and the special something in the photograph. It makes the photo thought provoking and worthy of questions and searches for answers.

This being said, Marcel Sternberger’s photographs in the Miskin Gallery were all rich with studium, in my opinion. The black background of the portraits put a focus on the subject. Once your eyes focused on the subject and were engaged by what they had to say, you noticed how effortless their expressions were. The studium, the desire to study these faces, the “enthusiastic commitment,” happened because of the simplicity and the effortlessness of the photos.

Looking into the eyes of each person in every photograph made me feel like I know them. I felt an incredibly strong connection with each one of them. This was the inevitable effect of the punctum. I was surprised at the feeling I got from every single photograph in the exhibit and I began searching for the reason. Why was this happening? Why did I feel like I know Albert Einstein? Why did I feel like Pearl S.Buck was in my living room drinking coffee with my mom last week? Why am I making up stories behind these feelings? There, I discovered the punctum.

The punctum was in the familiarity. Marcel Sternberger could not photograph someone without truly knowing them, thus he knew the best way to capture their identity. The curator of the exhibit caught the punctum perfectly: “Ultimately… Sternberger was a psychologist with a camera, capturing his subjects’ inner selves in that moment his shutter flickered.” The simplicity in the photos, the black background, the effortless poses of the subject, the familiarity in their gaze, all of these elements created the punctum that picks at your brain, trying to think where you know these people from and how come you know them personally? Or do you?

I cannot give a specific photograph as an example for two reasons. My photo of Marcel Sternberger’s photograph doesn’t do it any justice and in all honesty, I connected to every single one of his photographs.

Here is a photograph that I have taken. It was a moment that called my name when I noticed it, making me take out my phone and capture it. The studium was instant. It was a beautiful moment, a beautiful view, what wasn’t admirable? The punctum came afterwards, when I imagined the sky and the sea becoming one. I began trying to see something else at the horizon, something peeking out. What was happening there? How would it look from that side towards this one? Could the sky and the sea connect eventually? Did they become one? The studium made me stop and the punctum made me look closely.

Ellen Stoyanov

Before I address the ideas of studium and punctum, I will address the most impactful part of this text to me. This was the idea that once a photograph was taken it was an event that could never be replicated. I have always thought of how the seconds that pass can never be replicated because it won’t be the same day or time of year. However, I never realized how similar that concept is to many aspects of our lives including that of photographs. Once we take a picture, even if we try to recreate the pose and clothing, it will never be exactly the same as the first. That idea is baffling and unsettling, but it is a fact of life. Now, onto the aspects of studium and punctum. Studium is described as not only a study. Barthes describes it as “application to a thing, taste for someone, a kind of general enthusiastic commitment, of course, but without special acuity” (26). I think that we have always considered this term in class, but it is now that we can put a name to it. It relates to the “what is art” discussion that occurred on the first day. This concept is basically looking at a picture and being able to process it, but not connect or deeply resonate with it. I believe that all of the pictures in the Sternberger exhibit involved studium. All of these works caught my eye, because they were all in black and white. Also, the arrangement of the exhibit also sparked some of my attention, but not all of my attention. Then, this is when we move onto the punctum part. As noted by Barthes, punctum is “the accident which pricks me” (27). I think that this happened to me with several photographs. I thoroughly enjoy history, so seeing figures such as the Shah of Iran and Franklin Delano Roosevelt intrigued me to stop in front of the pictures and question it. I realized for some pictures how I spent two seconds looking while for others I stood in front of them and questioned. The most intriguing picture to me had to be the Diego Rivera picture. He was the only one with a dramatic facial expression, and he was the one with the most punctum. I instantly thought about his life, including his infidelity and the amazing artist Frida Kahlo who was his wife.
The photograph I have chosen for myself that had the most punctum and studium has to be this image of a woman looking down into her arms. It is a photograph of a painting. I asked Amy to come with me to this concert, and then this artist randomly starting throwing out his work. People ran to grab some of his art as they said they would decorate their dorms with it. It intrigued me to see the art in the dumpster. This initial studium passed as punctum disturbed and I thought: why would he throw away such beautiful work? Was he a “failed” artist? Was this work he did not want? Were these drafts? Why did he not sell them? Who is this woman in the painting? Why were all these white man’s paintings so effectively portraying and celebrating black women only? For the rest of the night, I bonded with strangers at the concert about his work, and his other paintings.

-Marie Traore

In discussing the subjectivity of art, the topics of appearance and semantic value of artwork start to enter the conversation. After reading the excerpt by Roland Barthes, I came to the conclusion that the concepts of studium and punctum are akin to the expression “Don’t judge a book by its cover.” With regard to artwork, the act of judging a book by its cover, or rather being or not being attracted to an artwork constitutes the studium factor, while punctum refers to the content of the work and whether it provides any sort of meaningful sentiment behind its appearance, and whether an element of the work exists that tempts the viewer to return to it.

Throughout my visit at the Mishkin Gallery, I felt there was one photo, in particular, that was not like the others. Having read the assigned reading, I’d only had a loose understanding or grasp of studium. I knew it was whether I liked or didn’t like how a certain artwork looked. The photograph titled “The Patriarch (Welsh Coal Miner),” had, in my opinion, a unique incorporation of studium. Unlike other photographs in the exhibit, the man in this work, middle-aged, was staring directly at the camera, with an agonizing, yet emotionless countenance, holding both hands on his face so that his fingers lined up just below his bottom lip. Before any further thought, I knew I liked this photograph. Something about the rawness of the man’s expression, his wrinkled face, the reflection of the light in his eyes, his uncombed and greasy hair, and his dirty fingers distinguished it from the neighboring works of Frida Kahlo and Sigmund Freud and kept me engaged while providing context to the term studium.

The punctum factor took to effect after I’d looked at the photo and read the caption. The man was a coal miner, which would explain the less than clean conditions of his face and fingers. Though I couldn’t draw an immediate personal connection, the photo reminded me of my grandfather, who’d owned a shoe repair shop for well over a decade and lives with scars and other marks of toil on his hands that represent the hard work he’d invested into his job. As it relates to this photograph, and really any work of art to which these two concepts apply, punctum serves as the “take away” and plays the bigger role in creating a memory, than the mere appearance based judgment of studium. Punctum inherently forms a connection between the viewer and the artwork, or as Barthes suggests, is the “accident which pricks me,” or the aspect that triggers an emotional response (27).

Though I found it difficult to capture a  single photo that embodied studium, partly because most everyday sights will contain some element that is visually appealing, the picture I chose is a token of punctum. This is indeed another cliche picture of the ocean, but personally, my first thought regarded the massive size of the ocean and the homogeneity of the body of water that covers seventy-five percent of the Earth, though is separated into many bodies on a map.

Ronald Osherov

According to Roland Barthes’ Camera Lucida, there are two main factors that allow a photograph to stand out to a viewer; studium and punctum. Studium, to summarize briefly, is the aspect of a photograph that adds interest for the viewer, while punctum is the aspect of a photograph that jumps out at the viewer and adds another level of attraction to the photograph. The difference between studium and punctum is that punctum causes a viewer to stop and reminisce on something particular in the photograph, causing great admiration for the photo, while studium just causes an overall likeliness and interest.

After reading Camera Lucida and fully understanding Barthes concepts of punctum and studium, I attended his exhibit. I was first overwhelmed with the amount of beautiful portraits in the exhibit, but as I walked around I began to notice that every set of portraits was dedicated to different people, times, and ages. I stopped and admired many portraits, but with a general fondness. I did not feel an overwhelming amount of admiration for many of the portraits, but I did adore how beautifully the photographs were taken. I understood that to me, many of these portraits demonstrated studium to me, but as I stopped to adore the photographs of Albert Einstein, I knew I was experiencing punctum through the photographs.

The photographs of Albert Einstein were absolutely breathtaking. He captures Einstein’s sense of happiness, free-will, originality, and brilliance, all into one photograph. I was truly taken back by the fact that Barthes was able to photograph a man that completely changed our world in his lifetime, and capture his true feelings and traits. I had never seen this done in a photograph before, and I knew that I was experiencing punctum through Barthes amazing work.

The photograph to the right allowed me to demonstrate Barthes concepts of studium and punctum. This photograph demonstrates punctum to me due to the fact that it reminds me of the times I spent in the city as a child. I recall holding my father’s hand and trying my hardest to not step on the cracks in between the pavement. Another viewer may see this photograph and experience studium because, in reality, it is simply a photograph of a sidewalk. The difference between studium and punctum is the viewer’s own personal connections with the photograph; how they feel and what they are reminded of when viewing a photograph.

After reading Camera Lucida by Roland Barthes, I was immediately taken aback by the idea that a photograph is an eternal representation of a single moment. While I always had that idea floating in the back of my head, I never stopped to think about it. I never considered that the eyes you see in a photograph, such as the eyes of Napoleon’s brother, are the same eyes as the person that existed. Barthes spoke about how a photograph is a machine that can replicate a subject, even after death, or “the return of the dead”.

I understand the concept of stadium and punctum, I believe, according to Barthes, because it’s something that elevates a photograph from the ordinary to the extraordinary. In my mind, I have associated stadium to be the basic levels of a good photograph; something aesthetically pleasing, and showcasing something of importance. Like Barthes explained, it is all culturally homogeneous, everything within the shot belongs together. I appreciate Barthes giving the feeling punctum leaves the spectator with, a name. I have definitely observed photos or even films that left me with a feeling of being punctured, or marked now with some invisible hole. I never knew a way to describe that feeling of being changed by something until Barthes explained it.

The only photograph in the Marcel Sternberger exhibit that I believe contains this stadium and punctum, is one of Albert Einstein from 1950. Albert Einstein was a cultural icon, he was a dignified player in our countries history with his development of the atomic bomb, and is responsible for a lot of the theories and formulas that allow us to understand our world today. In the photo, Einstein is dressed plainly, not like a scientist. He’s laid back and calm, and his smile is friendly and welcoming to the spectator. The stadium fulfillment is there, as he his dressed according to the culture, and overall just looks like Einstein ordinarily would. However, the punctum, for me, is derived by his innocent smile. Despite his involvement in the war and his role in creating a weapon of mass destruction, his smile is able to contrast what he has done and make him appear innocent, while he is far from that. Not only this, but he doesn’t look like a scientist, he looks like a common man, not at all special in any way. He’s dressed like a farmer would dress, and his hair and facial expression is simple, but in reality, he was one of the most extraordinary people of his time, let alone history, and yet Sternberger portrayed him as nothing more than ordinary.

Other than this photo, I don’t believe any of Sternberger’s photos contain both stadium and punctum. They are very nice photographs that capture the likelihood of the people within them, however they lack the elevation that punctum involves.

Without incorporating Roland Barthe’s concepts of studium and punctum, Marcel Sternberger’s photographs are simply stunning. With a wide range of photo subjects and an incredible talent for capturing the hidden essences of said photo subjects, Sternberger blew me away with the timeline of his life captured through photographs. Beyond his impressive subjects of notability, his extensive range of portrait themes and his masterful use of the monochromatic scale, there are the concepts of studium and punctum to truly allow the viewer to appreciate Sternberger’s works.

Studium is considered to be a surface-level attraction to a certain entity, most particularly a photograph. It is the reason a set of prints may catch your eye in a museum, or the explanation behind an individual’s particular attraction towards said set of photos. According to Barthes, studium is “a taste for someone, a kind of general enthusiastic commitment… without specific acuity.” (Camera Lucida, 26) Studium is a general, purposefully unexplained feeling of affinity or appreciation. 

Alternatively, punctum is considered by Barthes to be the element that completely draws one into a particular piece of art, the “sinker” in a hook and line, or as he says, “…the accident that pricks me.” (Camera Lucida, 27) Punctum is the moment where we as the audience understand what it is about a particular piece of art that makes us truly appreciate it as a whole. It is considered a “closer look,” or even a moment of “artistic clarity.” It may take us quite a while to find the punctum, but truly- this is what allows for photography to become real and personal to us all. 

Sternberger’s work encompassed so many faces. The one that I pondered over for several minutes came in the form of a girl named “Judy.”

In Sternberger’s portrait of her, she is smiling mischievously at a point away from the camera. The initial studium for this piece came from the prominently childlike features of her attire and hairstyle in contrast to the look on her face. The sailor collar, the ballooned blouse sleeves, the pigtails tied with bows all portray her youthful innocence, but the look on her face seemed suited for a women perhaps twice her age. The punctum in this photograph came from being slightly puzzled at the particular expression on her face. It seemed almost wise in her deep-set eyes and tranquil smile and the shadows of her eyes seem to bring out the expression on Judy’s face fit for a woman twice her age. This is the “needle that pricked me” and this is the punctum that made me truly admire this photograph. Perhaps with and perhaps without deliberate intention, Sternberger was able to capture a very young girl with a soul much older than herself. Added to this, Judy’s gaze is trained to a point away from the camera, and in this moment where the expression on her face comes alive, we as the audience know that this is a genuine moment of perhaps either happiness or mischieviousness for Judy.

Keeping in mind the concepts of studium and punctum in a photography, I contemplated how I, too, may take a photograph that allows my audience and my viewers to experience the same sensations as I did in Sternberger’s works. I happened across this photograph in my archives, which was taken at the historical women’s march in New York City this past year. It is one of my favorite photographs because I believe it holds the biggest impact for both myself and my viewers.

In this photograph, a young girl is holding a sign clearly stating what is on her mind. Viewers may be drawn to this image (studium) because of the bright colors and the feature of a centered and in-focus subject. However, what I hope to be the “punctum” of this photograph is the expression on this young girl’s face. It is equal parts unhappy and hopeful- anxious and pondering. The hand-crafted message on her sign can only contribute to the expression on her face and the overall message of not just this one portrait, but of the day it was taken itself.

Studium and punctum, as described by Roland Barthes in Camera Lucida, are two Latin words that refer to two aspects of photography. According to him, studium is what sparks interest in an image but is inherently unremarkable. This may be the “background” of an image or any aspect of it that gives the viewer a general feel for the atmosphere it was taken in. When a photographer takes a photo, they set an intention for the message that is being conveyed- it then becomes the responsibility of the viewer to decipher and interpret that intention based on all components of the image. Punctum, on the other hand, is described as being what “punctures” the viewer or makes them fall in love with and relate to an image. Barthes believes that punctum is the truly memorable and important part of any photograph. I think it is interesting that Barthes chose Latin words to describe these concepts, as he found none in French that he felt were suitable.

The Photographs of Marcel Sternberger: Portraits of the 20th Century exhibit is a stunning and expressive collection of black and white portraits. However in viewing them, I didn’t find elements of studium and punctum. Most of the portraits were done in the same style- the subject is close to the camera and in many cases looking directly at it with an expression they felt best represents themselves. Because there was such little variety in backgrounds, many of them simply being a gray backdrop or wall, it seemed like the faces of the people themselves were the only focal elements in the photos. It could be argued that their clothing and posture were secondary to the importance of the photos and were therefore elements of studium whereas their (in most cases, intense) facial expressions were punctum, but I personally viewed all of the subjects as a whole. Despite this, there were several portraits that differed slightly from the rest- those of the children. The description of this section referred to how “innately coquettish” young girls were and how he captured this. While I personally found it somewhat it appalling that young girls are still constantly sexualized, this perspective was definitely visible in the photos. In these, I would say that what is perceived as the “sexual qualities” of the girls were the punctum, and everything else from their clothing to the rooms they were in were studium.

Veronica Funk