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

“Camera Lucida” by Roland Barthes describes the difference between studium and punctum as apart of photographic “knowledge.” Stadium is the one thing that grasps your attention in a photograph while punctum refers to the actual detail of a photo that grasps the viewers underlying attention. After visiting the Photographs of marcel Sternberger: Portraits of the 20^th Century exhibit at the Miskin Gallery right next to Baruch, I was able to put these two terms to use. The exhibit was a lot more than I expected it to be. There were various photos that I could just walk around and really take the time to observe the difference between studium and punctum.

Regarding punctum, one particular photograph caught my attention. The photograph of Sigmund Freud perfectly depicted the underlying meaning of punctum- the detail. At first when you look at the photograph, it just looks like Sigmund is sitting in a chair, posing for the camera. Nothing more. Now it is time to pay attention to the detail. He is holding a cigar, even though he has mouth cancer which brings a sort of alertness to the viewers eyes and skepticism about any of Sigmund’s theories if he continues to harm his personal health knowing the consequences. One of his most popular theories was that the unconscious mind governs behavior in a much stronger way then people think. So why is he holding that cigar if he has mind cancer? Shouldn’t the mind be able to snap him out of the bad habits. Paying attention to the detail of this photograph thoroughly deepens the thought provoking process of interpreting the overall photo.

Studium is the idea that you don’t have to pay attention to the detail of the photograph, something catches your eye right away about it, the initial element.

The photograph that caught my eye through the studium lens is the one of George Bernard Shaw. In the photograph, he is examining stamps. Those stamps are a portrait of the children of the Royal Family of Belgium. The detail was not what brought my attention to the picture. Instead of the detail, I was more focused on the appearance of the man. His beard and glasses define his face and that is simply what caught my attention. The photograph did not evoke much intimate emotion from me which is why it could not have been from a punctum lens. Overall, so many of these photographs included studium and punctum elements but these two in particular just happen to catch my eye.

When viewing the Sternberger exhibit, I noticed that at first glance his photographs seem to capture a kind of essence of his subjects. This was something unique, in most posed photographs I feel like people look painfully modeled, often appearing completely different from how I imagine them in my mind. Of course this raises a question when it comes to people whom I only see in the form of photographs. Public figures like celebrities and politicians who I have never seen in real life, I only can imagine them they way they are posed in photographs. The way that Sternberger’s photographs were slightly blurry and not always framed in the most mathematically pleasing way made them seem raw and real. I feel like the photographs of children that Sternberger took that were featured in the exhibit best exemplified Barthes ideas of studium and punctum, and further, more of this ideas about the arbitrarily of posed photography. On the topic of photographing children Sternberger said, “[The photographer] must have patience and more patience to capture the complete absorption of a baby in the perpetual miracle of its physical ego; the awkward balancing of a toddler, a boy’s aggressive vitality, or the innate coquetry of a little girl.” I think this is a perfect example of how photographs simply can not capture the totality of a person. Sternberger is suggesting a) that a young person has already assumed a sexual or aggressive identity, b) that the extent to which a child is thinking ends at their physicality, and that these qualities can be encapsulated in a photograph. It’s ridiculous to think that children do not think further thoughts about the world, themselves, and ideas more complex than gender roles and their own bodies. Barthes’s concepts of studium, something that creates interest in an image and conveys an idea, and punctum, a detail that attracts an individual to a photograph by sparking something personal operate in many of Sternberger’s photographs. They are what make them interesting.

In one of his photographs of a Belgian princess, she is seen glaring into the camera with a handful of cherries to her mouth. She is about seven years old, but you can see how she is completely being seen through the eyes of an older man who believes that she is exuding an “innate coquetry.” It’s despicable to think of how the outcome of a portrait is entirely dependent on the eye of the photographer. It is indeed possible that you could be photographed and not a bit of you could come through in that picture. I think that Sternberger uses studium excessively to draw viewers into his photos. Each of them have a little quirk that makes them quite interesting to look at. Punctum on the other hand is individual, for me most of his photos did also include punctum. Photos like the one of Frida Kahlo and Diego Rivera and their dog felt really personal to me, like I could imagine visiting them at their house- seeing them in their most personal setting. The one of the Belgian princess also elicited a sharp feeling for me, I could see this sensual gaze that Sternberger was projecting onto the young girl and it made me deeply uncomfortable. Viewing this exhibit and reading Barthes has settled me deeper into an opinion on photography, especially portraiture, that I already held- one can not be fully represented in their physical form, especially not when that form has been manipulated by an “artist” who might hardly know the subject. Photography might seem like a deeply personal art, but I think it is often the opposite, the photographer is allowed to see things that appeal to their aesthetic, often without fully understanding the thing they are photographing and can capture it without any repercussions or investments in it. Of course there are quite a few exceptions to this rule, but I think that this is often the case, especially in a world where we all have high quality cameras in our pockets.

Photography. Up until this very moment I never gave much thought to what that word really meant.  In fact, I don’t think I gave it any thought. I never had any interest. I didn’t care about lighting, shape, or form. I didn’t care about color and value. To me, a photograph was any captured moment – a shot of a scenic landscape, a family picture, even a Snapchat filter selfie.

After reading Camera Lucida by Ronald Barthes and viewing The Photographs of Marcel Sternberger: Portraits of the 20^th Century collection at the Mishkin Gallery, I have come to the conclusion that throughout the 18 years of my existence I have been completely ignorant.

Photography is art. It is art in the simplest and yet also most intricate form. Taking a photograph is not the initial “click of a button” I imagined it to be. It is not the “smile for the camera” and “say cheese.” Taking a photograph requires skill. It requires precision. And in a weird way it also requires instinct.

How? It’s quite simple really. Every single day we take pictures. We send out our “streaks.” We post on Instagram. We even take pictures of our notes. But do these daily occurrences count as photographs? Are they works of art?

Some of them maybe. Others probably not. Actually, most of them probably not. Taking a photograph requires an eye for the perfect instant.

Barthes raised an interesting point in that there are two elements – studium and punctum – that an image needs to be considered a photograph. Studium is the general subject of a picture. It’s the political testimony or historical sense the image conveys. Punctum is the exact opposite. It is defined as the emotional power of a piece.

While walking through the exhibit, I found that Sternberger’s photographs contained both studium and punctum. Staring at his work, I felt drawn in by the fact that the images were mostly of famous historical figures – Frida Kahlo, Indira Gandhi, George Bernard Shaw, etc. – and that they all captured an individually intense moment in time.

My favorite however would be the photograph of renowned psychologist Sigmund Freud. In the shot, Freud is seen casually sitting at his desk, papers fanned all over it, and holding a cigar between his fingers. He is looking at the camera with this almost annoyed, borderline peeved expression and his head is slightly tilted. In that moment, he looks effortlessly interesting.  The photographer captured Freud’s essence beautifully.

As per the assignment guidelines, I tried to take my own photograph that captured studium and punctum. Unfortunately, I don’t think I did it justice.  This picture was taken last weekend in Pennsylvania. I went to visit my uncle and we went down for a walk by the lake. I was amazed by the view – the ripples in the water, the nearly perfect line of full, green leaved trees, the white cumulus clouds. I hope it’s obvious, but just in case, the studium is nature and the punctum is joy.

When people look at my photograph I hope they get the sense that this was a happy moment and great memory for the (amateur) photographer. The same way I was intrigued by Sternberger’s Freud.

-Alyssa Motilal

Photography has always been something that has fascinated me and captured my focus, no pun intended. The fact that anyone can capture moments in time forever, focus and blur on subjects and backgrounds to place an emphasis on certain topics, and the opportunity to add a perspective many people may never be able to see, have all contributed to my love for photography. The ability of taking a photo may seem trivial to many, but is always very empowering because it allows the photographer to manipulate, frame and decide what they want their audience to see. Not only does this give photographers endless power, but it allows them to edit photos in a way that artists cannot always do as easily with physical paintings or another artwork.

Barthes is able to capture the true meaning of what it means to take a photograph and the feelings it can capture by focusing on what makes a photo a photo, its evidentiality. By paying attention to the viewer reaction, he magnifies the importance of studium and punctum. Terms that carry a lot of weight and meaning while speaking about the power of photography. Barthes describes studium as an element that captures your attention and initial focus when looking at a photo. Factors such as vibrant colors and cool styles all play into the meaning of studium. Whereas punctum is described from Barthes as being that takes that initial interest of the photo to a more personal level. Something that “pricks and bruises” the viewer on an emotional and spiritual level. Factors such as raw details that invoke memories, and actions that remind viewers of past experiences with loved ones, all play into the meaning of punctum.

During my visit to the “Exhibit of Photographs of Marcel Sternberger: Portraits of the 20^th Century” at the Miskin Gallery, I was able to enter with a new mindset of how to view these photos. I became subconsciously aware of my own use of studium and punctum as I viewed photos and I was shocked at how accurate Barthes analysis of photography became. From the photos of world leaders, artists, authors, children, and religions I immediately noticed the black and white theme of Sternberger’s photography style. Some may argue that for this reason alone factors such a studium cannot play a role, but I disagree, studium can be expanded to factors beyond merely bright colors to catch a viewer’s attention. Personally, one photograph that captured the essence of both studium and punctum for me was a photograph from the Unknown Sitters wall. The photograph of the “Old Man” immediately caught my attention because of his large and untamed beard. Something so trivial captured the studium of the photo by causing me to take a double take on this old man’s beard. The punctum factor comes into play as I immediately remembered my grandfather’s beard. Although not as long and untamed, my grandfather’s beard was a distinct memory I had of him, something that allowed me to differentiate him from everyone else growing up. The ability of a photograph of a random unknown old man to invoke memories of my own experiences with my grandfather back in India is what photography is all about, capturing your attention, then allowing you to personalize the image. Barthes analysis of photography was not only accurate, but will change how I view future photos.

This photograph taken from a hike 2 years ago helps to capture the effects of studium and punctum. The bright and vibrant range of colors will catch a viewers eye, and from there it will invoke personal emotion by showing viewers the large drop from the clifftop. Driving factors such as fear and adrenaline will cause viewers to put themselves into my shoes and feel the same emotions I felt sitting at the edge of the cliff. It may give some the courage to conquer their fear of heights or it may even remind them of past experiences they’ve had while hiking with friends and family. Overall, the power of the photograph is subjective and it will cause different types of reactions to each viewer.

– Abishek (AJ) Johnson

Interest: a prevalent theme in this assignment and experience. As I walked through Marcel Sternberger’s exhibit in the Mishkin Gallery I found myself drawn to several photos. Was it my initial reaction to their facial expressions or merely the aesthetic of the black and white concept shown in all his photos? As I looked through each photograph, I started to understand Barthes’ concepts of studium and punctum in his work Camera Lucida. What is studium and punctum? Studium is the element in a piece of art, in this case photography, that initially grabs your attention. In the words of Barthes, it is “…the element which rises from the scene…,” (Barthes 26). Punctum is the specific detail that allows the viewer to feel something deeper and makes the viewer think and question the piece even further. Barthes refers this as a “sting” and an “accident which pricks me…,” (Barthes 27). Walking around the exhibit, this particular photo captured of Frida Kahlo and Diego Rivera initiated my understanding of Barthes’ concepts.

Initially I was drawn in by the facial expressions that Frida Kahlo held. I loved how she looked up at Diego Rivera so lovingly and in absolute adornment. In my case, this was the studium. I was initially drawn in by her loving facial expression. As I looked closer, I examined Diego Rivera’s face. Unlike Frida Kahlo’s, his face was blatantly stern. His mouth was straight, and his eyes were sullen. He wasn’t looking at Frida Kahlo, nor did he seem to be reacting to her touch and her expression of love. This was the punctum. His face made me question the photo further. I wondered Why isn’t he looking back at his lover with the same amount of intimacy and longing like Kahlo? His eyes are almost avoiding hers and trying to focus on the camera. His eyes hold only the emotion of sternness and concentration without any sense of love or other feelings of connection to Kahlo. Their dog, Mr. Xolotl, was also so awkwardly placed. This could be the second punctum of this piece. Overall, I sensed a disconnect between each of the subjects in the photograph. While Kahlo was expressing much love and sense of intimacy, the dog and Rivera gave off a more distant and standoffish presence. While the rest of the collection did further my understanding of Barthes’ concepts of studium and punctum, this particular piece was the clearest of them all to me. This photograph now makes me question the true relationship between Frida Kahlo and Diego Rivera.

Now, this photo may just seem like another food picture taken by a teen attempting to make their Instagram or snapchat story more aesthetically pleasing. Well, you’re right, but this photo also reminds me of studium and punctum.

Claire Ng

During a relaxing Wednesday, I had the opportunity to spend my 5-hour break in the Photographs of Marcel Sternberger: Portraits of the 20th Century exhibit at the Miskin Gallery. The walk was short and the exhibit was even shorter. Not expecting it to be so small, I had a quick glance at all of the photos and came to the verdict of my favorite two that I believe  explain the real themes of photography that Roland Barthes explains in his excerpt, “Camera Lucida.”

The first theme he discussed was studium, an element that grabs your attention and general interest. It can vary from a sad image to just a color, but the photo seems to always ease your eye. Basic eye candy to the average viewer. A photograph I perceived as studium is the photograph of Thomas Dewey. Just the overall position of the man and the way he’s built caught my eye. He reminded me of my grandfather at a young age, which I thought was quite ironic. But, it’s studium because that’s all it did. It just merely caught my attention and seconds later I was onto the next. There was no real “pinch” or emotional tension besides the fact I thought he looked like someone. In my opinion, that’s what makes studium, a simple glance at a photograph, but no real analysis. Overall, it just didn’t have that push that I wanted and that’s what brings me to Punctum, my favorite theme in photography.

Punctum, as described by Roland Barthes, is the emotionally damage the photo does to your mindset. A photograph may grab your attention but at the same time, it hurts you, it makes you feel an emotion, a “pinch” as the author explains, that scars or “bruises” you. It’s that extra kick that’s more than just appealing, it’s moving. The photograph that stood out to me tremendously was the photo of Diego Rivera mimicking Buddha by almost rotating his eyes inward. I looked at this photo and I shivered instantly. I was afraid but more than that, I was excited. I was excited to go deeper into this photo. I had a roaring concern with why he wished to mimic Buddha in such an almost “creepy” way. It drew questions such as, “Isn’t Buddha always smiling?” and “Why does Rivera call himself “close friends” with Buddha in the description of the photo?” That’s what I believe true punctum is, questioning and powerful analysis. I looked at this photo and stopped in place, I was truly “bruised”as Barthes would say because even hours later, I’m still in utter shock and still can’t draw all the feelings I have toward this photo.

Overall, I believe the tiny exhibit of the photographs was very fun and super convenient since it was basically a block away. Despite that, the photos were utterly amazing and I had an amazing time exploring. The reading was also a good read and definitely something to keep in mind as I analyze more photos in my near future. Thank you once again for an amazing experience Professor!

Below I also included some photos that I believe describe both studium and punctum.

Studium example

Punctum Example

-Kevin Hasa

Photography is a unique way of expressing ones feelings and emotions. The photographer has the whole world around them to choose from in creating their art. There are no limits to what they can photograph and claim as their own. Photographers have to catch the eye of viewers very quickly in order to draw them to the image. Roland Barthes uses two words to describe the feelings and emotions that the photographs invoke. These words are studium and punctum. These latin words are used to describe the connection that photographers try to make with their viewers through photographs.

When looking at a photograph, something in particular about the photo itself draws you to it. As soon as you lay eyes on the photograph, you have an immediate reaction to what it is showing you. This is the concept of studium that Barthes teaches us about. The concept of studium is prevalent when the viewer’s initial observance of the photo is made. It is solely related to how the picture looks. As the viewer, you are looking at the photo for what it is an nothing more. Once the photo captures your attention however, you mind quickly starts looking deeper into the photograph however. When this occurs, you soon are engaging in the concept of punctum. Punctum involves the viewer’s deeper understanding and connection with the photo. Something in that photo resonates with the viewer personally and reaches out to them. This create a personal connection between the viewer and the photograph that only the viewer can make. Everyones feeling that they get when looking at a photograph is unique and specific to them which makes the feeling even more special.

In order to see these concepts portrayed in real life, I visited the Sydney Mishkin Gallery at the photos by Marcel Sternberg. Upon walking into the exhibit, I was amazed by all of the beautiful black and white photos of well known historical figures and some who were literally nameless. The images that caught my eye however where the ones of Albert Einstein. I have always been fascinated with Einstein as a brilliant man of course but also as a father and as the political figure he came to be. This photograph of Einstein and Ilse Sternberg showed me the concept of studium immediately. As soon as I saw the picture I was drawn to Ilse’s laugh and Einsteins small grin that gave me a feeling of happiness. Soon after, the concept of punctum was prevalent. I began to smile as I continued to look deeper at the picture. I thought about how lovely it was that both of these people were smiling and happy even though they were facing such rough times in Germany and in America. This photograph of Einstein and Sternberg certainly proved to me that both of the concepts Barthes introduced are prevalent in most if not all photographs and really give photographs a deeper meaning.

After visiting the exhibit, I began to think of the pictures and photographs I have taken that could encompass the concepts Barthes talks about. One photo in particular came to mind. I took this photograph this summer, and as you first look at it, it is a pleasing photo to look at. A little puppy sits on a hill with a line of mountains behind him. To me however, this photo has a personal connection attached to it. It makes me think of my family back in Montenegro and all of the great memories I made this summer. Not only this photo makes me feel this way however, in fact most of the photos I took do. The concepts that Barthes introduced are very interesting and I have personally come to see that they are prevalent in so many photographs that you see everyday.