“Having thus distinguished two themes in Photograph (for in general the photographs I liked were constructed in the manner of a classical sonata), I could occupy myself with one after the other.” (Barthes, 27) This is essentially the entirety of chapter 10.
This section of Camera Lucida opens the floodgates to the rest of Part one, and sets the stage for the two key characteristics within a photograph. In order to truly appreciate a photograph as a spectator, one must distinguish between these two themes. They act as weapons of mass analysis. These include the studium and the punctum. This part of the passage called to me as it kindled my Latin knowledge. In addition, it serves a heavy role in the future of the book, and is expected to be thoroughly understood as the author loosely throws the jargon when analyzing photography. The first part of these dual forces serves as the more difficult one. In Latin, studium means zeal or spirit. In photography, the studium encapsulates the spirit of the photo, the general gist of the photo that is acknowledged by the average audience. However, the latter part is much more direct and simpler to understand. In Latin, punctum means point or puncture. In photography, the punctum serves as the irregularity that exists within the photo, the extra detail to the photo that interrupts the studium and adds spice it. Equipped with these two forces, readers are now one step closer to understanding the essence of photography.
“Contrary to these imitations, in Photography I can never deny that the thing has been there. There is a superposition here: of reality and of the past. And since this constraint exists only for Photography, we must consider it, by very reduction, as the very essence, the noeme of Photography. What I intentionalize in a photograph (we are not yet speaking of film) is neither Art nor Communication, it is Reference, which is the founding order of Photography.” (Barthes, 76-7)
This section of Camera Lucida is a breath of fresh air after the reading the beginning of part two, which I personally felt had little content in relation to photography and was too personal. This passage highlights the aspect of photography that is undeniable to its creation: the Reference. Otherwise known as “that-has-been” or the noeme of Photography, this element of Photography captures an aspect of it’s essence. It is essential to the photography, for without the original Referent, it cannot exist as an artform, a mode of communication, or as a whole, thus making it the “founding order of Photograph.” It is not a particularly hard concept to grasp, in fact, by being amidst a seemingly endless clutter of retrospection concerning familial ties, this chapter as a whole has a sense of enhanced coherency, especially after the direct connection with the Referent mentioned long ago is established.
Question: With the rise in editing software and photoshop, to what extent do the concepts of the photographic referent and its inherent necessity hold up in the current day?
While the studium of the photo would be the serene pond landscape, the punctum, in my eyes, would be the sharp contrast in color provided by the red leaves toward the right side of the photo.
The first passage you selected is essential to the entire book. It is very important for us to identify what studium and punctum are as Barthes spends a lot of time discussing the studium and punctum of photographs. Your analysis/explanation of these words is very well written and you do a great job of further explaining the difference between the two of them. Furthermore, the Reference of a photograph is clearly of high importance to the photograph, and you do a great job of explaining why it is such an important concept to understand. I really like the photo you included. The contrast definitely stands out when looking at it and this makes it a great example for examining the difference between the studium and the punctum of a photograph. This blog post was very well executed!
I wrote a similar question to the one you did and I think that as a result of photoshopping tools and apps, Barthes’ analysis of photography has to be reworked a little. While you can still have a studium and punctum with a photo that has been photoshopped and edited, the referent has been changed in some way.
Hey Jules,
Great explanation of what Barthes defines “studium” and “punctum” are! I think it’s worth noting that a photo can have multiple instances of “punctum”, but different viewers may find “punctum” from different aspects of the photograph (this depends on which part of the photo the viewer finds most striking). This next one may be a stretch, but I think “studium” can also be subjective, despite Barthes’ assertion that the Operator determines the “studium”. If the viewer is unaware of the circumstance/history of the photograph, he/she will have a different level of interest.