Summary:
In traditional photographic theory, photographic installations are often seen simply as tools such as cameras to capture images of the real world. Frusel, however, expands the concept of photographic installation to a broader scope. He believes that photographic installations include not only technical cameras and other equipment, but also various social and cultural structures embedded in our lives. This redefinition allows us to no longer limit photography to the production of images, but to understand it from the perspective of social structure and meaning-making.
I. Introduction
When we look at photography, we tend to see it simply as a technical means or a form of artistic expression, ignoring the deep meaning and impact hidden in it. However, William Frusel's philosophy of photography leads us to go beyond conventional wisdom and place photography in a broader social and philosophical context.
Photography is not just a process of recording images, but a profound cultural phenomenon that is closely related to the development of human society. In contemporary society, with the advancement of science and technology and the transformation of social structure, the meaning and role of photography are constantly evolving. In this article, we will explore the photographic installation, a core concept in Frusel's philosophy of photography, and its redefinition and reconstruction of social subjectivity.
II. A new understanding of photographic installations
A. Traditional definition of photographic installation
In traditional photographic theory, photographic installations are often seen simply as tools such as cameras to capture images of the real world. This definition limits photographic installations to technical devices and ignores their deeper social and cultural significance. Traditionally, a photographic installation is considered to be a passive tool, merely a record of reality, without its own subjectivity or significance.
B. Frusel's concept of photographic installation
The macro and micro levels of the installation
Frusel's redefinition of photographic installation sees it as a broader concept that encompasses not only technical devices such as cameras, but also the various social and cultural structures embedded in our lives. At the macro level, photographic installation is an integral part of the entire social fabric, intertwined with political, economic, cultural and other aspects. At the micro level, photographic installation is the embodiment of the interaction between the individual and his surrounding environment and society, and is the medium and carrier of the interaction between the individual and the society.
The relationship between the installation and the social structure
Frusel emphasizes the close relationship between photographic installations and social structures. Photographic installations are not only influenced by social structures, but also shape and influence them. Through photographic installations, the relationship between individuals and society is constructed and expressed, and factors such as power, identity, and identity in society are also reflected and reproduced. Therefore, the photographic installation is not only a technical tool, but also a symbolic system, carrying the meaning and symbolism of the social structure.
Photographic installation as a manifestation of social structure
In Frusel's view, the role of photographic installations is not only to record and reproduce reality, but also to reveal the hidden rules and power relations of social structures. Through photographic installations, we can see the differences, conflicts and injustices in society, thereby promoting reflection and change in society. The photographic installation has become a mirror of the social structure, reflecting the reality and problems of the society, and providing an important reference and driving force for the reconstruction and improvement of the society.
III. Comparison of the ideas of Frusel and Foucault
A. Foucault's understanding of the device
Foucault also touched on the "device" in his philosophical thoughts, especially in his theories of power, knowledge and the body. Foucault emphasized the relationship between power and knowledge, believing that power is not only an oppressive existence, but also realized and consolidated through the production and dissemination of knowledge. Under this theoretical framework, the installation is regarded as a field where knowledge and power are intertwined, and it is a mechanism and means for the operation of power. Foucault places the "device" in a network of power knowledge, emphasizing its importance as a practice of power.
B. Parallels between the ideas of Froussel and Foucault
A focus on power and knowledge
Both Frussel and Foucault have deeply thought and analyzed the relationship between power and knowledge. Both scholars believe that the production and dissemination of knowledge is not only a neutral and objective process, but also a means and strategy for the operation of power. They all emphasize the interpenetration and interaction of knowledge and power, and regard "installation" as a field where power and knowledge are intertwined, with similar perspectives and theoretical frameworks.
Concern for social structure
Both Frussel and Foucault were concerned with issues of power relations and identity in social structures. They all believe that the social structure is not a natural existence, but is constructed and maintained through various power mechanisms and forms of knowledge. Therefore, they conduct in-depth analysis and revelation of various power relations and identities in society, trying to find the possibility and path of social subjectivity.
C. Comparative analysis: the different views of Luxel and Foucault
An understanding of power
In his understanding of power, Flusail places more emphasis on the interweaving and interaction of the micro and macro levels of power, and analyzes it in the relationship between the individual and the social structure. Foucault, on the other hand, paid more attention to the relationship between power and knowledge, and discussed it in a more abstract theoretical framework, emphasizing the impact of the production and dissemination of power knowledge on social structure.
Understanding of the device
In his understanding of the installation, Flusail sees it as part of a social and cultural structure, emphasizing its importance as a social practice. Foucault, on the other hand, places the device in a network of knowledge and power, emphasizing it as a mechanism and means for the operation of power. Therefore, there are certain differences in the understanding of the device between the two scholars.
IV. Comparison of the ideas of Fruser and Heidegger
A. Heidegger's technical understanding
Heidegger has a unique understanding of technicality in his philosophical thought. He sees technoscience as one of the fundamental characteristics of modern society, and believes that technocracy is not only a tool or a means, but also a way of being about the way of being. In Heidegger's view, technocracy interprets existence as a programmability of a resource, and the world as a disposable inventory. This technical nature leads to an active domination and control of the world, as well as a passive degradation of people.
B. Frusel's Theory of Installation: A Dialogue with Heidegger's Technocratic Thought
Technicality is understood
There is a certain dialogue and convergence between Frusel's installation theory and Heidegger's technical thought in the understanding of technology. Both scholars believe that technoscience is not only an objective existence, but also an explanation of the way and existence of the world. However, Fluser analyzes technoscience in a social and cultural context, emphasizing the interweaving and interaction of technoscience with factors such as power and identity. Heidegger, on the other hand, sees technoscience as an explanation of the way of being, and emphasizes the fundamental impact of technoscience on the way of human existence.
For the relationship between the world and people
In terms of understanding the relationship between the world and people, Frussel and Heidegger have certain differences. Flusail emphasized the importance of installation as an important carrier of social practice and cultural symbols, and emphasized that people actively shape and create the world. Heidegger, on the other hand, emphasized the influence of technology on people, believing that technology leads to the passivity and degradation of people, and deprives them of their freedom and dignity.
C. Comparative Analysis: The Convergence and Divergence of Views of Frussel and Heidegger
Convergence of perspectives: Both Frussel and Heidegger are concerned about the impact of technoscience on the world and people, arguing that technoscience is not just a tool or a means, but also a way of being about the way of being. They all try to reveal the fundamental impact of technology on the way of human existence and social structure, and emphasize the importance and universality of technology in modern society.
Divergent views: Frussel emphasizes man's active shaping and creation of the world, puts the installation in the social and cultural context for analysis, and emphasizes human subjectivity and creativity; Heidegger, on the other hand, emphasized the influence of technology on people, believing that technology leads to the passivity and degradation of people, and deprives them of their freedom and dignity. As a result, they have a certain disagreement on their understanding of the relationship between technology and people.
V. Device-based society and the weakening of subjectivity
A. Characteristics and Implications of Device-based Society
Device-based society refers to the intersection of technology and culture in modern society, which produces a special social form, in which technological devices have become an important carrier of social practice and cultural symbols, and have a profound impact on human lifestyle, social structure and subjectivity.
Technologically advanced lifestyle: The device-based society presents a highly technological lifestyle, and people are inseparable from various technological devices in their daily lives, from smartphones to smart homes, technology has penetrated into all aspects of people's lives.
Digital transformation of culture: With the rapid development of information technology, the way of cultural communication and consumption has undergone revolutionary changes, digital media has become the main channel of cultural communication, and people's reading, entertainment, social and other activities have gradually shifted to cyberspace.
Reconstruction of social structure: In the device-based society, technological devices not only change the lifestyle of individuals, but also reconstruct the social structure and organizational form, for example, the emergence of intelligent production systems has changed the way of industrial production, and the rise of virtual communities has changed people's social patterns.
B. Frusel's concern for subjectivity
Frusel's focus on subjectivity runs through his installationist thought, which he sees as a key element in human interaction with the world, at the heart of human behavior and practice. In the installation-based society, Froussel pays special attention to the dynamic change and reconstruction process of subjectivity.
Pluralism of Subjectivity: Frusel argues that subjectivity is not fixed and unchanging, but is constantly evolving with social and cultural changes. In an installation-based society, people are confronted with a variety of devices and experience the pluralism and complexity of subjectivity.
The Interaction of Technological Devices and Subjectivity: Froussel emphasizes the shaping and influence of technological devices on subjectivity. He pointed out that technological devices are not only objective existence, but also a symbol system, which affects people's cognition, emotions and behaviors through the transmission and interpretation of symbols, thus having a profound impact on subjectivity.
C. Mechanisms by which devices weaken human subjectivity
In the device-based society, the device has produced a series of weakening mechanisms for human subjectivity, which leads to the blurring and alienation of subjectivity.
Technology dependence and disability: With the popularization and development of technology, people have gradually formed a dependence on technology and are accustomed to completing various tasks and activities through technological devices. However, over-reliance on technology can lead to a loss of confidence in one's abilities and a sense of disability.
Information overload and distraction: In the device-based society, people are faced with a large amount of information that needs to be constantly screened and processed, which may lead to distraction and inattention, and affect the individual's deep experience and thinking about the inner world.
Virtual social interaction and loneliness: With the rise of virtual socialization, people's social activities have gradually shifted to cyberspace, and virtual social interaction and real social interaction are intertwined, but virtual social interaction often lacks authenticity and emotional depth, which may lead to loneliness and social isolation.
VI. The Task and Significance of the Philosophy of Photography
A. Frusel's critical spirit
Carrying a critical spirit, Frusel's philosophy of photography aims to reveal the impact of technological devices on subjectivity, and to reflect deeply on the blurring and alienation of subjectivity in modern society. Through the analysis of photographic techniques, he reveals how technological installations affect people's perception and understanding of the world, as well as their identification and construction of their own subjectivity. Flusail focuses on how photography as a technological device has shaped people's visual culture, and through critical reflection, calls for a re-examination of the relationship between technology and subjectivity, and the possible negative impact of technological devices on subjectivity.
B. The possibility of redeeming subjectivity through the philosophy of photography
Although Flusail reveals the mechanism by which technological devices weaken subjectivity, he also points out that the philosophy of photography as a path of critical reflection may give new meaning and possibility to subjectivity. The philosophy of photography not only helps people to realize the impact of technological devices on subjectivity, but more importantly, it provides a way to re-examine one's relationship with the world. Through the lens of photography, people can think more deeply about their own lifestyles, cultural traditions, and the impact of technological developments, so as to reconstruct their own subjectivity.
Frusel's philosophy of photography also emphasizes the importance of the visual image, which he believes is not only the product of a technological device, but also the expression and display of human subjectivity. In photographic images, people can discover their own existence and experience revealed, thus giving new possibilities to subjectivity. Therefore, the philosophy of photography provides a way to reconstruct subjectivity through visual images, providing new possibilities for people to redeem subjectivity.
Author: Lu Xilin
Bibliography:
Flusser, V. (2000). Towards a Philosophy of Photography. Reaktion Books.
Azoulay, A. (2008). The Civil Contract of Photography. Zone Books.
Disclaimer: All articles (including graphics, papers, audio and video, etc.) under my account can be reprinted or quoted at will after 72 hours from the date of publication, without informing me. If you need to request a manuscript, please contact [email protected]