Plato's Cave Discussion Q's: Jill B, Jennifer C, John C, Ian C

Q) Sontag says that “photographing is essentially an act of non-intervention” but later in the essay, she argues that cameras are like guns. What do you think she is doing with this apparent contradiction? What is she trying to get her readers to understand by including both?

A) She’s explaining the ignorance that people have when they don’t fully understand the meaning behind the photograph. How the intentions of the photographer gives a positive or negative meaning. She later explains to us that cameras are similar to guns, in the lethality of them. Not in the sense of mortal wounding, but moral and knowledgeable corruption. How the object of photography provides a feeling of danger for those in power, how the “clever” can use these tools to overthrow others. By providing examples of both of these, she shows us an example of how the purpose of a photograph determines whether or not the picture is harmless or lethal.

Q) After our previous exercise, do you ultimately view photography as a positive or negative practice? Or is it more complicated than that? How would you characterize the practice and the art?

A) It is more complicated than that because of the accessibility of it, people are able to see what they want to see, how America is such a visual culture. How we need photographs to understand how we view things. And because of the accessibility of it, it provides a negative view on it because it provides images that can desensitize us, how the images shown will dull us to photographs that would otherwise impact our view on things.