Reading Ch. 6

Philosophy is one of my utmost favorite subjects, the intense observation of the unobserved is truly a mind-boggling phenomenon that more often than not leads me to a break down of some sort. With that said, it seems as though this book is Ritchin’s breakdown about the twenty-first century and its’ digital media monsters.

This chapter seems to get right to the core of Ritchin’s main dilemma, which is neither photography nor digital media per-say, it is that the human race is lazy and willing to accept any information with little to no proof of its validity. Ritchin does not necessarily see photography as the problem nor does he hold the mass digital media explosion responsible, he sees the human response and eager acceptance of an easy road to all information as the actual problem. This is most justified through Ritchin’s continual support and advertising for the “hypertext”. Hypertext is a means to make people search and tediously work to find answers to the issues of the world instead of allowing a news station and government to form public opinion.

Though I support his desire to promote a more aware public/society, it seems like quite the undertaking to readjust an entire way of thinking via more work for the individual. He said that one woman spent four hours upon his and Peress’s photo essay navigating to and fro, but who as time for that? Part of the reason things are the way they are with the internet and speed and fast-food is because very few people have time between work, family and maintaining a social life to follow a treasure map to the news, which is probably one main reason very few people read the newspaper, there is always a short-cut that is usually online. I understand wishing people to be more attentive and care about what is true, real and actual but an advanced search seems as equally negative as a quick snap shot of information.

Furthermore, photography by default falls into this category attributing to America’s laziness, but taking away ownership from fine art or even just a photograph seems to have many more downfalls than not. Artists spend vast amount of time thinking and rethinking how to display and exhibit their work, be it in a gallery setting or on a simple poster, but allowing others to readjust the artist’s intentions to fit their liking seems to devalue the art and the artist themselves. The original point of owning or viewing a person’s work is to react with what has been given; if you want to alter artwork make that a piece of work in and of itself, don’t deface and or take ownership of someone else’s intentions.