Post # 9

Snapshots of the Past
Reading

Print the Legend by Martha A Sandweiss

In this work, Martha Sandweiss tracks the development of the influence of photography upon the portrayal and imagination of the West. Sandweiss begins with an analysis of Daguerreotypes of the Mexican War, which she argues were dismissed largely for their inability to portray the broader themes of the war that the public desired to be given, which were provided by other forms of graphic art such as drawings and lithographs. She goes on to trace the evolution of photography and the way in which it was adapted to attempt to tell those stories that it, by nature of its realism, was initially ill suited to tell. This was a well thought out work in which Sandweiss does an good job of providing evidence for her arguments.

However, I found the historiographical discussion on the use of photographs as primary sources to be particulalry interesting. First, Sandweiss establishes the limited ability of a photograph to go beyond a snapshot depiction of the past and establish a broader historical meaning. Secondly, she challenges historians to analyze photographs just as they would any other primary source. Sandweiss argues that photographs must be analyed IN history, not just for what they portray but also for why they portray the image presented. In that regard, the historian must not only take into account the image itself but also the intent of the photographer and any biases that might shade the view of his or her cameral lense. In other words, the historian must take his or her analysis throught the lens of the camera, through the eye of the photographer, into the mind of the photographer that was influenced by social understandings and biases. Sandweiss also calls for an examination of photographs THROUGH history (Sandweiss 9). In other words, the varying and shifting ways in which an image has been used throughout the past must also be analyzed.

After working extensively with photographic evidence in the development of a multimedia tour presentation for the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum, Sandweiss' argument raises many issues that I had encountered personally. In that position, I quickly encountered the pitfall of the use of images as editors afterthoughts. In a museum, it is the artifact itself that is the primary story teller. My photograph research was intended to supplement the lessons and significance portrayed in the artifact itself and the curator's description. While I do not think this is as inherantly wrong as Sandweiss attemts to make it, it did raise a bigger problem. When images are looked upon as afterthoughts, they can quickly be taken out of context in order to portray the broader story a curator, producer, or historian is trying to tell. I believe this becomes particulalry challenging once a video producer, with more lax hisoriographical standards is introduced into the process. Sandweiss gives an excellent example of this when she discusses Ken Burns use of images in his series on the West (Snadweiss 329). I have also been challenged with this issue. In preparing the presentation on the museum's F-4 Phantom II, I encountered an image of a formation of F-4's flying in the foreground as an unseen bomber was dropping its payload in the background. Had this image been included in the presentation, as the producer desired, one would have come away with impression that the F-4, a fighter aircraft, was carrying a large bomb load. Though this may seem like an insignificant issue, it does point to the small factors that can quickly lead to historical mis-interpretation.

Thus, I believe Sandweiss gives us all an excellent reminder about the importance of taking into account the entire context of any primary source, whether it be an image or a diary. Her historiographical challenges can go a long way in guiding the historian away from the pitfalls of misinterpretation and misrepresentation.