June 03, 2002 For many people, Visual Anthropology means the production of ethnographic films. In consequence most teaching programs focus on the practical training of students in order to enable them to produce film documents. In contrast to this concept, my paper aims to emphasise that Visual Anthropology also consists of research beyond the field of ethnographic filmmaking. First, I want to evoke some main topics that have dominated the debates in Visual Anthropology during the first 30 years of its existence. Then, I try to outline some actual fields of research.
Visual Anthropology is a young sub-discipline of Cultural and Social Anthropology, which originated in the mid-seventieth only. One of the reasons for the late development of Visual anthropology was related to the fact that for a very long time the Humanities considered films and still photography as being only "visual decoration” for written analyses. Scientific knowledge was associated with text production and pictures so it was thought had no epistemological value whatsoever.
A first step towards a theoretically reflected use of photographic images and films occured with the research conducted by Magaret Mead and Gregory Bateson in Bali and New Guinea at the end of the thirties. It was the first time that photos were no longer utilised as visual illustration or as support for written arguments. In their book Balinese Character- A photographic Analysis Mead and Bateson published their research results in a visual form and in doing so they presented about 100 photographs completed by short explanatory texts. This was in 1942.
About 30 years later the term “Visual Anthropology” was introduced by John Collier and stood mainly for the diverse aspects of ethnographic filmmaking. In these early times questions on the scientific and aesthetic value of ethnographic films were an important focus of attention.
In fact, two powerful Schools of thought denied the value of ethnographic films simultaneously. On the one hand, scientists rejected them and argued that films were not appropriate to produce knowledge. On the other hand, artists and professional filmmakers refused them because they held in contempt their aesthetic value. For the first group, science referred to objectivity, and for the other , art referred to subjectivity. Thus, the real question underlying the debate was the following one: Do science and art exclude each other or are they compatible? Nowadays, it is generally accepted that it is quite possible to produce and to transmit scientific knowledge in an artistic way, but this rather old-fashioned debate still comes up from time to time.
Another question, which was largely discussed in these early years of Visual Anthropology, dealt with the ethic problems of filmmaking. What kind of relationship exists between filmmakers and those being filmed? Do the filmmakers achieve their footage with the consent of the people or without paying attention to their opinion? Have ethnographers the right to penetrate in the private sphere of their protagonists? Are ethnographic films of any benefit for the filmed people themselves or do they only serve the academic career of the anthropologists? These and similar questions were the topics of passionate discussions. The underlying problem was the question of the principle of reciprocity in research and fieldwork. Since then, many anthropological filmmakers tried to resolve the problem of reciprocity in several ways. Thus, film projects are more and more elaborated in communication with the protagonists who are no longer filmed objects but interactive subjects. Filmmakers also bring a copy of their work back to the people with whom they realised their filmic document and submit it to their comments and critique. Another and more active way is to initiate the native people in the use of camera and thus to enable them to do their own filming and to use their films for their own purpose which sometimes also includes struggles for the political recognition of their rights.
Summing up, we can retain that the early years of Visual Anthropology were mainly dominated by the questions of the scientific and aesthetic value of ethnographic films as well as of the ethic problems of filmmaking. In the eighties, the concept of Visual Anthropology was extended. In addition to the field of ethnographic film, two complementary domains of research were defined. Since then, Visual Anthropologists on the one hand produce and analyse all kinds of visual information about human societies such as drawings, photographs, films or computer animations. On the other hand, Visual Anthropologists investigate and compare the culturally diverse forms of visual communication such as mimic expressions, gestures, dance, theatre and so on. The key words of the new understanding of Visual Anthropology thus were visual information about cultures and visual communication within cultures. The nineties:With the digital revolution of the nineties and the changes which took place due to the influence of global media new investigation fields arise. Visual Anthropology now focuses on the visual media as such and the social and cultural consequences of the media revolution.As we can see, we have went a long way from the problems that occupied the researchers in the first period of Visual Anthropology. This development of Visual Anthropology is reflected by two programmatic positions. In 1975, Paul Hockings edited the first seminal book on Visual Anthropology, the famous Principles of Visual Anthropology. In this book, Margaret Mead entitled her introduction chapter “Visual Anthropology in a Discipline of Words“. Only 22 years later, Antonio Marazzi entitled a call for papers „Visual Anthropology in a World of Images“.Let’s now have a look on diverse topics related to this „World of images“.
The impact of visual media on everyday life
A wide field of research deals with the impact of the new visual media on the every day life of people. In fact, the omnipresence of media images such as film, video, television, internet, computer simulation, cyberspace and so on constitutes a new environment, which radically changes our accustomed and familiar perception of social life. Reality is less constructed on the basis of personal and collective experience but constructed by media images. In the history of mankind, never before a process with such a profound cultural impact took place within such a short period of time and with such extraordinary speed. We today observe how the visual replaces familiar forms of social life: this means that social experience defined as concrete inter-subjective action and communication is increasingly replaced by a more and more rapid flow of visual information. This phenomenon implicates radical consequences for the perception of self and others as well as for the perception of life and reality.My statements might appear somehow abstract and this perhaps all the more as the media development is just starting in China. But I think that the beginnings of the evoked process are already observable. The disembodiment of social communication On the global level we notice something which we could call an ongoing process of disembodied communication. We all can observe in every-day life that telephone calls with friends and family members replace more and more personal visits, and e-mails replace more and more the telephone calls. Last year in Germany, I noticed with some astonishment that I even received e-mails from my secretary who was sitting in an adjacent room just separated from mine by a common door. We had very friendly contacts and there was no reason to avoid face to face contacts. But she didn’t move her body to my room because the quick exchange of e-mails was already self-evident for this young person. It seems that in the new forms of communication the body completely disappears. In face-to-face contacts, the whole body is present. In family and friendship relations, we take care of the other’s body, offering food, health care and creating a comfortable atmosphere of well being. In official contacts we respectfully pay attention to the other’s body. In contrast to this, the body disappears in telephone contacts, but the voice with its unmistakable individuality still carries emotions and a kind of personal presence. This voice disappears in e-mails. Communication here is reduced to the decoding of visual signs (characters). Disembodiment already characterises children’s life, especially in the city and in one-child families. Face to face games with other children and vivacious games involving the whole body disappear more and more and are replaced by watching TV or playing computer games. In front of the TV, the body is reduced to the eyes only and in computer games to the combination of eyes and hands. Family meals are shared in front of the TV attracting everybody’s eyes and suppressing conversation and exchange between family members. In video-conferences big topics are negotiated which can have very concrete consequences in political, economic and social life, but the negotiators just appear as images. Teachers disappear from the classrooms and are replaced by pre-recorded videotapes. Youngsters in the city pass more and more time in Cafes offering computer games. These Cafes are crowded, but the consumers are alone in front of their machine. Young women complain that their husbands or boy friends pass more time with sitting immobile in front of their computer than with them. In villages, the introduction of TV in most of the households changes the traditional communication structures. People withdraw from the collective spaces of communication and consume the TV images in their private homes. In short, the increasing consumation of all kind of visual information isolates people from each other and changes traditional forms of social interaction and communication.With the increasing isolation on the one hand, we observe the emergence of new forms of community on the other hand that already produce special sub cultures. Consumers of TV-series such as the famous Star-Trek constitute internet-fan-communities. Members living in Sydney, in Ireland or in South Africa will never meet in reality but are connected by intensive „virtual contacts“. They are the vivid expression of a new cultural practice, in which visual communication becomes predominant and in which human intelligence and the construction of individuality is more and more defined by the ability to decode and to use visual codes. For investigating changes of such great import we need new descriptive and analytical methods. Treating the new media just from a technical point of view is obviously not adequate. We need to complete this kind of research with the perspective and the specific categories of social and cultural anthropology. Visual Anthropology is highly qualified to deal with the complex phenomena of the media revolution. Deeply rooted in the tradition of comparative studies of cultural diversity, Visual Anthropology focuses on all forms of human work and human life. In consequence Visual Anthropology is necessarily interdisciplinary and uses all kinds of methodological instruments. Before dealing with another field of actual research I want to give some exemplary research topics which actually are treated by some of my German students, by young overseas researchers here in China and by some colleagues of mine: n The visual staging of power in TV newsn The visual staging of the bodyn Globalisation and visual mass media n The introduction of TV in remote Chinese villages and changes of social communicationn Video-Fan-communities n Chat-groups and Fan-groups in the Internetn Locality in the electronic era n Virtual identities: the self-representation in the Internetn Visual media and the market of religions Specific nature of imagesIn historical records, we find some famous stories of how photographs were falsified. One example is a group photo of Russian political leaders that was published at two different moments in time. In the later one the head of a person who in the meantime had politically been discredited was missing. In another photograph someone else had replaced the head of this person. In these examples, the falsification used the technique of touching up and photomontage. In spite of the existence of these kinds of modifying or manipulating techniques, photographs and film images had for a long time a high reputation of being “truthful” representations. The digital possibilities of creating virtual images and manipulating pictures at will confront us definitively with the questions on the very nature and specific character of all kinds of images. What is representation? The old idea that pictures duplicate reality is definitively outdated and it is not astonishing that videos and photos lose more and more their status as pieces of evidence in court trials. That images are constructions is more and more evident. Visual Anthropology therefore has to investigate the construction principles of all kinds of images, not only of virtual images. The hypothesis underlying this kind of research is that no image stands for natural visual “rough material”, but that all images are culturally and historically specific creations, regardless whether we deal with cave drawings, with dances, sign languages, films or web-Sites. The analysis of the immanent codes, of the construction principles and the formation of representational conventions leads to the eminent question on the narrative qualities of visual products. Do the different visual genres contain their own narrative structures or do they adopt these structures from other narrative traditions? We all know that the invention of the medium film was possible only due to technical innovations of the late 19th century but it couldn’t develop as a separate “seventh art” without relying on long existing narrative traditions, such as literature, theatre, opera, fairs and so on.The question on the existence or non-existence of an original narrative power of visual genres is especially interesting in view of the virtual images. Here too, the decisive question is: Do the new visual media create new narrative contents? Preliminary researches suggest that this is probably not the case. The narrative motives and subjects reflect an astonishing continuity of fundamental cultural codes. Unfortunately, I am not familiar with Chinese Culture and therefore not able to evoke some examples from your own cultural background. In the West African context for example, my German colleague Tobias Wendl (1997) showed in detail the continuity of archetypal patterns of self-representations, regardless whether we are in front of a sculpture of the 19th century or of a present-day photography touched up according to precise requirements of a customer. Werner Petermann (1997) who investigated European popular image traditions proved that the design of personifications of horror motives such as Vampires and Monsters are embedded in a continuity of many centuries, regardless whether they occur in literature or in video-productions of actual Fan-communities. It seems that the complex network of images, image producers, image markets and consumers is dominated by the fact that images are constructed following long-living models or patterns which simply are adopted to the technological possibilities of new media. The cultural narratives constitute the real continuity. These narratives often represent archaic motives varying from culture to culture. In the western context for example, one of these motives is the man-to-man fight. Over more that 2000 years, this motive is enacted and represented in multiple „designs“ including the duel as such, specific war techniques in the past, different kinds of sport, but also the staging of TV debates opposing two political candidates during election campaigns. Other basic narratives are the victory of the good over the bad, the power of beauty, the sacrifice inspired by love and so on. Poems, novels, stage plays, paintings and many other forms of artistic expression have dealt with these kinds of narrative contents and the modern visual genres such as animation films, computer games and TV series continue their transmission. Thus, it appears that the new visual media do not create new visual contents but just produce new visual practises.
Hybrid worlds of images
Another topic of actual research is related to the phenomenon of globalisation. All kinds of images are caught in a global circulation. Western martial-arts or Rambo-Films where the hero as individual is idolized achieve big success in Africa and in Asian countries. In Germany, the program of many flourishing video-distributors exclusively contains Hong Kong action and martial-arts films without any subtitles. The consumers of such films obviously have no Chinese language knowledge, but in spite of this deficiency they link up with other consumers in large Internet fan-communities. But the impact of globalisation is still more complex. Images are removed from their original context, function and cultural meaning and circulate and mix with other representational traditions. This leads to a kind of world-wide hybrid environment of pictures and images. Heike Behrend (1997) for instance reported on photo studios in Kenya specialising in taking photographs of migrant workers. Most of these people live in miserable conditions but they want to send photos to their families that are able to make believe that they are rich and happy. For satisfying the request of their customers, the studio owners have designed a specific scenery which suggests to represent a luxurious living room. The background of the photo studio is a colourful mixture of African, Indian and American folklore pictures, paintings, posters, advertisements and all kinds of visual objects coming from all over the world.In the context of such phenomena, Visual Anthropology has to investigate the constitutive elements of the increasingly hybrid forms of visual representations, to analyse the “trajectories” of these elements and the changing of sense and meaning linked to their global circulation and mingling with other visual products. The Impact of History and Culture on Human SightOnly recently, another topic of Visual Anthropology has become the object of intense research, that is the impact of history and culture on human sight as well as on the other perceptual senses. Ernst Gombrich (1984) emphasised, that human eyes never are „blank“. The human eye always perceives the outside world as an already experienced eye. Its perception is influenced by the past, by emotions, knowledge and so on. The experience of the eye evoked by Gombrich is not restricted to the personal level, but includes collective cultural experience. Strictly speaking the blank eye would be blind.Let’s construct an example as an illustration. Imagine that after a long and painful mountaineering, a group of 4 people suddenly perceive the wonderful shape of a mountain range. They stop and look. The first one is overwhelmed because he sees an extraordinary example of specific geological strata. The second recognises the resemblance of the mountain shape with the silhouette of a naked woman and feels inspired to write a poem. The third one falls on his knees and worships the holy mountain of which his grandfather had told him so much when he was a little boy. The fourth one doesn’t see anything special because his wounded feet absorb him. They all look at the same mountain, but each one sees it differently and bestows his perception with meaning according to his personal disposition. Cultural studies about human sight rely on the basic hypothesis that all human beings have the same sense organs but that they learn in very different ways to make use of them. Sight is not considered as the passive reception of visual stimuli, but as a complex process in which visual information is selected and ordered in a way to produce meaning. History and culture are fundamental elements which bring about different “cultures of seeing”. Thus, Visual anthropology investigates the interplay of the social, linguistic, cosmological, ecological and other various historical and cultural factors, which determine the interpretation of visual experience. Within my short lecture I have not the opportunity to discuss all of these factors. As an illustration of the impact of ecology I just want to evoke the example of the Eskimos (Inuit). It is well known that their natural environment of eternal snow has sharpened their visual perception with regard to the multiple differences of white colour. Most of us are only able to distinguish a few nuances of whiteness and our languages have no vocabulary to express more gradations. In contrast, the Eskimos use dozens of words for naming multiple nuances of white snow. The Kashinawa Indians of the Peruvian rainforest live in a natural environment that is dominated by the green colour. In contrast to the Eskimos the permanent confrontation with a predominant colour has not produced numerous terminological distinctions. On the contrary, for Kashinawa people, green is so common that it even is not classified as colour but constitutes a kind of non-colour.These examples should be sufficient for pointing out the impact of ecological conditions on visual perception as well as the culturally diverse ways to deal with these conditions.The American philosopher Marx Wartofsky emphasized the specific influence of art and representational styles on human sight. For demonstrating his argument he brought to light how the introduction of the central perspective into European painting did not only signify an artistic innovation but also a radical change of European ways of seeing.Tobias Wendl conducted intensive research on the perception of still photography in non-western cultures. He found out that people, who have grown up in cultures where the central perspective is not existent in art and who never have been confronted with such a style of representation, have difficulties to decode and understand photographs. In fact, still photography is deeply rooted in the tradition of central perspective painting. According to Wendl, photographic images are a rather brute optical representation, which isolates and fixes one single, privileged moment. The spectator is not separated from the picture, on the contrary by implication he becomes a part of the extended photographic space. In many non-western traditions looking and seeing by using such an individualistic point of view simply doesn’t play any role. Such a perspective is considered as too narrow and too superficial. On the contrary the artistic aim in these cultures is much more focused on the synthesis of multiple perspectives and moments. (1996: 179).Following the hypothesis of the interdependence of human sight and images, Visual Anthropology has to conduct systematic and comparative research about culturally diverse ways to build up specific “worlds of sight” or “worlds of seeing” and “worlds of images”. „World of sight“ means the totality of cognitive patterns, which enable that sense stimuli can be bestowed with meaning. The above mentioned social, linguistic, cosmological, and ecological factors are a part of this
„World of images“ is another expression for the whole visual environment produced and created by human beings and which includes much more than image productions in a strict sense. Worlds of sight and worlds of images are linked together by visual practice.
The research of culturally diverse worlds of sight and worlds of images are based on two complementary questions. In what way do the images and representational traditions of a culture inform us about specific concepts of visual perception? And inversely, how can the understanding of specific concepts of visual perception help us to better understand and interpret the visual representations of a culture? New visual media and scienceA last point which I would like to mention today is that we have well passed beyond the historical period when the Humanities dealt exclusively with concrete material sources such as written documents, sound recordings, archaeological objects and so on. With the new digital media we are confronted with new kinds of sources that often represent an epistemological challenge. The computer-based simulation is only one of many examples. Classical fieldwork among bodily present people is no longer possible for investigating some new topics. I recall the research on Internet chat-groups and fan-communities for example which implies a kind of “Virtual fieldwork”.
In the same time, new forms of collecting, treating and storing data as well as new networking archive systems develop and deeply change the production and the circulation of knowledge. We are confronted with the challenge to use the immense possibilities of digital media and at the same time to control them in a way that the epistemological value of research is not perverted.
Mentioned authors:Behrend, H. 1997. Zuhause in der Fremde: Konstruktion von Lokalität in kenianischer Studiofotografie. Vortrag im Rahmen der Tagung: Hybride Wirklichkeiten: Zur neueren Theoriediskussion in der Visuellen Anthropologie, Frankfurt/Oder.Gombrich, E. 1984. Bild und Auge. Neue Studien zur Psychologie der bildlichen Darstellung. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta (Original English version Oxford 1982).Petermann, W. 1997. Kulturvergleichende Studien zur Konstruktion von Fremd- und Eigenbildern. DFG-Forschungsbericht. Wendl, Tobias 1996. Warum sie nicht sehen, was sie sehen könnten. Zur Perzeption von Fotogafien im Kulturvergleich. In: Anthropos 91, 169-181.
Wendl, T. 1997. Kulturvergleichende Studien zur Konstruktion von Fremd- und Eigenbildern. DFG-Forschungsbericht.
