"I now now that there exists another punctum (another "stigmatum") than the "detail." This new punctum, which is no longer of the form but of intensity, is Time, the lacerating emphasis of the noeme ("that-has-been"), its pure representation." (96)
Barthes deduction of time as a second punctum somewhat confuses me. First, it implies greater universality than his earlier definition of punctum, which is completely subjective. Can anyone help but perceive time in a photograph? Can one just accept the pose in the aorist tense without trying to contextualize it?
To me, this comes as part of Barthes madness for photographs. Spending too much time with them, he can't help but fill in the missing spaces left, write in the stories, the cinemas of each picture.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment