1RA+Rough+Draft

1RA Rough Draft Jason Frey Visual Rhetoric Feb 2012

In the small town of Halberstadt, Germany, the year 1913; a boy named Ralph Crane was born. Inspired by this fathers hobby of photography, Ralph became a photojournalist (Crane). Ralph was a staff photographer at LIFE Magazine until the company folded in 1972, he then freelanced for Smithsonian, the International Herald Tribune and many other publications. During his employment with LIFE Magazine Ralph took many photo’s but there are three photo’s that stand out to me—these I will reference as; “run”, “stop” and “hide”. All three photos were found in Google images and were taken for LIFE Magazine between the years 1947-1950. The photos reveal post WW2 life, “run” show’s how some parts of life were not affected by the war, “stop” reveals the lingering effects of the war and “hide” unveils the return to normalcy.

Although the three photos have some commonalities such as the time period the shots were taken and the fact that they are all black and white, each one was taken for a different purpose. The photo “run”, taken in 1947, was called “A Boy’s Escape”. The photo was a reenactment of a “disturbed boys escape from a children’s home” (2). Ralph used a perfect combination of high speed strobes, impeccable timing and drama to make the audience feel like this was the real escape. The photo “stop”, shot in February 1953, shows an automobile arriving from the Eastern Sector of Berlin being halted by West Berlin police. This photo reveals an overwhelming, lingering hostility that exists in Germany’s capitol. The photo “hide”, taken in 1950, show a young couple sitting in a pit carved out of the sand. This photo was shot to “capture our longtime love affair with the sea” (Gresham). During this time period (1947-1950) the world was recovering from the second world war, industry and technology was beginning to boom and there was a general desire for normal life to resume.

The purpose of these photographs, as a whole, in my opinion, is to capture a moment in time and represent the feeling of a people group in the area each shot was taken. The “run” photos’ purpose is to convince the audience of the light at the end of the tunnel or the bright future ahead, just make a run for it—leaving clothes and all behind and //The Man// won’t catch you. The “stop” photos’ purpose is to show that although many years have past since Germany lost the war, division and hostility remain among the people—even in the capitol, Berlin. The “hide” photos’ purpose is to show not only joy one can have on a beach but also how America has finally “returned to normalcy”, forgetting the horrors of the world war and even ignoring current dilemmas such as the Korean War. There appears to be a state of contentment.

These three photographs are rhetorical because “spectatorship (the look, the gaze, the glance, the practices of observation, surveillance, and visual pleasure) may be as deep a problem as various forms of reading (decipherment, decoding, interpretation, etc.) and that visual experience or "visual literacy" might not be fully explicable on the model of textuality (Blakesly&Brooke). These three photos “is twofold…denotational and connotational” (Barthes) "run" Photo

Masterful, exquisite, dramatic and technical excellence is just a few words that have been used to describe the “run” photo (2). The photo features two individuals, both mid air and in long stride, racing down a dark hallway. The photos main purpose is to reenact a disturbed boy escape from a children’s home. Because the photo was staged Ralph was able to create whatever scene that he could think of to best represent and evoke emotion in the audience. He chose to strip the boy of his clothing because no sane person in there right mind runs around naked. The man who is chasing the boy is well dressed—he has dress shoes and pants couple with a fuzzy sweater—not the type of person that would be perceived to do the boy harm. The man embodies the public servant who is doing his best to keep the peace. The stride of the man also appears to be more relaxed, the boy on the other hand looks as though he is running for dear life. The hallway is dark with light being cast on both the man and boy.

The light on the boy is like “the light at the end of the tunnel” effect, he is moving out of the darkness and into the good life of freedom. The boy is also rounding the corner which helps convince the audience that he has a good chance of escaping. The light on the man shows once again that this is not one who is sadistic or evil but an angel of light who is only thinking in the boy’s best interest—so the boy must be chased down and caught to save humanity from such a disturbance. The photo could have been taken in color but Ralph chose to do it in black and white. The shades of various grays and dark sinister shadows enhance excitement of the boys escape and the persistence of the man chasing.

There are two different ways that one could view this photo, one could either side with the boy and judge the man or vice versa. The boy’s escape in a way represents the way that all humans feel at one point or another in our lives—a chance to break free, leave everything behind, and start fresh—this photo shows that such a thing is possible. On the other hand the viewer could also relate to the man, the authority, the keeper of the peace and order. This man embodies a person of position; such as leaders, parents, teachers, policemen, etc. The boy in this case could be seen as an unruly child who refuses to follow instructions, obstructs the harmony and is a detriment to society.Blakesly & Brooke state that, “we should bring textuality and visuality together, really together, before we pull them apart.” This is very true for the “run” photo, the interpretations of what is actually going on, or supposed to be going on in the photo could be greatly skewed if the textuality (a boy’s escape) was separated from the visuality.

"stop" Photo

In 1953 there was an uprising in Eastern Germany. This began with a strike by the East Berlin construction workers on June 16 and turned into a widespread revolt against the German Democratic Republic government the next day. With this context in mind we see the “stop” photo and note this is most likely a police officer performing his duty trying to maintain the peace. The oncoming car is random, indicating that the government does not trust any person entering West Berlin. There is enormous barbed wire behind the police officer—this could pop the tires of any intruder on rubber wheels. The photo needs to show the barbed wire because it shows the gravity of the situation. If the photo only included the policeman, it would look like a cross guard out on a rainy day directing traffic—the photo would loose its significance.

The photo is dark, with many shades of gray—the perfect type of color scheme to represent sadness, division and turmoil. If this photo was in color, it would not have as strong of an effect on the audience. The buildings appear as shadows in the background, like a ghost town. In the sky there is no sunshine to be seen, only dark gray overcast—this adds to the gloominess of the situation that Berlin is going through. These seem to be depressing and bleak times for Germany, even long after World War II had ended. The dirt on the sides of the road and the tall, unkempt grass next to the side walks indicates a country out of order. Normally a major street like this would be clean and finely trimmed, but it is obvious that this has not been done for weeks or even months. Germany does not have the finances to clean main streets in their capital city—this indicates a lack of government power.

Before the rise of Hitler, Germany was historically known for having many political parties and also containing very outspoken individuals who would regularly start uprisings. These uprisings were suppressed and diluted by Hitler and his passionate followers during his rein, but regrouped after the fall of Germany, 1945. At the time this “stop” photo was viewed by the public it is very likely that people around the world could see this as Germany returning to normalcy, when uprisings were usual happenings. This could be viewed as a good thing, various peoples speaking up to gain new rights or as bad, the deterioration of German government and order. The dreariness of the photo seems to indicate that these were bad times—it’s not a colorful, hopeful looking photo that brings hope for a bright future. The current state of Germany is a stable, thriving country—a country who long forgot the horrors of the holocaust. Looking at this photo today merely speaks of a snapshot of the dark days when Germany was trying to regain power and noble status among the nations. The people of today, 2012 do not know of this dark Germany.

The viewer of this photo could decipher a variety of different inferences depending on their current position. One of those in the uprising could view this photo as encouragement to keep fighting “The Man”—this man (government) that holds them back and “stops” them from going were they want to go. This photo could also be viewed as a testament to the order that //does// exist—letting the world know that the people who have started the uprising have not won and just a single (united) German (government) policeman is needed to keep this unruly group under control.

"hide" Photo Santa Monica, 1950 was a time for “sock hops, poodle skirts, going to the beach and drive-ins” (Gresham). The “hide” photo shows a care free North America. The photo is black and white which gives it an “old time” feel, like the good o’ days at the beach. The shades of gray in this photo do not deter from the joy and relaxation that is occurring on the beach. Because the photo is not in color, there is an overall, equal sense of contentment among the people in the photo, which invites the viewer to join in and take part. Also the shades of gray keep our focus from being distracted from the two lovers up front.

One critic stated that this photo “captures our longtime love affair with the sea” (3). This “love affair” is represented by the couple in the front. Of all the places this young couple could have been in 1950 these two lovers wanted to be at the shore, deep in a pit dug out of the sand. Behind the couple there are people, shops and all kinds of activity. The couple receives the focal point of this photo. The woman is leaning on the man; his arm wrapped tightly around her. Maybe she is cold and tired so he holds her tight to keep warm in the cool sand. The couple are somewhat protected from the ocean wind, but also from the noise/ commotion going on around them. They appear to be oblivious to all other activity--as if they are the only ones on that beach.

It is interesting that there is one woman who looks like she is staring directly at the photographer. She draws an ire attention to herself which takes away from the couple slightly. No one else in the photo appears to be looking at the camera but this woman. Crane did not use a different shot, he allowed this woman to look into his lens. This woman is like a voice of reason staring into the soul of the audience. She sees through the fickle love and the temporal pleasure of life on the beach. She is not smiling, she remembers the not so distant past (WWI and II), is aware of the present (beginnings of the Korean and Cold war), and almost dreads the future calamity to come. I was personally attracted to the seriousness of this woman—which is so different from the rest of the photo. Once noticed her eyes take most of the attention off the couple in the sand pit.

These three photographs by Ralph Crane represent life as it was in that specific time. As I have said they all have a hint of return to normalcy, after the great calamity of World War II. The “run” photo persuades us that boy’s are still boy’s, the “stop” shows us that German had reverted to its regular uprising, as it did before the war, and lastly the “hide” photo shows an American people at peace, relaxing on a beach without a worry in the world, the military men have been home with their families five years now and have begun to forget.

Works Cited:


 * 1) Crane, Rita (Feb, 2000), My Father LIFE Magazine Photographer Ralph Crane, //Flickr//, []
 * 2) Unknown Author, //Blogspot.com,// []
 * 3) Gresham, Anna Lee, (March 2003), LIFE at the beach, //coastalliving.com//, []
 * 4) David Blakesley and Collin Brooke, //enculturation.gmu.edu,//[]
 * 5) Ramage. D John, //Rhetoric A User’s Guide//, New York, Pearson Education Inc., 2006, Print.
 * 6) Barthes, Roland//,// The Photographic Message//, classroomsalon.org//, []

Writer: Jason Frey

Reviewer: Chandler Wilson ** 1. Does the writer understand the concept of a rhetorical analysis and does the paper demonstrate its application? Why or why not. Give suggestions. ** I believe that this paper did demonstrate the concepts involved in a rhetorical analysis. He has strong support in the beginning of the paper, the fourth paragraph, relating it back to the Blakesly & Brooke essay that we read through. Also throughout the paper he was aware of the photograph and also of the audience; there could possibly be more support within the context of each image description to relate it back to the rhetorical thoughts of some of the theorists we read. But all in all I think that the paper does a good job of analyzing the images. ** 2. **** What argument / communicative purpose does the paper describe for the photographs it uses. Is it appropriate? Effectively presented? Why or why not. Give suggestions. ** The purpose of this paper is to communicate the feelings and attitudes of post-WWII, at least this is the message that I got from the paper. I think that it was effectively presented in the paper through giving an overview of each image, analyzing them from the photographer’s point of view, and also giving the appeal to the audience. I felt that they way the paper is set up makes it easy to flow from image to image and see all these components. ** 3. What is the argument claim put forward for the photograph(s) under analysis in the paper? Is it appropriate? Effectively presented? Why or why not. Give suggestions. ** I think that the idea was to say how the photographer shot these images to represent the post-WWII vibes. People were still on the fence with how they felt, but it was common to want to have freedom and be back at a state of normalcy. I’m not sure if this is what Jason wanted to get across but I think that the paper supports this idea. I guess that the argument for the photographer would be that these images work together in a series of showing the world post-WWII. I would say that it was presented effectively because the images were all related back to the audience and how they would view them; it was also related back to the people in the image, which I found to be a very interesting tactic. The only thing that I would possibly do to further support the idea would be pull in more from the context of the images and how they may have effected the audience of the time. We see the images one way, but we also are not fully aware of what these people went through. ** 4. What did you like about how to various visual/rhetorical theorists (Berger/Faigley/Ramage/Blakesly&Brooke/Barthes) were used in the paper? What could be improved about how the paper uses these theorists? What suggestions do you have for the writer? Be as specific as possible by discussing each theorist one at a time and how the paper uses them. Also, give suggestions of theorists that the writer does not use but might be useful in his/her rhetorical analysis. ** I really liked the support that was used from Blakesly & Brooke; I felt that this paragraph towards to beginning strongly supported what Jason went on to cover in his paper. I felt that the idea of pulling the spectatorship into the analysis of this photographs really helped completely cover the rhetorical side of the images. Also in his description of the “run” photograph, he included to idea of textuality and visuality being used together to first see the meaning behind the image. However, there wasn’t much support from the other theorists. He mentioned Barthes briefly in the beginning of the paper but I think that it could have been helpful to use more of Barthes’ ideas in comparison with each image. By introducing him in the start of the paper, I was expecting to see more of his information quoted later in the analysis of the images. I think that using Ramage could be really beneficial to this paper. I found it hard to quote him directly in my own paper but after reading through this paper and others, I feel that the concepts are being used just not quoted. I think that Jason could possibly use Ramage to support how to images work together; possibly use his idea of “the gist.” This can support the idea of why Jason himself chose to use this images together even though they were not put together by the photographer.

Review: Justin Taylor


 * 1) ** Does the writer understand the concept of a rhetorical analysis and does the paper demonstrate its application? Why or why not. Give suggestions. **

The writer does a good job of using the readings to support his rhetorical claims, though some of the claims themselves may be debatable. I believe the right concepts are called into play, but some can be delved into more deeply to make them more conclusive for the reader.


 * 1) ** What argument / communicative purpose does the paper describe for the photographs it uses. Is it appropriate? Effectively presented? Why or why not. Give suggestions. **

The argument, what I interpreted as: "The purpose of these photographs, as a whole, in my opinion, is to capture a moment in time and represent the feeling of a people group in the area each shot was taken." can be appropriated, but in its state is too general. I think that by substituting the generalities with specific details in regards to the pictures it would be more effective.


 * 1) ** What is the argument claim put forward for the photograph(s) under analysis in the paper? Is it appropriate? Effectively presented? Why or why not. Give suggestions. **

I interpreted the claim as being as an example of a specific people's natural desire for the nostalgia of normalcy in the face of change. I think this claim is well supported throughout the paper through could be made more dynamic by being more upfront with it at times.


 * 1) ** What did you like about how the various visual/rhetorical theorists (Berger/Faigley/Ramage/Blakesly&Brooke/Barthes) were used in the paper? What could be improved about how the paper uses these theorists? What suggestions do you have for the writer? Be as specific as possible by discussing each theorist one at a time and how the paper uses them. Also, give suggestions of theorists that the writer does not use but might be useful in his/her rhetorical analysis. **

There is a decent amount of theorist material used and they certainly build stability in the paper. Perhaps the idea of negative space having meaning in the photo could be used to strengthen arguments in the first two photographs, where much of the image is plain.