1RA+Draft

Seth Eckman Visual Rhetoric Engl 340 Professor Archibald Paper 1 Eugene Atget; First Draft (Paper 1) Documentary photography is used to chronicle and preserve historical, political and social events. If done right, the photos should evoke an accurate sense of time and place. Documentary photography is about context; what is documented and when did it occur. Eugene Atget's understated photographs of Paris transcends the specific times and places they were taken. The emotions conveyed in Atget's photos are universal. Thus, they easily appeal to the audience's pathos.

 Before delving into the symbolic meaning of the photo and its context, let's look at the non-coded iconic message of the photo above. In other words, the literal meaning of the photo; what's in the photo when all connotation, or applied meaning, is stripped away (Barthes 153). In //Coin de la Rue Valette et Pantheon// there are three buildings. The middle one is in the distance. It appears faded, perhaps due to its distance, fog or the sun hitting it. Compared to the other two buildings, this faded building looks like an important, distinct building. Perhaps it's a landmark or political building. Perhaps it's a church. The two other buildings line an alleyway and appear to be rundown, especially the one on the left. This can be assumed due to the amount of wear on its exterior. Instead of taking an up close picture of the distinct middle building, Atget took it from the vantage point of someone standing in the alleyway. Thus, the viewer is led from the alleyway to the distant building. One of the most important aspects about this photo is what is not in it. Not only does a photo refer to what is seen, but what is not seen (Berger 293). People are absent from the photo, making the scene look still and abandoned. Stillness is a trend throughout Atget photos.

The linguistic message is obtained through the text that comes with the photo (Barthes 153). Assuming the title is given, the title of this photo gives the viewer clues as to what the building is and where it was taken. If the viewer has the knowledge of the French language then they can conclude from the title that the photo was taken in France. Also the word //Pantheon// pops out to the viewer. It appears to be significant. One can conclude that the Pantheon is the subject, and that it is in France due to the title being in French. Thus, the title works with the image to help the viewer figure out what the focal point is and some of its context (Barthes 156-157).



The non-coded message and linguistic message can also be found in Atget's similar //Notre Dame.// In //Notre Dame,// wild, unkempt tree branches in the foreground distort the view of a big, stately, distant building. The building, like in the previous photo, appears to be an important building due to its size and architecture. Perhaps the viewer would assume it to be an estate or a church. Like the previous photo, there's a quietness and stillness to the photo. Not only is the massive building quiet and still, the river that is in between the branches and the building is, too. The only movement is from the branches. They contrast with the general calmness of the area. As in the //Pantheon//, instead of taking a concrete photo of the structure, Atget took the photo from a distance. This distance allows nature to interfere with his subject. The branches actually seem to work themselves into the building. This effect causes the branches to distort the building. The distortion is especially visible on the far left side of the structure. The linguistic message, the title, tells the viewer exactly what the subject is. The subject is Notre Dame, a church in Paris, France.

The viewer can already notice a sense of loneliness and stillness in these two photos. And from the titles, they know the location and the names of the subjects. But why did Atget decide to take photos of French architecture? And why did he shoot them the way he did? A better understanding of the context, and a better understanding of Atget's ethos or ethics, will provide those answers.

Working in between pre and post industrial Paris, Eugene Atget was a documentary photographer (Oden.) Atget focused on the architectural and sociological documentation of old Paris. He wanted to document the city before it became modernized (Borcoman). Thus, Atget avoided taking photos that represented a modernized version of Paris. His photos depicted “a sense of loss in the face of an increasingly machine-oriented, homogenized, rapidly paced world...” (Grundberg) Atget preferred the old, rustic, traditional and nostalgic. Essentially, he was documenting “the past glories of Paris.”(Grundberg) He would wake up before dawn, get ready and go out and document the city. He was a “master” of mood and place. His photos were heavy on light, shadow, and space. (Borcoman). His audience at the time consisted mainly of artists and sculptors who used his photos for their own art. Also, many of his photos were bought by libraries and historical societies. A lot of the streets and buildings that Atget photographed were later destroyed due to wars. Because of Atget's photos, people became aware of the existence of these places. He was crucial in the documentation of Paris's history. He died virtually unknown in 1927 (Oden).

To summarize, Atget's ethos were to focus in on the traditional, old and nostalgic, while avoiding the contemporary. He was taking these photographs at a time when Paris was being “bulldozed by modernity.”(Grundberg) Knowing what his focus was, what his ethos were, and the context of his photos, it's easier to illicit more meaning out of the two photos above, and easier to come up with visual metaphors. A visual metaphor is when an image represent a bigger concept (Faigley 89).

In //Coin de la Rue Valette et Pantheon// and //Notre Dame,// both buildings could represent old Paris; a Paris that's starting to fade and be neglected due to societies increasing modernization. These metaphors wouldn't work if Atget's choices and approaches were different, though. Atget chose to take pictures of old Paris. Thus, he had to choose something appropriate to represent it. The Pantheon, a very old mausoleum, is very much in the tradition of Atget's subject matter. Notre Dame, an old church, is too. Also, Atget chose to shoot early in the morning. This explains why there are no people in either photographs. It makes the scenes appear abandoned. The scenes most likely wouldn’t have been that way if they were taken in the afternoon or evening. If locals were in the alleyway heading towards the Pantheon or were in boats on the river looking at Notre Dame, the photos wouldn't have the same stillness or sense of abandonment and loneliness. Also, Atget was shooting right when the sun came up. This probably explains how the Pantheon got its ghostly effect. It was probably due to the morning sun hitting it. How else would the Pantheon get that faded, eerie look? Without these choices, both photos would look completely different. A photo shows the decision-making and the choices of the photographer (Berger 292; 294).

Furthermore, we can apply a coded iconic message to the photos knowing Atget's context. The coded iconic message is made up of signs in the image that we apply a deeper meaning to (Barthes 160). Signs communicate like language (Faigley 85). Once we understand the context of the photographs, it's easier to pick out the signs and apply meaning to them. The main sign in //Coin de la Rue Valette er Parthenon// would be the Pantheon itself. The Pantheon, faded, distant and surrounded by rundown buildings, could represent the fading, old Paris; a Paris that will seem passe and irrelevant after it surrenders to a new, modernized world. The Pantheon also looks ghostly. If the Pantheon represents old Paris, then old Paris can also be viewed as “ghostly.” Old Paris is still around. It still “haunts,” but it's a part of the past. Another sign would be the rundown buildings that line the alleyway. They could represent an //already// faded, forgotten portion of old Paris. Even the Pantheon could end up like these two buildings. In relation with the other buildings, the empty alleyway could be another sign. All three buildings look abandoned due to the lack of people in the alleyway. Not only does the lack of life give the scene a sense of abandonment, but it also gives the scene its stillness.

We can also apply connoted meanings to //Notre Dame// knowing Atget's ethos. Again, Notre Dame itself could be a sign. It could represent old Paris that is being eclipsed and hidden away. The branches do the hiding and eclipsing. These branches could be another sign. The branches are wild and looping. Thus, they could represent modernized Paris; a Paris that is less conservative and traditional. New Paris is moving and advancing while old Paris sits still. The branches distort and work their way into the building. This could imply that the new is already starting to distort and take over the old. Also, Notre Dame is distant from the viewer. Thus, old Paris is becoming more distant as contemporary Paris emerges. Also, note how the branches look like scribbles. It's as if someone scribbled over the photo with a marker. Thus, the branches also could represent modern society defacing, crossing out, disregarding, or even disrespecting the past. Also, many of the thinner branches look like cracks and cobwebs. This could represent old Paris being neglected. It is as if nothing is bothering this area; nothing wants anything to do with it. It sits and collects dust. This sense of neglect adds to the building and the river's overall stillness. The river is so still it looks like an empty street. But the stillness also suggest that even though old Paris is faded, distorted and neglected, it isn't going anywhere. It won't move. These landmarks will remain and still be a part of Paris's history. They'll just be marginalized. In many ways, //Coin de la Rue Valette et Pantheon// and //Notre Dame// are quite similar. Trends that run through these photos are scenes of stillness, loneliness and abandonment. Also, both of the photos have similar subject matter, important French architecture, presented in understated, gloomy ways. But how do these two photos compare to the photo below? We'll start with the non-coded iconic message of the image, and then go to the linguistic and coded.



//Hotel de Jean// is a photo of a staircase’s railing. The railing looks like it's own entity, and parts of it are immersed in shadows. The walls look warped and show some wear. Again, it's important to point out what's not in the photo. Steps are not shown, nor is their any people using the staircase. The photo has the same stillness and lifelessness that the other two photos have. It looks similar to the way the Pantheon was presented in the first photo, just more eerie and odd. Of course, there are differences between this photo and the other two. The main difference is that it's an interior shot; it's inside a building. Also, the building is different than the Pantheon and Notre Dame. The title, //Hotel de Jean//, tells the viewer this isn't the interior of an important mausoleum or church. It's the interior of a hotel. Of course, this specific hotel is probably not as highly regarded as the Pantheon or Notre Dame. But perhaps it shows that even ordinary places like hotels are in the same boat as the landmarks of old Paris. Though the interiors would most likely be different, this hotel's interior could be an indication of what the Pantheon's or Notre Dame's interiors will look like one day. The photo also shows that the modernization of a society doesn't discriminate against what it marginalizes, replaces and forgets. Parts of the railing are immersed in shadows. Perhaps that'll be the the rest of the railing's fate. It's as if the scene is fading due to disuse; as if the steps have disappeared because no one has been using them, leaving only a railing that is already beginning to get consumed by shadows. This can be related to Atget's old Paris. No one has a use for Paris's past anymore because of the the evolving society, thus the past is forgotten and just left to fade.

Atget documented the remains of the old, traditional Paris trying to survive against the modern world. And he did this, interestingly, without showing any aspects of modernized Paris in his photos. Thus, branches and the way light and shadow effect certain architecture represented old Paris becoming obsolete. The context of Atget's photos helps illicit a stronger response from the viewer. These photos in particular can appeal to the audience’s pathos, or emotions. Though the audience might not be from Paris, these photos transcend where and when they were taken. They appeal to the emotion of loss, which is universal, and there is a great sense of loss in these photos. It's as if these places will go unnoticed and then quietly disappear without a soul around. Thus, old Paris could represent any society or community that has had gone through drastic changes. Old Paris in these photos could also represent the “good ol' days.” Many can relate. The viewer might have had their most cherished, beloved places closed down, radically re-worked, changed, sold or even demolished. And not only could viewers relate to the difficulties that come with change, but they could also relate to the difficulties of adapting to new, foreign situations and places. It's hard. Most want to cling to the past. Also, knowing how important and recognizable the first two buildings are, the viewer might be taken aback by the way these great pieces of architecture are presented. Even if the viewer doesn't know that these are the Pantheon and Notre Dame, they can still gather by looking at them that they're pretty impressive, distinct buildings. Knowing the purposes of the buildings gives the buildings more importance. Thus, when these important buildings appear so quiet and lifeless, it's even more poignant. Atget essentially drains the importance out of these buildings and scenes with his presentation of them. Where's the people? Where's the motion? Where's the life?

Works Cited 1.Barthes, Roland. “Rhetoric of the Image.” p. 152-163. 2.Berger, John. “Understanding a Photograph.” p. 29-294. 3.Borcoman, James. “Eugene Atget.” //Masters of Photography//. 27 Feb 2012. 4.Faigley, Lester. “Understanding a Visual Argument.” p. 85-103. 5.Grundberg, Andy. “Photography View; Eugene Atget- His Art Bridged Two Centuries.” //New York Times//. 10 March 1985. Web 27 Feb 2012. 6.Oden, Lori. “Eugen Atget Bio.” //International Photography Hall of Fame.// Web 27 Feb 2012.