The Motley View

The Journal of Film, Art and Aesthetics ISSN 2049-4254

Influential Theorists: Andre Bazin The

Ontology Of The Photographic Image
Posted on December 1, 2008 by A.R. Duckworth

Andre Bazin is undoubtedly a famous figure in film criticism and film theory. Bazin was a co-founder
of the influential film magazine Cahiers du Cinema, a mentor and friend of Francois Truffaut and firm
supporter of realism. A large collection of Bazins writings were complied and published
posthumously and entitled What Is Cinema?. In a series of articles I will explore Bazins essays. The
first article will be:
The Ontology of the Photographic Image1
If the plastic arts were put under psychoanalysis, the practice of embalming the dead
might turn out to be a fundamental factor in their creation. The process might reveal
that at the origin of painting and sculpture there lies a mummy complex. The religion
of ancient Egypt, aimed against death, saw survival as depending on the continued
existence of the corporeal body. Thus, by providing a defence against the passage of

time it satisfied a basic psychological need in man, for death is but the victory of time.
To preserve, artificially, his bodily appearance is to snatch it from the flow of time, to
stow it away neatly, so to speak, in the hold of life. It was natural, therefore, to keep up
appearances in the face of the reality of death by preserving flesh and bone.2

What Bazin is arguing here is that at the heart of the plastic arts painting and sculpture is a need
to make immortal the mortal; to turn the image of our flesh into clay, steel and paint is to transform
ourselves and preserve our being beyond its physical existence. Bazin is not, as some critics have
argued, asserting that all art is solely defined by an attempt at immortalising the mortal. But that one
of the defining characteristics, or innate motivations, in the production of art and artefacts, be it the
mummification of Pharaohs, portraits of Kings and Emperors, is the preservation of life by a
representation of life.3Bazins position is that the plastic arts, and I would also assert Bazins personal
opinion in what makes art attractive, attempts to have the last word in the argument with death by
means of the form that endures.4
It should be noted that Bazin died at the age of forty and death stalked him continuously throughout
his life. Bazins attraction to realism, and an idea of art as a production of the eternal, seems
inherently linked to his psychological and physiological state. The attempt to cheat or outlast death
through the preservation of ones image and world seems very close to Bazin. As Bazin explains the
image helps us to remember the subject and to preserve him from a second spiritual death.5Just like
F. Kafkas fiction, which is infused with fears of and struggles with consumption, Bazins conception
of the psychology of the plastic arts seems to be his own.6 That said the foundation of much art is
linked to attempts at ensuring an ever-lasting legacy. From statues, palaces, portraits to tombs
influential men have commissioned and produced art to represent themselves and the world they live
in.
Bazin explains that painting, attempting the production of realism, encountered a problem in
combining both the representation of the spiritual real or emotionally real and the representation of
the physical real.7Bazin notes that painting can successfully represent the emotionally real but that
the reproduction of the physical real will always lean towards illusion.8This illusion, I believe, to
Bazin meant the inability, of painting, to truly represent the outward appearances of things; a painting
of a cart doesnt really refer to a cart but rather refers to the painters painting of a cart. The cart refers
back to the painter and his paint. And to Bazin not only was this a flaw of painting, in its attempt at
reproducing reality, but also the main reason photography and film is so successful in the
reproduction of reality. Bazin explains Photography and the cinema on the other hand are
discoveries that satisfy, once and for all and in its very essence, our obsession with realism. No
matter how skilful the painter, his work was always in fee to an inescapable subjectivity. The fact that
a human hand intervened cast a shadow of doubt over the image is unavoidable. Film, in contrast
allowed, for the first time, allowed the image of the world to be:
formed automatically, without the creative intervention of man. The personality of the
photographer enters into the proceedings only in his selection of the object to

be photographed and by way of the purpose he has in mind. Although the final result may
reflect something of his personality, this does not play the same role as is played by that of
his painter. All the arts are based on the presence of man, only photography derives an
advantage from his absence. Photography affects us like a phenomenon in nature, like a
flower or a snowflake whose vegetable or earthly origins are an inseparable part of their
beauty.9
The painter is unable, due to his medium, to escape the appearance of his touch. Photography,
according to Bazin, evaporates the human touch: photography removes the artists fingerprint
evident in the medium of painting and sculpture. Bazin also believes that, because of the technical
and scientific method of photography, the aesthetic experience derived is much more in-line with
personal perception. Photography and cinema replicates the physically real without the barrier that
one encounters when admiring a painting or sculpture. It should be noted however that Bazin invests
far too much faith in the technical process of developing film as an objective and not subjective
process. The production of film is open to that very same human touch Bazin felt paintings
contained. With the birth of photography came the birth of photo modification and editing and films
such as The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari show this trend with certain scenes being coloured differently.
And with digital film it is hard to really locate an image that hasnt been altered somewhat for
aesthetic reasons. I think Bazin, even if he accepted that film is often modified, would argue that the
best cinema would attempt to capture reality as it is. However this position will be further explored in
Bazins other essays and other articles concerning them.
Bazin may have argued, however, that the counter-position that photography is not objective
incorrectly translates his proper position. Bazin uses the French word objectif, which means the lens
of a camera, and overtly, in the French text, plays on this meaning. Bazin may therefore be arguing
that by the objective nature of photography he means that the physical appearance of brush marks,
the fingerprint of the human touch, are not apparent in film and therefore photography, unlike painting
or sculpture, reproduces reality without direct reference to an artist or photographer. Bazin therefore
may not mean objective as not-subjective but rather through an object. Photography removes the
appearance of the touch of humanity rather than the touch of humanity.
To Bazin the process of photography confers on [an object] a quality of credibility.10Bazin explains
that we accept as real the existence of the object reproduced, actually re-presented, set before us,
that is to say, in time and space.11Bazin is arguing that photography and cinema communicates an
items existence to us and we believe it. A point is often made here that Bazin seems to believe in the
nave position that the camera never lies. However I believe that this point is too harsh. Bazin uses
the word confers which indicates Bazins position to be that the sense of real is attached or
attributed to the image this is not the same as saying the camera never lies. Bazin is arguing that
the reproduction of reality, through the camera, is imbued with an advantage because, unlike a
painting or sculpture, a photograph is not an ersatz.12Painting, or sculpture, is a replacement for an
object, a photograph the reproduction. And Bazin believes that this reproduction is treated,
commonly, as if it is the object.

There does seem to be some truth to Bazins position. People often accept cinematic worlds without
question and often photos modified, or photo-shopped, are accepted as true and real until people
are promoted to believe otherwise Piers Morgan losing his job over now discredited Iraq photos is a
distinct instance of this. This common, or regular, acceptance of photography and films realism is
often targeted by viral marketing campaigns and I am reminded of a film whose name I
currently cant remember which circulated a simulated, but realistic looking, office fight in order
to gain surprise and attract people unknowingly towards the films website. It is not that the camera
never lies but rather that we often accept photographs and films visual representation to be
unadulterated and true (even though we known it isnt a psychological state known as
ambivalence).
Bazin goes on to argue that the aesthetic qualities of photography are to be sought in its power to
lay bare realities.13Bazin comes to the conclusion that:
Only the impassive lens, stripping its object of all those ways of seeing it, those piled-up
preconceptions, that spiritual dust and grime with which my eyes have covered it, is
able to present it in all its virginal purity to my attention and consequently to my love.14
To Bazin photography makes us see the world anew. Realism strips bare those preconceptions
which, to Bazin, we accumulate through the passage of time like dust settling on furniture. Therefore
to Bazin photography and Cinema, in the realist style, is a gust of wind which blows away the dust
that settles on our way of seeing. A problem with Bazins conclusion, that realism blows away our
preconceptions, is that it moves from explanation to conclusion without exploration of the logical
sequence which would indicate how realism would blow away our preconception. Bazin imbues the
realist style, and photography, with magical qualities like the ones he noted in the Egyptian cultures
motivation for mummification. However Bazin fails to establish the reason why and how the realist
style blows away the dust of preconceptions and it seems rather, contradictory to Bazins intended
position, that realism relies on preconceptions. Realism is not so much presenting virginal purity but
rather relying on regular conceptions and perceptions of reality this reliance is in fact why one would
argue realism is imbued with the power of truth. Realism encounters a problem as it seems to rely on
common-sense perceptions and those common-sense perceptions tend to be a naturalised
ideological position.15In The Ontology of the Photographic Image Bazin cannot support the
conclusion he comes to however he does provide a groundwork for arguing that the film is a
powerful medium with a technical process of production which allows it to represent an object rather
than replace it which painting and sculpture does therefore ensuring a sense of verisimilitude to
attached to the medium of film. Bazin does go on to argue for realism in further essays and I will
cover these in the attempt to uncover his motivation for his assertion that realism is the optimum style
of film.

1The ontology of the photographic image is an inquiry and assertion by Bazin on the differences
between film, and painting/Sculpture. On a wider note Bazins ontological approach is an inquiry
into what is, could be and most important to Bazins What is Cinema? and what should be

in cinema.
2Andre Bazin The Ontology of the Photographic Image in Andre Bazin, Hugh Gray (trans), What Is
Cinema?, Vol. 1, London: University of California Press Ltd, (1967), pp. 9-16, p. 9.
3Andre Bazin The Ontology of the Photographic Image, p. 10.
4Andre Bazin The Ontology of the Photographic Image, p. 10.
5Andre Bazin The Ontology of the Photographic Image, p. 10.
6 It should be noted that, although it is evident that Kafkas fiction is imbued with the personal fear of
death and his physical state, there is great humor and joy even in the struggle and fear.
7Andre Bazin The Ontology of the Photographic Image, p. 11.
8Andre Bazin The Ontology of the Photographic Image, p. 12.
9Andre Bazin The Ontology of the Photographic Image, pp. 12-13.
10Andre Bazin The Ontology of the Photographic Image, p. 13.
11Andre Bazin The Ontology of the Photographic Image, pp. 13-14.
12Andre Bazin The Ontology of the Photographic Image, p. 14.
13Andre Bazin The Ontology of the Photographic Image, p. 15.
14Andre Bazin The Ontology of the Photographic Image, p. 15.
15See Barthes Mythologies or Althussers Ideological-State Apparatus

S H A R E T HI S:

Twitter

Email

Like
2 bloggers like this.

R E L AT E D

Facebook

LinkedIn

Print

Google

Reddit

The Ideology of Realism:

Jean-Luc Comolli & Jean
Paul Narboni's
Cinema/Ideology/Criticism
In "Cultural Studies"

Influential Theorists: Andre

Bazin - The Myth of Total
Cinema
In "Film Form/Tech."

Shallow Focus and the

Aura of Authenticity in
Gamorra
In "Film Form/Tech."

The Ideology of Realism:

Jean-Luc Comolli & Jean
Paul Narboni's
Cinema/Ideology/Criticism
In "Cultural Studies"

Influential Theorists: Andre

Bazin - The Myth of Total
Cinema
In "Film Form/Tech."

Shallow Focus and the

Aura of Authenticity in
Gamorra
In "Film Form/Tech."

This entry was posted in Film Form/Tech., Philosophy and tagged Aesthetics, Bazin, Cinema,
Film, Film Criticism, Film Philosophy, Film Theory, French Film Theorists, Infulential
Theorist, Infulential Theorists, Objective, Perception, Philosophy, Photography, Plastic
Arts, Realism, Subjective, The Ontology of the Photographic Image, Truth, What Is Cinema?
by A.R. Duckworth. Bookmark the permalink
[https://ardfilmjournal.wordpress.com/2008/12/01/influential-theorists-andre-bazin%e2%80%93-the-ontology-of-the-photographic-image/] .

About A.R. Duckworth

South Yorkshire England
View all posts by A.R. Duckworth

6 THOUGHTS ON INFLUENTIAL THEORISTS: ANDRE BAZIN THE ONTOLOGY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGE

Tony D'Ambra
on December 2, 2008 at 03:45 said:

A photograph frames reality, and as soon as the shutter closes, the

photographer has defined a limited reality. In this sense, a photograph is no
more real than a painting or sculpture.

A.R. Duckworth
on December 3, 2008 at 13:36 said:

It is certainly true that the process of photography captures and embalms

time but Bazin would feel that this poses no problem to his position
because he believes that this process captures or frames the real world
as it is perceived. The photograph is no more real than a painting or
sculpture but to Bazin it reproduces reality rather than creates an ersatz, or
replacement, as does sculpture. However I would agree with your
statement: Bazins position takes photography to be too true of a
reproduction and in a sense photography cannot escape its position as a
replacement for reality regardless of its aesthetic similarities with perceived
reality. Distinguishing between photography and the traditional plastic arts,
sculpture and painting, by positing that photography is a reproduction and
not an ersatz fails; photography as we have both come to the position
is both a replacement and a reproduction of reality.
Another point of difficulty Bazin encounters is that of a causal link. Bazin
argues that painting shows a human touch unseen in photography.
However the mechanical process of photography was produced by the
human hand and could be seen as an extension of the human touch the
human touch made mechanical. In fact it could be argued that science,
and machinery, is the most overt sign of the human touch as it has sprung
so far from nature.

Billy Pilgrim
on December 28, 2008 at 01:44 said:

Bazins thought is probably misinterpreted towards his strongest, firmer

positions, but I find this to be the perfect start and epilogue to any
discourse about Andrs view of photography and cinema.

Pingback: The Ideology of Realism: Jean-Luc Comolli & Paul Narbonis

Cinema/Ideology/Criticism The Motley View
Pingback: Influential Theorists: Andre Bazin - The Myth of Total Cinema
The Motley View

abimorella
on January 13, 2010 at 02:48 said:

now this idea of realism that people get in photos and movies is an illusion
of what they believe reality isI need help with Christian Metz and the
impression of reality