ABSTRACT
Photographs made in a straightforward, stylistically realistic manner are in special need of interpretation. They look so natural that they seem to have been made by themselves, as if there had been no photographer, as if they were made by an objective, impartial recording machine. Amidst the selective descriptive information that describes the photograph and explains its historical context, Susan Sontag offers interpretive claims both about the photograph and about history: Wall’s photograph is “the antithesis of a document,” the war is “colonial” and a “folly”. When critics interpret photographs, they use one favored approach, different approaches, or a hybrid of approaches depending on the works they are interpreting. Feelings can also arise as a result of interpreting: After we perform careful critical analysis of an image or exhibition, our feelings about it may change profoundly. Ultimately, viable interpretations are those held by a community of informed interpreters that includes critics, artists, historians, dealers, collectors, and viewers.
