Inscriptions

I found both Benjamin's and Sekula's writings interesting in regards to the archive as not simply being an informative source or bi-product of a system but rather as the source of certain systems. Benjamin's comments on Art as Photography vs. Photography as Art was something I really never considered prior to this article. I have only seen the Sistine Chapel in person once in a giant crowd as we were shuffled from one end of the chapel to the other but that image of the two extended index fingers of God and Adam (Michelangelo) I have seen my entire life. A big part of our art education revolves around this archive of photographic representations. Some times I am let down when I see actual artwork. I remember the first time I saw The Persistence of Memory (Dali) I was so used to seeing poster size vivid representations, and when I saw that little 9X13" painting I was really taken back. Sekula comments on the use of photography with physiognomy and phrenology and its role in class labor and criminology. Creating stereotypes of criminals based on facial features is a major part of intelligence today. The scanners at airports are checking databases of facial profiles 24/7. Now that photography is so easily manipulated, these systems are vulnerable. If an entire system is based on an archive, that system is dependent on the archive's truthfulness. If a curator Photoshop's installation shots of an a short lived exhibition and maybe increases the size of certain sculptures or maybe makes the color more vivid on a certain painting, and all we ever see is the photographs of the exhibition, then we are all miss lead. Most of us probably only see about 1% of the art we study.