The Civil Contract of i Photography Ariella Azoulay ZONE BOOKS - NEW YORK |sag es ‘eh sored fo a rete by any mean, cling nirofining, recording, petted by Sesion 4Lexcopt By tevewers sin fom the Publier + Baglin reston Date “Als Ascloy (0) anne Phoogerty— Pltril works, sion, Tie reorosiyss Contents Le fresdewe plwoys aledined in opposition to news frtectow~ 7 Acknowledgments 7 Inteeduction 9 1 Citizens of Disaster 34 1 ) The Civil Contract of Photography 9s The Spectator Is Called to Take Part 137 WW Emergency Claims 187 V, Has Anyone Ber Seon a Photograph of a Rape? 217 &) Photographing the Verge of Catastrophe 209 Vil Whore Goze? 278 Vill The Public Bae of Photography «33 IX The Woman Collaborator Does Not Exist 471 A Comment on the Photographs 408 Notes 297 Aibliography 659 Index 576Cuapren Two ‘We have seen that citizenship isa form of relations between the gov- cerned individual and the governing authority, relations ultimately bused jn a political equality between cach and every governed indi- ‘dual. | will now explore the ways in which, when seperated from hationality or any other essentialist conception of a group of gov Ered individuals, citizenship comes to resemble the photograp! relation, Exactly ike citizenship, photography, is no one’s property. It cannot be owned. Photography, at loast the kind that I'm con~ ‘cetned with in this book in which photographs are taken on the vyeige of catastrophe, also is 2 formn of relations of individuals to the power that governs them, 2 form of relations that is not flly medi- ted through such power, being a relation between formally equal individuals — individuals who are equal as the governed as such. Itis a form of relation that exists and becomes valid only within and between the plurality of individuals who take part ini: Anyone who addresses others through photographs or takes the position of a pho- tograph’s addressee, even if she is a stateless person who has lost her “right to have rights,” asin Arendt’ formulation, is nevertheless » citizen—a member in the citizenry of photography. The civil space of photography is open to her, as well. That space is configured by ‘what I call the civil contract of photography. Photography is an apparatus of power that cannot be reduced to any ofits components: a camera, a photographer « photographed environment, object, person, o¥ spectator, “Photography” isa term 85hat designates an ensemble of diverse actions that contain the pro sea encstribation, exchange, an ‘Consumption of the photo~ apap image. Each of these 1o0c volved in the photographic AP ates use ofa direct and an indies! force — taking someone's portrait, for example, oF loose Mr aomeone’s portrait. Much bas Perritzen about thie violent dimers of photography ~ the potential for turning my er into a violent clash. over, compared with the endless 8 photographs take, vee are those cases where erupts elence replaces the relations ‘itceen the protagonits. Tht is Beene civil contract regulates rove encounters, educing and TAOS! of the time © possibility of direct wiolence Tong, as photographs exist Pe end, we can see in thes and ‘Treough them the way in which ive enables the injured parties ° prosent their grievances, eto others, now or the TAT Tuts tug tothe rhetoric of the contract ‘radition in political theory may seem carious, ad reed of explanation. Afterall the theory arin tration bas eft the momnens of contract itself outside the political order and w 5 between governed people that a not fowtjone dictated —by the ruling Powe’ in fact, many thinkers in weet aiton have actly agreed with Carl Schmitt's reduction of tee concept ofthe potitial to the space opened by and demarcated through the sovereign decision (Or ® vrevies of sovereign decisions) “They were mostly interested seify and limit soverelgy power, which many of them sunderst eifferently from Schmitt a this has been the main way 29 jghhts of individvals the aaterests of the public, and the commer ‘of the multitudes bare Fees taken into consideration. The speiviivl, the publics an the multitude have always been Me asidexed with 2 view to the Pore’ aay aune time the most dangerous 16 individuals thay Utimaely necessary for dele ProteeUONe * condition for thelr ‘coexistence in 8 grOUP» “Euinking with Schmitt from the epPors direction, Agamben anesthe image (or metaphor) of the ee act to articulate the Way® wee hich social and political relay manifest themselves ia the in Wyn determined by the sovereign esisiom ‘Concluding his diseas 86sion of bare life as defined as “sacred life” under Roman law — the life of homo sacer, he who “cannot be sacrificed and yet may be killed" he notes: has been rightly observed that the state is founded not a the expres sion ofa social tie but as an untying (déliasm) that probibits (Badiow, Ver, p. 128). We may now give a further sense to this claim, Délioson isnot to be understood as the untying ofa preexisting te (which would probably have the form of a pact or a contract) The tie itself originarily has the form of an untying or exception in which what is eaptured is at the same time excluded, and in which human life is politicized only through an abandonment to an unconditional power of death. The sov- «reign tie is more originary than the tl of the positive rule or the tie af the social pact, but the sovereign tie isin truth only an untying. And. ‘what this untying implies and produces —bare Ife, which dwells in the no-man’s land between the home and the city ~Is, from the point of view of sovereignty, the originary political element.” ‘The incommensurability of contractarian political theories with sovereignty which Agamben underlines isa superficial one, because, as noted above, the original moment of the contract itself has been left outside the political-historical domain, and concrete contracts are always seen in terms of the authorities who can limit, impose, induce, or invalidate contracts. The true opposition, I sugges, is not between contractarlan theories and theories of sovereignty, but be- tween “sovereign violence,” which “is in truth founded not on a pact but on the exclusive inclusion of bare life inthe state,”” and multiple voluntary associations between many individuals, which reproduce the original moment of contract withouf necessarily reproducing its result, that is, the constitution of sovereign authority. ‘And where Agamben insists (rightly) on the fact that “the state of| nature is in truth, a state of exception, in which the city appears for 4m instant” and “%s thus not an event achieved once and forall but is continually operative in the civil state in the form of the sovereign decision,” 11 would like to insist on the fact that “the state of con- tract,” too, is continually operative in the civil state-—in order to reproduce not sovereign power, but rather a space relatively free afrom its intervention, a space where “thinking a politics freed from the form of the State” becomes possible.$ “Thinking a politics freed from the form of the State” is Agam- ben's ovn project, described in The Coming Community (1993) as a polities founded on the “Whatever,” on “singularity,” "not ia its indifference with respect to a common property (to a concept, for example: being red, being French, being Muslim), but only in its being such as i is But there is another way of thinking politics freed from the state, one that not only can receive a theoretical account, but that can do so because it is manifest, in the form of nongovernmental political activities of many forms and agendas, Jn empirical form throughout the world today, Thetis a politics founded not on singularity, but on the equality of the governed “as such” —as they are, Itis based not on a community to come, but on a coramunity, or rather several communities, bth within and beyond the boundaries of the sovereign state, that already exist, communi- ties that employ varity of means — photography prominent among them ~to edify an open political space where no one can decide on the exception, anda final decision cannot be made, a community in ‘which a new beginning is a right preserved for each ofits members and solidarity among its members precedes the submission and the identification with power. As Hannah Arendt has noted with regard to the power of the sovereign, “the moment the group, from which the power originated to begin with (potestas in populo, without a People or a group there is no power), disappears, ‘his power" also vanishes.” In a politics founded on the equality of the governed, Power regains its meaning, not as a governmental tool, but as “a human ability not just to act but to act in concer®™” and to negotiate, sometimes successfully, sometimes not —with sovereign power. ‘The civil contract of photography, whose text Ihave drafted dur- Ing the years of the second Palestinian intifada, bears witness to an attempt to find refage amid the loneliness of being a spectator who has been addressed every day by photographs documenting the daly horrors of the Israeli occupation. Working out and making explicit the clauses of this tacit contract has been an effort to think my rela- tion to and attitude toward these photographed individuals beyond guilt and compassion —outside of the mezely psychological frame- 88 work of empathy, of “regaré civie duty and the mutual te to show that this mutual tru: relations between individuc ‘mid-nineteenth contury and The cul contrat of pho shotographic practices an orem ibe depicted asa ositing this contract isa 9 eee necessitated — by photogray teristics of this contract is political configuration and form of sovereignty and its camera modified the way in extent of their participatio: change that I explore here. The Invention of Photogr. “To this day, historians of ph of the origin of photograph determine its precise mome is controversial, the conscr moment reappearing as a ¢ photography’s evolution, an tive chronologies ae al pr hhotography is calculated ar Fing here to the samme after one of its two inventor of Deputies. This was the dat object of national legislation inventors by the French stat licly visible invention, open not restricted by copyright. this official birth date, Henry claimed the title of invento vided evidence of his prese_oftregarding te prin of others”—on fe basis of guy and de noel trust of these ‘whovare governed. Iwill ty sp how that this mutual trast, voiated by photography, sa form of frat established during the ‘he civil contract of photograpic practices am at is irreducible to any of chent Dae be depicted asa product of their accumulation. Rather, se sevice isa way to delineate part of the newly con- aeapel relations that has been opened = and even P structed space Joping the charac: stated —by photography. In aldiion, devel “ferns ofthis contact is my Woy fof questioning photography"s __ politcal configuration nd Mehiecting on its effect on the modern rm of sovereignty and its ersitoril articulation. Briefly put, the ‘pnera modified the way in which individuals are governed and the ment of thetr participation im the forms ‘of governance, It is that change that J explore here. ‘The Invention of Photography ‘To this da, historians of photography pereht jn exploring the issue TE the origin of photography’s invention 7 ‘sustained attempt £0 ope its precise moment of Diet. WHT the moment of birth dotemeroversal, the consensus 8 tha ONS single, magical i cent seappeating as constant anchor 1 all the narratives of photography’s evolution, an axis Telative to which the many altern vive chronologies are all presented: a me from which the age of photography is calculated ands scentennials celebrated? I'm refes- ing hereto the esnmer of 1839, wie) ithe daguerreotype, maxned Se rey ofits two inventors was exibited ‘the French Chamber sf Depaties. This was the dae that searked its transformation into am Topislation ana source of only payments to its ects by the French state, ening dhe 8946 render it pub- Tily visible invention, open and vrconsable to all, whose uses were ‘lt Jnown that before oe eestrcted by copyright. However 6X aot a bith date, Hensy Fox Talbot of Gist Britain had alseady itil of inventor of this new technology and had pr Nuon of his invention to the British object of national claimed thi Sided evidence of his presents 89Royal Society over a decade earlier. Another claimant to the title was Hippolyte Bayard, who went to dramatic lengths to make his claim Nevertheless, the daguerreotype endured as the prototypical term for what soon became photography. In 1931, about ninety years later, Walter Benjamin opened his essay “Little History of Photography” by noting “the fog that sur. rounds the beginnings of photography” obscuring the beginnings of this technology. And yet, he wrote, in contrast to the case of print- ‘ng the fo i this case is not al that thick, for “the time was ripe for the invention, and was sensed by more than one—by men who strove independently for the same objective: to capture the images in the camera obscura, which had been known at least since Leo. nardo’s time." Benjamin elaborated somewhat on each of those protagonists, n fact circumventing the question ofthe origin of pho- tography whose answer converges into a single inventor's name, There was no single inventor. Instead, Benjamin proposed a new perspective of photography’s beginnings. The origin, he suggested, ‘was the appearance of a professional community. In 1999, the American historian of photography Geoffrey Batchen Published a book thathe titled, with a quote from Daguerre, Burning with Desire. As T noted, Daguerre is conventionally considered the inventor of photography, despite repeated retractions of this title since the moment it was granted. In 1827, when Daguerre himself was still far from solving the question of how to fix and preserve the images‘created within the camera obscura, Joseph Nicéphore Nipee had already discovered the sokution. At the time, however, it was considered unsatisfactory, Daguerte wrote Niépce: “Iam burning with desire to see your experience from nature?” Batchen’s thesis pat the properties of photography self snake it impossible for ar ingle indlvidua to clam exclusive ProP=# ty rights to a photograph: The Space of Political Relations ix Photography ‘Theinwention of photography offered the gaze & absolute plane nent is frozen, 82) ‘oul immobility, 9 plane on which all mover nt ean be contemplated without dist formed into a sil picture th ‘bance. However in this piotare pane and stabilized — what "as there sjand Barthes in Camera Luci phrase coined by Rel hn says ofits subjects ‘aha has been established — what * 40 employ the succt ida to characte! that it “was there, “ ‘what every photograph bi shat or yao tne momento he photographs mE a ra photographer, photographed, and cADSTS encountered ae whic ven when his encounter comune under e difficult « + ana Ee or diner, when a trent Toms eo : sa eam eo the pli pce #2 88 of plurality 93action, the act of photography and the photographs it produces right, at least potentially, restore it, In other words, although pho- tography may appear to be a distinctive object of the contemplative life (Vita contemplativa), a moment in which all movements have been eliminated, it is actually deeply embedded in the active life (rita activa); it attests to action and continues to take part in it, always engaged in an ongoing present that challenges the very dis tinction between contemplation and action” The photograph al- ways includes a supplement that makes it possible to show that what “as there” wasn't there necessarily im that way. The disappearance of what “was there” from the frst daguer: ‘eotype of 1837 and its transformation over time into an imageless ‘monochromatic surface might serve as an allegory for this structure of relations, The daguerreotype shows “a section of wall and bench (or perhaps a window ledge) cluttered with various objects typically found in such places. These include the following: plaster casts of the heads of two putti or cupids, complete with small wings? This description, which adheres to the plane of the visible as closely as possible, is revealed as an utter fabrication after inspecting the da _guerreotype preserved in the vaults of the French Society of Photo, raphy (SFP) in Paris. The daguerreotype, which has (re)turned into a plane of silvery ash, is kept inside a safe-deposit box alongside a reproduction intended to attest to what is seem in it, despite it no Tonger being visible, The omission of this daguerreotype from the great Daguerre exhibition at the Musée d'Orsay in 2003 was based fn the assumption that a yawning divide lies between what was seen in the first daguerceotype and what can actually be secn.?? What lies in this in between, between what was seen in the first daguerreotype and what can actually be seen in it, is the very space of relations of photography. ‘This space is characterized by a particular relation to the visible, There has always been a regard for the visible. The world has a ble dimension; human beings are equipped with eyes and conduct ‘themselves, toa large extent, in and through the world in keeping swith the ways they observe it. The traditional distinction between the life of study and contemplation (vita contemplatira) and the life ‘of action (rita actira), assigns contemplation a realm of its own that 4. is essentially visual —re | using vis-i-vis a lane Groves: the metaphor stract thought: theory, or understand through However, attitudes tow ditional modes, 2s well contemplation and, cor of action. The gaze, af stramental activities, 0 row more efficient an Be annah Arent, wt the realm of conterpl Condition, drew a distit action. The frst form, designed to provide fo vvival and the reprodv defined as work, cons serve immediate: needs sumption. Such produ that may be used in cx ating an entire world, allowing them to tur tedion, which unlike uct or carry out a prey viduals’ venturing to ech, doing so in pr thet gaze n the reco, the outcome of this * ‘evolve in the world. Twill draw on Are active to characterize aves. The two most » gaze, which, I propos gaze, guiding and accc present as analogous ¢ of the practice of orieonts have tive life art in very diss graph al Uhat what daguer | imageless structure nid bench typically + casts of si This slosely as g the da- FPhotog- ed into ongside a pite it no from the was based What lies arreotype lations of xe visible. basa vist- conduct 1 keeping. between dd the life own that marveling, disinterested ince the days of ancient conceptualize ab- jally visual Fever wonderment Jandscape or a figure. Jnor of this guze has served to 0 speculation, study, things that people imagine heough the use of thet tmaginatlony and so forth Wg toward the visible have aleys included two ad- Peer odes, as well, bots of which 8 ‘unrelated to the world of Feimplation ad, converses MOT: “desely approximate the wortd Micon, The geze, afterall 5 a ‘malienable part of action, of it~ Lara activites, ofthe effort 10 acho? goals and objectives © er efficent and more sopistcae eee ronah Arent, who revisited che “assical distinction between = the alm of contemplation and the ‘calm of action in The Human M epne dew a istincion between (eS forms and three arcas of ‘chined as labor, consists in activity © gesigned to provi of existence, allowing su*- “ial and the ¥epro% wnd form, which she Ppned ax work, consist in activity creNthR PY oducts that do not re that are not used up through divect 0 Fomption. Such products inchude Fnatraments, tools, axl took Parts that may be used in creating additional products and, finally i res ing an entire work, arranging the life of humans on the planet svleuang them to tara its space into Det bode, The third form is sree ich is unlike workin that it does 9° produce an end prod aang carry out a previously made plat “This form consists in indic ve ory venturing to generace something 12% ‘through action oF {peech doing eo in public, mong me * cher people, exposed t© “Bese gao, inthe recogation that the individual cannot fully predict the Btme of this venture oF conttal ‘he way in which it will evolve in the world. Tear deaw on Arondt's distinetion amos three modes of vita atime to characterize various forms of 2 tive, noncontemplative gases, The two most ‘eiespread ones ae the dentyings orientative fate, whic, 1 proposcs is analogOt to Tabor, and the professional gave, guiding od by certain types of actHOM which Il Gees of the first Kind constitute att resent as analogous to Wor Pghe practice of ortentation and Srrvival based on the mechanism action. The first form, __ serve immediate nee’ 95of identifying what is visible, which is a necessary condition for exis- tence. The individual observes her surroundings in order to identify herself within them, to plan her movements, and to identify the objects, animals, and people that she encounters, discerning their intentions as well asthe dangers and opportunities implicit in each. encounter, Gazes of the second kind, which might be termed “di- rected” or “intended,” are typical of professionals (doctors, artists, police, architects, educators, etc.) and allow the arrangement and control of what is visible through the use of a body of knowledge that is incremental, ongoing, and evolving. ‘The professional gaze isn’t necessary to basic survival, but, rather, to the ordering of cer- tain types of activities, to the analysis of events and citcumstances, to hand-eye coordination, and so forth, in situations where action is fice of the need to satisly immediate needs and i, instead, anchored to goals ofa higher order. The identifying gaze and the directed gaze have accompanied human existence from its very beginnings. Prior to the invention of photography, however, it was difficut to find a gaze of the type that ‘was analogous to action in the sense defined by Arendt, Until then, the practical gaze was either an identifying, orientative one or a professional gazc directed toward a definitive activity. The gaze rec- ‘ognized as distinct from these two forms lay outside the realm of action altogether ~ the contemplative gaze that gives pause and wonders. Then, the invention of photography added a new way of regarding the visible, one that previously did not exist or that, at least, cxisted in a different manner. This gaze is based on a new ati tude toward the visual, It constitutes in an approach toward items, situations, customs, images, or places that, before photography came into existence, were not held worthy of contemplation in and of ‘themselves, This approach or attitude now exists in contexts of pli- rality, among people, ina publie sphere, contexts within which every participant not only contemplates what can be seen but is also, her~ self, exposed and visible, Such regard for the visual departs from the disciplinarian gaze or the pattern of communicating prerecognized messages. It approximates at least the central distinguishing features of action: it includes the aspect of a new beginning, and its ends are unpredictable, 96 “The members of the co above, anyone and everyone to photographs —as a phot: photographed person. Whi between amateur and prof between random or occas for whom being photograg photography is not actually isa broad community, whic tography,” and itis borderl members cannot be define interest in photography. Wi the third manner of gezing, which Ihave related to Aren ‘outset with civil character ‘occurs within a political sph ‘enabled by photography, wi always and only — within a gave views the photograph scribed in it and discernib plural participants in the act photographed person, and ¢ instantaneously recognizes clements that enter into tt photographer’s intentions, ¢ to them, The cll gaze doe ther can it bear another's © ‘cannot consent to any atter abolish the space of plurality The Properties of Photogn In Techniques of the Obserrer, pearance of a new figure of of three positions: “An indiv subject of empirical resear machine production?” The secondary to the revolution E Neen |eEeE—————_ essary condition for ess ane de to Het) roam sand to identify the orem es screig Hee rr opporsnites mpc ae eich might be termed profesional (doctors of Pe tiow the arrangement 2 and aon ody of none 1 ving. The professional Bt Lervatber, to the Ordering of outs events and circumstances) oa ere action is 2 in tan oe ed Fate needs and i, inste ve directed gaze bave 2000™E2 snnings. PHOT sea eo ind a sense defined b} an identifying OF} anda definitive acti @ two forms lay outs fn of photogra wat previously & Smser. This gaze 8 institutes in am AP pr attitu tblie spheres pee win a ch regard for the visual setgorn of comamanicatin PL Ppast the contal istinguls spect ofa new beginnines seen. prevent 96 ied tothe invention of ve ofthe type that ‘erent. Until Chey ie the reali of pase and new way 1 departs froma ag Feats ends ‘The members of the community of photography are, as stated above, enyone and everyone who bears any relationship whatsoever to photographs —as a photographer, a viewer of photographs, or photographed person. While it is customary to draw distinctions between amateur and professional photographers and also, perhaps, ‘petween random or occasionally photographed persons and those for whom being photographed is a profession, the community of photography is not actually organized around these distinctions. It fsa byoad community, which I venture to call “the citizenry of pho- tograpliy,” and it is borderless and open. The relations between its members cannot be defined in terms of a common professional {interest in photography. Within the framework of this community, ‘the third manner of gaving, the third form of regarding the visible, which Uhave related to Arendt’s concept of action, appears from the putset with civil characteristics. Much like action, which always _peoura within a political sphere of human plurality, the singular gaze ~ sqabled by photography, which T view as a civil gaze, also exists— _ always and only —within a plurality. The spectator activating this sae views the photograph and recognizes instantly that what is in- scribed in it and discernible in it are products of plurality — the lural participants in the act of photography (the photographer, the togeaplid person, and the spectator). Moreover, the spectator tantancously recognizes them as products of the multiplicity of {ents that enter into the frame, whether in keeping with the sfographer’s intentions, or despite these. intentions, or unrelated hein, The civil gaze doesn't seck to control the visible, but nei- ft bear another's control over the visible. In particu it St Gonsent to any attempt to rule the visible while secking to the space of plurality. ies of Photographs and Photographs as Property ues of the Obserrer, Jonathan Crary postulates that the ap- ‘new figure of the viewer was witnessed in a mixture “Win individual body that is at once a spectator, a stopitical research and observation, and an element of 2 | |seeing instruments during the first decades of the nineteenth cen: tury and to the new observer these apparatuses established. How- ever, as Crary himself points out, photography also establishes “a new sot of abstract relations between individuals and things” and imposes “those relations as the real” Crary’s understanding of that transition from the camera obscura to the seeing instruments of the nineteenth contury, which created a new observer, will serve as a point of departure for my discussion of what the properties of pho. ‘tographs imply for the status of photographs as property, Lt us begin with the photographer. It is commonly accepted and legally established thatthe photographer owns the images that he or she makes —that the photographer's ownership of the image is his or her “right” under the doctrine of property rights. Itis this putative “right” of ownership that, in the case of photographs, I want to con- test here. My questioning of the concept of “right” in this instance is ‘meant to challenge the assumption that the photographed individual hhas no right over the image made of him or her and that this right is “naturally” given to the person holding the photograph's means of production, Most importantly, { would like to challenge the trans- formation of the photograph into an object of private property. To do $0, 1 will examine the distribution of those goods known as “images” within their social and political contexts silenced from the discussion over the regulation of photography's exchange relations through market forces and by the judicial system that legitimized this regulation. Starting in the middle of the nineteenth century, when channels for the distribution of photography were established — the exchange of cartes de visite, shop display windows, exhibitions, newspapers, and so on~access has been provided to images of people, objects, and places that in the absence of photography would have remained outside the modern citizen's visual field. Here, I will dwell princi- pally on the most obvious instance of this framework, the photo- graphic situation under conditions in which at least two people gather around the camera and take part in the situal of photography. ‘Men and women of the period celebrated this accessibility in'a ‘way that made them (and subsequent others) forget the fact that photography isthe result of an encounter with an another and with 98 another, and, as suct ‘that encounter, one ‘or not, becomes the a photograph in whi scribed. It is aw enc a measure of violem explicit consent bet inherent in the instr ‘order to produce an tographed person ca tographer. Because 0 photographer, howe graph been deemed | after judicial interve ‘well-known people, tain rights in regard 1 the extent that they b bution. At all other or disaster, the phot more accurately, hat advance — any legal hands of others. "The “right” to the deployed retroactivel phy. The question of not emerge until the tion, in which the phe of production in his ¢ tively created the cor the “natural” owner 0 ‘working for someone an additional transfor recognized as belong created the photograp nal image was printed the camera, ‘The precedence givs other, and, as such, does not have one obvious, constant owner, In encounter, one is holding a camera, while the other, knowingly vot, becomes the photographed person. The encounter produces otoyraph in which an image ofthe photographed person isin ‘beds It is an encounter that alvays and inescapably involves Fmmeasure of violence, even when the situation is one of full and ~ {xplict consent between the participant parties. The violence is Jaherent in the instrumentalization of the photographed person in ‘nder to produce an image of him, within which context the pho ographed person can have as much of a vested Interest asthe pho- tographer, Because ownership ofthe image has been assigned to the photographs, however, in only a few particular cases has photo- {raph been deemed to be in the public domain, and even then only ‘Ter judicial intervention.#* In rarer instances, typically involving sve nown people, photographed individuals have been given cer- tain rights in regard to thelr photographs taken in public, atleast to the extent that they have been able to influence their mode of distr- bution.% At all other times, whether daring moments of happiness tr disaster, the photographed persons renounce in advance ~ or, ‘more accurately, have been treated as if they have renounced in ‘advance —-any legal right to their own image, entrusting it tothe hands of others ‘The “right” to the ownership of a photographie image has been deployed retroactively in regard to the intial decades of photogr phy. The question of who is the proper owner of a photograph did not emerge until the twentieth century?” The photographic situa- tion, in which the photographer is whoever actually holds the means of production in his or her hands and controls its operation, effec: tively created the conditions for the photographer's designation as ‘the “natural” owner of the photograph. When the photographer was ‘working for someone els, the question of ownership went through an additional transformation, but the photograph in all cases was recognized as belonging to whomever possessed the instrument that created the photographic image and the support on which the origl- ral image was printed, rather than to the one who stood in front of the camera. “The precedence given o the ownership ofthe support (the artifact) 995,1 metal or glass plate in photography’s infancy, photographic paper at a later stage ~also made it possible for the opposite scenario to cur, in which photographs licking the name of the photographer who made them wander throughout the world 2 In those eases in which photographs are exhibited or printed without the photogra. pher’s name, the photographed individuals are presented as content, imespective ofits makers, content whose distribution is of prime importance forthe public—an importance that usually suspends the gnestion of legal ownership. In these cases, the photographed indi Yidual is usually not the owner ofthe photograph. Although the pho. ‘ograph is in the hands of someone who presents himself or herself 4s its owner, the only way of exercising this ownership isto share it with the public as a substitute for the photographs owner. Thus, the individual or institution (newspaper, archive, et.) having physical Possession of the photograph, the material object itself, camvact as if they were performing a “service” to the publie, which isin prin ple, the photograph's “true” owner ‘When the question of ownership arses legally, before a court, it usually appears only indirectly and does not undermine what has come to be taken for granted that the photographed individual is not the owner of his/her own image. The first instance of such a jusicial case concerned a photograph of Napoleon li. The painter Adolphe Yvon had asked a photographer named Bisson to take a pho- ‘ograph of the emperor to assist Yvon while painting the emperor's picture. The painter posed the emperor in a certain attitude, under Certain lighting, in a manner compatible with his own artistic con, dan caeth, an instrument capable of perpetuating everything that vrs lst yesterday and of saving what may vanish fomorzow Lo ad- Yon to being educated to look on photography as an event of im portance: to al of humanity, modern citizens experience i as O08 Pp wich they ave the direct addressees.™ Photography has enabled them to participate in events beyond theses, yet that aye 1 aera eithout them. Photography has directly interpellated the macitizen—he or she can become the bearer of history, both as photog- rapher and as photographed. An unprecedented responsibility has been placed on the individual, who has the potential to preserve ‘what takes place at the heart of the family for the sake of those clos- est to him or to her, as well as what takes place in public space, for the sake of people he or she doesn’t even know. Thrown into the modern world, which took shape in the spiit ofthe civil revolution that came in the wake of the Frenich Revolution and spread through- ‘out the globe, and of the Industzial Revolution, which was already in full swing, the individual wordlessly consented, The individual ply became both the photographer and photographed. ‘The photograph, which preserved singular images on paper, was ¢ proof for the individual that the proposed civil contract of Photography was reliable. Mute at its inception, the photograph maintained its sllence. Such silence, which can sometimes seresin to the heavens, attest to the fact that it is our historic responsibility nat only to proxiuce photos, but to make them speak, Photography granted moderns the opportunity to be naturalized in their world — {0 know it, investigate it, contemplate it from various angles, bring it closer or distance themselves from it, critique it, and find answers, Since the eighteenth century, the public sphere has not been the sole origin for acquiring civil skills, The world of instruments opened new possibilites for looking and acting, as well for contributing to the shaping of the modern conditions for citizenship.*® This mass naturalization refashioned the political game, reshuffling the cards in a profound way. The encounter between 2 public sphere and a new instrumental technology opened unprecedented opportunities both for change to take place within the political sphere and for new forms of exchange to occur within it. The camera opened the possi- bility of redefining the concept of citizenship and the conditions for its falfillment. People deprived of citizenship —women, first and foremost ~ began to take an active part in this formation of a new world.*® ‘As soon as the first daguerreotypes were distributed, hundreds of women began using the new technology to produce photographs of the same quality as those produced by men, although their careers 4d not enjoy the benefit of stability and protection that accompa. de ira nied men’s social and p right “to be included in From an opposite persp duction of the camera at camera embodied the pe take part in the product interests the public. Th could in principle partic tographer or photograp the new exchange relati words, the camera chan ered and the extent of governance. | Photography, then, » ‘The body of citizens we the relations between th unified sovereign power, in conformity with coe discrimination, exploite between the creation of sion of entire populatie game, the modern citiz photography, which the terest in weakening and The market and the shotography without the Thvention of photegrap. emphasis on ownership, ship, on the other, in ef contract had bequeathe: contract was involved —: market logic, governme the only one of its kine ‘membership in a politic bys sovereign power, wh The civil contract © graphed person to the psjed men's socal and politica status!” Peopre began enjoying the mete incladed inthe film,” as Walter Benjani plirased it5* a opposite perspective, Susan Sontag bas defined the intro~ Hoation of the camera as “the right © something called news"? The Hom Mmoied the possibilities availble to he ‘modern citizen to part in ee prodtion vestigation, and distribution of what E {ajerests the public. These practices ~ in which the general public vtrple partiipae, ether as active or essve ABS (pho- graphed) —constituted a significant strat ‘ons formed in the political sphere. In other tte ae he eamera changed the way in which the individual is gov seed and the extent of bis or her participation in the forms of this jovernance. ‘Photograph, thea, was the forerunner of & missed revolution. “The body of citizens was given the means to instigate change, but revelations between these citizens were nev hy regulated through dere sovereign power most often on the as of ¢ ‘ational moxie areeormity with coercive rules of exclusions HES archical order, oa snation, exploitation, and oppression. In the brief interval orrvcen the creation of the new political condita and the exch beet cotive populations from equal partnership. the political game, the modern citizen signed » comp» the civil contract of photography, whick the market and dhe nation-states'shared an in aa eee eakening. and even eliminating altogether. “The sparket and the nation-states had an interes distributing photograpy without the contract that had ‘been established with the ra Ee photography. The segolation of sock relations with Cnplasis on ownership, on the one band, and on national citizen Ship, on the other in effect deprived modern citizens of what the 1 cor had bequeathed to them. The political ga ‘which the con pact was involved —a game that cannot be predicated entirely on oret log, governmental power and the male's perhaps the only one ofits kind in which citizens 6 able to fulfill their rembership in a political commcnity in 9 framework not dictated bya sovereign power where they ate abe act on their own behalf. | asoverign Movtract of photography does not ind the photo- | graphed person to the photographer oF ‘those who might keep | 3the photographer from standing opposite the person. It binds all individuals who take part in photography, both photographers and photographed alike, Every “signatory” to the civil contract has received, in return, the possibility of producing images of the other, that is, of supplementing the inventory of images that he or she can access, Every individual has been given the opportunity to sée beyond his or her immediate surroundings and to use the gaze of others on people and places that the individual cannot accessor pho= tograph— including the individual himself or herself, The modern citizen bas thas renounced the exclusive right to his or her image in favor of an economy of images that, in principle, includes the indi. Yidual and all others. This consent is conditional on the consent of allothers. Within a short time, the individual has been able to obtain Photographic evidence ofthe consent of al these other, respective of their class, nationality, or whatever. Those who are enclosed solely in a private sphere are excluded from this game, but this hea- {ation is temporary, for they might (re)eppear in the public domain, (re)exposed to photography. ‘The citizen's renunciation of the exclusive right to possess or dis tsibute his or her photographic images does not mean that the eith zen renounces the right to become e photographed image. It can be expected that the former renunciation would help produce one's mages when one néeds them, for example, when one considers what happens to a person as a matter of public concern, This is not simply a one-time agreement given to a particular photographer at the moment of an encounter, but isin principle a renunciation per- formed only once by cach citizen, linking them all in the contract, In The Sexual Contract, Pateman discusses contracts that concern ‘not regular property but property in person—as in the eases of the ‘marriage contract, employment contract, or prostitution contract, Irrespective of the eventual generosity of such contracts, in every. thing relating to the compensation given to the person whose body becomes property, they do not eliminate the fact that one side of the contract has the authority to dictate to the ther sie everything concerned with their bodies. Pateman contends that all of these contracts exist under the auspices of the “original” contract — the Socal contract—in the framework of which obedience is portrayed 114 as free will, The act tract latent within it at issue is also prop take place within ab absence of any exph (snapshot photograp the nature of the eng contract in which th scribed, inchiding sat pliance with the cont if there isa contract civil contract of pho tual framework for th to the different uses and recontextualizes have threatened to ir ploitation and contro Photography is,or modern citizen to est movement and of in tographs and to-be ph like to show through f of viewing the world spectator, capable of photography, the mo which she was not pr been given strong anc of herself and others, disclosed in these pho: the citizen felt cheati njsery, moreover my 1 Florence Thompson, peared hundreds of tin was taken. Despite the equality ‘institutional bodies, t ity to exercise these mEe ie as free will, The act of photographing confronts us with the con- nds all xson. Tt bind tract latent within it, an unusual type of contract in which what is ers and ae at issue is also property in person. The act of photographing can spposite the pe Phy, bath photogr™e graphs mntract has ory” to the evi) oon ae 4 take place within a broad spectrum of agreements, ranging from an Sf producingimages fhe | abserice of any explicit formulation of the principles of exchange entory of images HA Tt Myo see (snapshot photography, for example), through hasty consent as to seen given the OPP oF the nature of the engagement (a photographic studio), to a detailed and to use the & contract in which the form and character of the exchange are de- eroundings gal cannot access OF PHO” scribed, including sanctions stipulated in the event of any noncom: he individual Ls a mse oF heel ie a i pllance with the contract (fashion photography). Whatever the cas, elusive right to is 8 Nhe indie Trthere is a contract it refers only to the act of photographing. The shat, i. principles incthe consent of ‘contract of photography, however, which serves as a contrac ant is conditional om (Oo ain tual framework for the regolation of photography's relations, refers hho individual bas been 8? On ive. to the different uses of photography, which includes spectatorship, se alt ese ters respon ‘and recontextualizes each of these concrete contracts, which could ose who ae “have threatened to impose on photography stable relations of ex svhatevers TH Studed from this game fight (repent HEP rat this imi Photography is one of the instruments which has enabled the tnodern citizen to establish her liberal rights, including freedom of ovement and of information, a8 well as her right to take pho- joraphs and to be photographed, to see what others sce and would ee cad sip show through photographs. Photography has become a means ce Ton rou be produce ee "wing the world, andthe citizen has become a well-trained n, for examnple, when oe his is not Spectator, capable of reading what is visible in photographs. With meter of public concer, TE graphy, the modern citizen found herself in @ situation in ‘particalar phot een pe ‘she was not previously familiar. On the one hand, she had inciple Fem contract jiven strong and powerful tools— the production of images ‘them all in ae nie ‘and others, and the right to see and interpret what was tracts that ed im these photographs. On the other hand, as an individual ~as Sa 2 illaen felt cheated: ‘I'm tired of being a symbol of human ment contrac oF POSS toreover my living conditions have improved,” complained generosity of S00 thompson, when her image as the Aigrant Mother reap~ ensaton given © Oe ne ae dreds of ies in the press decaes after the photograph ens mate he Fact OY sens Fay to dictate (0 (he oe jute the equality of means that are held in principle, “others” temas contends tht 2 albotlies, the rich and powerful, etc. still have the abil pices of te ce ore ssise these means in a discriminatory, and even oppressive cork of which of : -operty in perso neve 14to turn ‘the citizens of the fon of a political overigt individuals, but photography and pret the era value of photography S ahere,” sm the words of This lectures, Barthes 2 im its speciicty 82 community “yhis is not simply & snutual goorantee linked 60 the met vated on a mutual consent regarding St hat what we ind really “2 ‘Camere Lucida and io Roland Barthes: Tt p the i fails to tempted phy or argue that “photog! 2a the snsivtionaited P Motographs. Only 2 Be ‘ata newspaper Pie ending power ofthe ne ‘photo. Phot forget that despite the Hoot that photography Pe 126oo spvaks the truth, A photograph does i oir gett peaks photograph does in fact attest fo what “was wee etme thas eta euene is puta nd ny in ee ‘ ly exec Her power Mt ie, Win ws he ron wt iil nh tgp tol eer ihe ne fontained inthe very photographic situation, in which rnc photographer and photographed interact around a camere, Thats 2 Photograph i evidence ofthe social relations which made i possible, means of 2 6 recomie am image : and these cannot be removed from the visible “sense” that it dis nantes Meeted ited tO closes to spectators mio can ages or dsgres on its acta content se 1 a ge Tesolin that wt teh apt atts sore a Ee at ex exesion ol uns or ninguna Ete dary when her becoming 28 fhe realization of the contract is not something only subsisting in Saad aes the photographic act, between photographer and photographed but fraws most ofits strength and validity from the very fact that it torent to ara nein we gat te citizens of te : ablished the! Teaation of a political Sets Toa wrapel dren See Even if it appears, ata certain time and place, that an individual or ee _ group is capable of destroying the civil coatract of photography, ‘photography and pre) a with the citizens ofthe citizenry of photography, the pect cing ah @ ial sping recast ple gh the elforts of some ofits tral ae : ngs nes, There nothing inherent to the technology of teat aim is Lectures Bares 36 yin s grees ‘a ot photogs tent poplin and i th ae way anol rst baitier ce rnge become casi olen eee ptt sgn ic ae paren wed, but nO pseu photographs, for compl, might be ugha canbe sock atitude toward pho “disaster area, and tured into a passive photographed individual, ried atone unde te tonconetn he sn ofa potogaph indie athe ogame coat ES ec mnie ‘important photographer, having the ore cograpie median as 8 BE Se nal cise of events. The mutual guarantee Pee wenn, Wien Barpd bom the eset equal among the cineny of Figo medium, in adtion t9 Basted ee ocr yn cin ce eretand the instivtionaliat pea iecbnnce cath which atest 0 What thor a i oe me a staken by the consensual social attitude towar = et ca — ce zap a of exiting od PAE 34 re apaper Kiosk is ede oral 2a ot, Photogeaphys aE sphy speak ing aphyCitizenship beyond Sovereign’y: Tow ed an Ethics of the Spectator Sie odeatialzation and dissemination of photography neat the side of the nineteenth Century ¢ eated a new citizenry ~the cit enry of photography — whose sane were equipped with the necessary tools for producing, photographs, interpreting (Bey and eting on what they disclose rough given to the modern citizen sete jeans of aecoming citizen ine ration-state, photography provided the possibilty ie pecominga citizen in this new cee of shotoprapry. Wheress the i eae is based om the principles of vovereignty and territotalization, reenry of photography. of rete fe evi contact of photography is the constitational founda- Mas is based on an ethical duty end on patterns of detersicorializa thon, In principle, photography #8 2" Jstrument given 10 e¥erYODE: raking ft possble to deterrtorisliag pirsical borders and redefing Tenite communities, and places (PrOCSH eS of retest 6 TS gem of photography 58 simalale® of acollect all citiz - precedence aver citizen making it tizenry of photography i fundamentally vray defined by okizenship: Memes hip inthe citizenry means ap an ciiacnship mesns meme ship in the citizenry. The ieenry of potograpby has 80 soverCE andi therefore no apparatas sfexclusion, Each and every one's in principle, amerber ofthe ok Teative. Membership in the collective = ‘based on each one’s Fenn: sere Fexclusve ownership otis oy se tnd on each ons ‘willingness and right to Be Photographed and becomes photograph. Haart thatthe civil contract has oly DOW ‘been explicitly fat nated doesnot contradict the fact th “ovists and bas existed & Tong as protograph Hse That 1am presently able to formals ror tiene ests on the abundant evidency have of theix exis fence, As early as the 18405 the photographers David Octal wil tener Adamon, i tandem. wih (het photographed sles stor photography a8 an instrument hat establishes, on the ad HO seg of exch photograph a niversal jana that goes beyond 1 pas Gt to see clearly what pbotouraphy has to show. er ayo men went to fe PROUORTADNS of the fishermen fisherwomen of New Haven in an s8emPt (2 assist them at 8“ahen thelr fisberies were failing, The gathering of photographers we the photographed around the mera was No! contingent on a ragmatic anawer to the question oF ‘whether photography could Fite. Instcad, st was motivated Dy the scopic regime that pho- topaply catablished —a photograph produced in the course of an seers between photographer and photographed s created and tispred by 3 vlaton oan external eyes he ee cof the spectator. Itis samp resin eye tats present in the situation, but one fon the sake PF which the photographed is willing to be photographed and the fotographer is willing to take photograph! “She looked as if she poet oy photographs ight help het s0 she helped me "There was a Tie} of equality between us,” wrote Dorothea Lange in her diary about Florence Thompson. ‘This spectator’s eye detervtorializes photography; ‘transforming, stom a ample, convenient, efficient, (clativly) inexpensiv= and tasly operable tool for the prodetion of pictures 510 8 social, cul- ay Get politica instrament of immense power. The gap Pelee sera twrerdimensions of photography is newly expressed in each photographic ac, summoning a supplementaly 0°08 Jeastallud- Jig tothe existence ofan empty places a potential ples that enables {Be act of photography to occur while the participants acknowledge {hat they are not alone in front of the other, Photogrephy thus en= cence teasers to produce images that go beyond the simple technical aifene required to produce them, attaining something that = ser he here and hows The reason they enjoy such 2 slats is due er rast thet as soon at they bave appeared in the world, tis impossible to dismiss them. Their presence canna! be subsumed geese reign of a higher authority. They are independent 1 the a a potinterpretation are not determined in advance and are ‘Tways open to negotiation. They are notxestricted co the HRA airy cho would claim tobe their authors or of those who parti= spate in their production. “This particular characteristic of photographs tends to mislead the spectators who view them, A newspaper editor for example, will =F acon captions to photographs, a8 if denotaive relation had ea cetsblished betwaen them, Such denotative relations assume aoe iis visible in the photograph exists there — somewhere — 139awaiting the precise verbal formulation that would make it proper object. However, contrary to what Susan Sontag has claimed in her own writings on photography, the transcendent status of pho- tographs does not require what is visible in them to be given or assumed intrinsically to have a “grammar” of its own. Although they write on the social context of photography, both Sontag and Barthes preserve the notion of a stable meaning for what is visible in the photograph and reduce the role of the spectator to the act of judgment, eliminating his or her responsibility for what is seen in the photograph. That judgment assumes a passive attitude toward the Image and is primarily interested in questioning the extent to which the photograph succeeds in arousing a desired effect or expe- rience. Sontag focuses on the photographer and secs him or her as responsible both for the photograph and for the fact that the pho- tographed is represented one way and not another or conveys one experience rather than another. "Moralists who love photographs” writes Sontag not without a small measure of contempt, “always hope that words will save the picture." According to Sontag, the picture's fate as good or bad is sealed as soon as itis printed on photographic paper. Any attempt to start speaking for the photo is akin to an effort to revive the dead, Her “ethics of secing” is based ‘on an aesthetic judgment and gives no attention to the civil contract of photography. It turns photographs into works of art that can be judged, Her ethics of sccing, in effect, reifies the new visual field created with the appearmice of photography, leaving the photograph in possession of a special “grammar” that allows it to remain inde- pendent of its spectator. ‘The civil contract of photography shifts the focus away from the ethics of seeing or viewing to an ethics of the spectator, an ethics that begins to sketch the contours of the spectator’s responsibility toward what is visible. The individual is not confined to being pos- ited as the photographs passive addressee, but has the possibility of positing herself a8 the photograph’s addressee and by means of this address i capable of becoming 2 citizen inthe citizenry of photogra- phy by making herself appear in public, coming before the public, and entering a dialogue with it by means of photographs, which, despite their power are often both silent and silenced. yo Once photographs are among many, in rogard to citizens that what brings + Jook at photographs, isthe ‘era when speaking in term ‘more rare,” photography from which the discourse ¢ a local seca, oF ration tography remains part of t Become one ofthe ast Hine for those who still see citio ‘This struggle Tinks thost threatened by the denial of. ‘of others with those who he swhoma photography and the first chance to become ci Israeli context, for instant citizenry of photography } ‘heir becoming citizens in Palestinians are at one and global citizenry and noneiti tography enables them—a cally present the ways in w visible the more and less hit Israeli power. Without the tion of the photographic « be perceived. Photography noneitizen, but it does enal reconstruction of their cit violence of photography’s « citizens deprived of rights v tiate with the sovereign po: Photography thus has fo cexeignty, without place or ing heterogeneous histor, and a unified interest. The of relation that is not sub}= Gace photographs ae spoken of, hovers they are spoken of = among many. i regard to many, and obrain ‘the power to remind Zrzens that what brings thers ogother, what motivates tern £0 ole at photographs, s the common interest, the xs publica. In an sone speaking i terms ofthe = publica s becoming more and tr Mares photography # one TeMaNINg Ty ‘a place of refuge, Thom which the discourse on the re publica may be revived. Neither Faves] sectarian, or national politics nov politics of identity, pho” tograpiy remains part ofthe ret publica ofthe cszemry ands OF 0 tere done ofthe last lines of defense in the battle over citizenship peepee who ail ce citizenship a8 somethin ‘worth fighting for. aos gat links those who have citizenship and those who a¥e ureatened by the denial of citizenship or &xPP90 tion of the rights aa ghers with ose whe have been robbed fF denied citizenship, for Sihom photography and the citizen y of photography aze often their Tut ance to become citizens despite BoB ‘stateless. In the tay context for instance, the Palestinians ‘became citizens of the vaemry of photography long before there any possibility of eee pcomuing citizens in the ordinary mews ‘of the word. The eotnians are atone and de same time chet of photography’s flobal citizenry aed ponetizens of te tate that governs them, Pio~ apap enables them —along with many thers to make polit tally present the ways im which ‘Bey ‘pave been dominated, making role the more and less bidden modes ‘which they are exposed £° Tercl power, Without the spectator parca inthe reconstruc ‘Ren of the photographic énoneé, the harm © Citizenship will not be perceive. Photography does not PA cen to their position a¢ be etfgen, but it does enable them and others who take part in the mone retion oftheir civil grievances (0 Coo the legitimate eorrmoe of photography's citizens regardlens cof their status a8 N00- nena deprived of rights who camnot use their citizenship to nego tiate with the sovereign power ‘hotography thus has formed a cing § tizenry without sor- cexeignty, without place o borders ‘without language oF unitys Bay nga heterogencous history, & ComMo® praxis, inclusive eitizenships a nifed interest. "The citizenry oF photography isa global form ane a ion that i not subject to national Fein despite existing 3hwithin their borders, and that is not entirely obedient to global logic, ‘even as it enjoys the chanmels of exchange and association the latter creates, Photography is a means of employing legitimate violence that is—or, in principle, that can be in the hands ofall of the mem- bers of the citizenry of photography, whether or not they are citizens ofthe space they inhabit. Inthe citizenry of photography, citizenship is rehabilltated and regains its essence, Not all ofits citizens neces. sarily give active expression to their citizenship, and only a few have ‘ver given their explicit consent to take part. However, even those who explicitly attcmpt to position themselves outside its bounds, or those who have never encountered a camera, are indeed a part of it In the ethics that photography requires of those who view pho- tographs, it requests that its citizens who are equally not governed in the citizenry of photography —not only try to avoid situations of degeneration into which the nation-state and the market often sink, bat actively to resist them. For the citizen of photography, national citizenship is not the ultimate realization of citizenship and does not see property and ownership as the principle achievements of human existence, Instead, photography, while personal, isa mobile and global re- cording kit for contesting injuries to citizenship, Official UN data estimates the existence of 175 million noncitizens worldwide, ‘This figure does not take into account the millions who, despite being officially granted citizen rights, are far from able to assume theit cite zen status. Photography can be put forward and read as a nonmedi tated complaint attesting to situations in which citizenship has been violated. Simply Mip through any history book from the last hundred years, any NGO pamphlet, any publication written by 2 human. ights or civil-rights group, or any humanitarian organization report, and you will see that photography marks the beginning of a demand to become citizens, even when that demand is hidden behind a demand for the protection of human rights. These collections of photograph-complaints would be worthless, however, ifit were not, for the citizenry of photography and its citizens who produce these photographs-complaints, a photographers or as spectators, When a photograph turns into a grievance, whoever articulates it becomes its civic subject. 132 Often, photography t sovereign power. Photo, tine tasks, ongoing docur storage of data, the use 0 mental duties. Disciplir proved to be ideal places cof cameras. Supervisior study and research~ the camera operators and tk are themselves the ones tion of these objectives, ¢ not prevented the creat what has actually taken pher, photographed and ‘mony to this gap, even if spectator to notice ther from which the spectator ing it possible for the pl citizen, as well Photography plays ac from their subordination vation that limit the con photography is rarely t: regulate its usage. The # rental ole regarding ph phy to the logic of the filled with the technical the language of neutralit: raphy, which has been 1 confined to the framewo fo public demand, Yet as course of development state, which indirectly © fields of warfare, espiona of the masses, whose pu mobile, user-friendly cat of night-vision and aerie(Often, photography has been used, in one way or another, by the sovereign power, Photographers were rapidly integrated into rou- se tasks, ongoing documentation, the collection, classification, and “storage of data, the use of data to enforce the law, and other govern- rpental duties, Disciplinary and closed sites, in Foucault's terms, proved to be ideal places forthe installation and regular employment ‘of cameras.© Supervision and control, refinement and improvement, study and research — these have been the motivating goals behind {Camera operators and those who command them, even when they ave themselves the ones exposed to the cameras.” Yet the formmula- tion of these objectives, even in the form of written declarations, has not prevented the creation of a gap between the stated aims and ‘hat has actually taken place in the encounter between photogra- phe, photographed and camera. Every photograph isa living testi- ‘mony to this gap, even if'some photographs may still lack an ethical spectator to notice them. In many instances, this gap is the place from which the spectator can become a citizen of photography, mak- ing it possible for the photographer or photographed to become a citizen, as wel Photography plays a crucial role in the civilian status of ts {rom their subordination to sovereign power to practices of civilian- ization that limit the control of this sovereign power.” Nonetheless, photography is rarely the object of legislation, nor does the state regulate its usage, The state’s renunciation of any crucial govern- ‘mental role regarding photography effectively abandoned photogra- phy to the logic of the market, and the governmental vacuum was filled with the technical jargon of capabilities and possibilities, and the language of neutrality and precision, Thus, the course of photog- raphy, which has been marked by different kinds of inventions, was confined to the framework of the market and determined according to public demand, Yet asin other fields, $0, too, in photography, the course of development was dictated both by the resources of the state, which indirectly channeled photographic inventions into the fields of warfare, espionage, and supervision, as well as by the money ‘of the masses, whose purchasing power led to the development of mobile, user-friendly cameras. Thus, for instance, the development of night-vision and aerial photography contributed to the process 133,of restricting accessibility to photography almost to the point of ‘monopolizing it (asim the case, for instance, of satelite photogra- phy), whereas the development of prepackaged film or the mobile automatic camera contributed to its populaizati Even though photography was a French invention, it wes an= chored in a contraot that was not limited to a particular nation,” Against the political order of the nation-state, photography —to gether with other media that created the conditions for globalization paved the way for a universal citizenships not a state, but a citi zenry a virtual citizenry, in potential, with the evil contract of pho- ography as its organizing framework. Citizenship in the citizenry of photography asks not to be stopped at borders and plays a vital polit- ical role in making sure other cultures are accessible, in all of their prestige or misery, deeming local cultures to be worthy of documen- tation and public display. Photography, being in principle accessible to all, bestows universal citizenship on a new citizenry whose citi- ens produce, distribute, and look at images, ‘This citizenship, in principle, issues actual and virtual transit visas toall, allowing everyone to see, show, and be seen — though itis sub- ject, of course, to supply and demand. The citizen ofthe citizenry of photography may move as she pleases in the visual féld created by Photography, It is part of the contract to which she’s a signatory, a contract that, like any constitutive agreement, supposes a primal beginning and moment of creation, a moment of transition from a state of presence to a state of re-presence, re-presentation, a visual representation, This agreement — although it seems to produce a ‘moment of unity, an unrealistic instant in which all citizens could be represented as if they were full partners in forrmulating the contract, — collapses in the face of the structure of the camera, sinc its limi- {ations are exposed. If this contract has any representation beyond the innaginary realm that this book secks to give it, such a depiction ‘exists inthe entire body of photographs from which it was extracted, From an instrument once recognized by the French state as hav- ing the power to fuel a revolution on the scale ofthe French Revol tion, photography was reduced to merely its technical components, To this day, it has almost always been employed without any prior and systematic study ofits legal, cultural, political, and moral ramifi- 34 ‘ations or of the effects s raphy has been naturalize that its very use appears t not only any discussion « rode in whlch these hv ‘mon to all people who et Given this governmer phy has a crucial role. It: for the different uses of distribution, the exchan nisms of interpretation a. as well a its public or jan The exercise of that regu of the spectator, and it i turn.sor ofthe effects sternming from its omnipresence? Photog: Ic been naturalized as disciplinary medium to such a degree BP ery ave appears to have been versal apres! omy avg ily any escusion ofits procedures or apechanisns, but of the see which these have been adopted, as though they were com- “fron to all people who employ photography* Fe en this governmental vacuum, the iil contract of photogra- sy Ha crucial role, I can serve as a regulative power, econ BN) diferent uses of photography, its modes of production and = Higpibution, the exchange relations that are involved) its mecha “tions of interpretation and authorization its patterns of accepeance, as well as its public or juridical standing, “The exercise of that regulative power is the duty first and foremost df the spectator, and it is tothe ethics of the spectator that I nowlous epidemic dss dunce the concept “asingly vile sts ose action organized spart of the ime swith which Tell today bocome2 ‘The former take sy in whieh they bal kil" fom @ (2004) bep:// Se Ai Dol em Sot unex no rcumstances ie entitled t0 «enship. Citizens no Tonger a fect nay nen oa refuges ast acess one 9s Ft ine ain eins rte wots Arm ir a devel Minne megs A i aigession in pita discourse a ali zens? On the sePanoD “the nalon from the tater 66 «be ng nt oncing tapers of Meal Arovlay and AaL Ophin Bed DOYS pon per ond Urpin (Gia Avr Relig, 2002) Pg, shar abs wing mE acmentry work te are Ken rn of stat of Ait iin” 2°70 rcoersatians with im en ple Converten ith Azole Ov, aa Protons, Tel AV, 2005): gate on rsa te cues of ope who hae ft esto ey éitizenship tote people oo live and werk thin 115, The eoncept of online gris ofthe pola nd remo St and foremost, re enc prevent from seeing th Po oor eanscendent dimension and conto negotiation and slteraon senshi ompea us therfore to define RoW old concepts such a8 Sve iy or nepresentation sity of such Trae yakage of igs constantly be 12 qnarran Two: Tae Crvit- CONTRACT OF PHovooKArAy pon not mater ore parpoe of ts SESH sneer the decision veo ne cncption (Cot Seb, Pla THOME Tour Chapters oa the Conese of oenigny (Cob MAST to) ar ore the dstntion Pees) arery med enemy, or over te borders of > SPACE yee the covereig’s ls ave orga Agen, Home Soo: Severs Fort gd Bare Ifo tas. Daniel ee osu Stnford, Ch Stand User Por 1998), p90. 3. Ib pp. 106507. 4. ida, p- 108. 5. Bid. {6 Giorgio Aguntven, The Coming 1b: Unter of Minnesota Press 1993), B srg quran wage’ Arendt ais DED speak of pent personas we arnt wm pond “power metaphorical What 8 Pare meaphor rng" Ha pron, On Ffene (New Yorks Harvest Books, 1970)». 44 Common, eas, Mica Ha (Minnenpo> powerful oan! oF ® 509asa media This and interviews in Michel Feber (od), with Gale Krikorian and Yates i jee econ nt iNew Yorks Zane Bots 207) pay 9. in 1989, for iostance, the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of aesiane WHEE May copsres the PAS tion of photography was clebated i various phces throughout the WORM x the users oF io. Walter Benji, Seleted Writings, Ylune 2, 127-1934, el ee of pilose Jennings, Gary Smith, and Howard Bila (Cambriige, MA: Belly to understand t vad University Pest, 1999), p- 507. 1M, quoted in Geofrey Batshen, Barn Pres 1999p. 8 2 Th. Pinson for instance, wrote dt the discovery ofa. 1837 pont Dues andpronoonced the rat photographic portal reed satnal Bronch debate, one ofthe only debates sbout the inven igure otype, which ad long before been marginale by the ion tepals tcnlogy of ela on paper Stephen Pinson, "Rees de retype nt Un cpp cis Mase ry 200) aoeeeedet Gunthert, "La bit sre de Daguere is Le daguerep fO joy 8 ig with Desire (Cambridge La je porgaphigne (Pris Musée Ora, 203) p35 3 opts 1. Bi p39. = 2a ee a for nee ease I 15; raving parc ile teat ity tthe ncention of the atochn d he sly by Naini Boutouch, Gunthert aks his ee by the Lumre brothers nd to he we wT abi wes pt, Natale Boulouch, "Fendt avec le oe Les eneux Ps Tine de hotogapie des cours” Bees Potagaphqus 10 2002) Sate nant re atl in Alen Trachtenberg, Reding Aeon Thee ngs as Hisar (New Yor: Hill aed Wang, 1989) P= 3. z ei Teli of he Ober, Jonathan Crary shows tat ding he Y stom 810 1840 i, etre the intention of photography — new ost resttutionalized, along with the conditions fora new visual experience ae voled a break fom the nodel manifested by the mero cere and ne 4 aaa Fcredaton, communication production, consumption and ona yates nev bere consecration Cay Teng aor (Conbrd MA: MIT Pres, 1992p. 14. Many ofthe acer ‘her Chapatrtsty the viewer at he begining ofthe cantar ae abo pial Spectators of photography, but do not adequately desc them. 1a. Roland, Bathe, Cage Lucid: Rflecion on Phtagophy tras, Richard owed (New York: Vintage, 2000), p76 translation modifi TD. tu Comes Lida and is eae, artes attempted to grap th sence Figure was 26. Celeties Jo” taken of hes in oftheir image Mj, one af the rt a8e* ‘ership involed ‘era "images siode yours yes obser perience al ae palntion Salas of cries typical of «Richard egy ne spe 8 a Bassi, fais 10 we Bares wished, but trees precise dest photography Fon, wee edi of eth aE the dination vee HS Ege sory ofthis nines ee iesty oF CRABS PTE i This deverptem urning wt Des © sige. WA: MOT Pre . Heecrption of wha bein the dager ONE paged on 8757 rotinaes tobe di abated asthe Bist aquest! fase te? Shes Gunhers che SFP IE feito showing be ctl ‘ae ofits cone oman te at of BOS “p. inthe exhi guess preference FoF ominigue Plansbo™ neque ai: Me 2a, Crary eens 25, For some or of ke omnes of PHOT rym Lacy Gra JN, joy Faby see John Dav Views pega Flo THE 24, hid p13. penta inthe BOY ial mot vim the owners of photographs aghts forthe 16, Celebrities sans econo “gam in te public PEO taken! oftheir images: ree ne fis case 10 NES ane photograph ofonnership vis own image, 8 omen + gh tne ar ead FeO of flout S esp —inawed « pROLDEF pp HOt ‘era "mages 2s FOP28, The ate Michal Heiman has eytematiclly demons at projec “Usknown Photographer” 29. Itis important to note that inthe nineteenth centary, people cares dere withthe photograps ofthe fone, snd Bison we cl the common commercial practice ofthe period 30, Gill Freund ithe sure of his story although te doe spl fact thatthe photographed object snot part ofthe lea dpe Ser Gil snd, Photographie vc (Pati Sul, 1936), p,RO-BL H, Lange quoted in Mare Moni Robi, Les 100 ptr dsl sans ds Chine, 2000) 32. Géafey Dany "Photographic ies” Sn Luis Obipo (CA) Na Ti ittp:/Awww.newtimes-slo.com/archives/cov_stories_2002/coy_OH72 002) wo Int acceted anu 31,2007, - 2, This manly tru of celebrite who have tord hr image oie resource, and therefor thir by oters detract fom he era tal they themselves might derive from them, An “ordinary” prac, boweyd sd the can of Flnence Owens Thompron (in Dorothea Lange's phtejagh, wl given nothing, even though their photograph has made others a fortune, = 34, Numerous caslogues published inthe last few decades mails sssamptions. See Carol Squiers, The Body at Risk: Photography, huss aa Heal (New York: International Center of Photography, 2005); Deborah Will, Ag = tions in Black (New York: W. W. Norton, 2000); Roy Guttman and David Riall = (eis), Grimes of Wr (Londons W.WW, Norton, 1999; and Thomas Y, Levi, Ur Frohne and Peter Welbel (ed) ll (Spc) Ror of Sucelanc fm Bet ‘to -ig Brother (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002). 4 35, One example the cameras ditibuted in the Occupied Terres arog = the fain, Sethe ntervle with Hain Breyhit n Ariel Aula, Hr Das = {eo tYa? (Tl Aviv Babe, 200). 36, The stalking of cbs by paparaa andthe poli photo opportu. are two examples 37, Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, ed, C, B, MacPherson (London: Penguin, 1987) piss 38. tid, pp. 227,28 39. See Arent, The Human Condon an Carle Pateman, The Sena! Cotes (Stanford, CA: Sunford University Pres, 1988) fr readngs ofthe social contac. oth etal ais stories that the cv contract sought to replace. 40, See Patetan, The Sel Contract sa “a Kinds of Portrait: The Ph jan Sogn, I Kinds ‘het FA New Hur of Pte CSTR ‘Nye presented the inne ay recived. the wake & oforecs with gp to dele? acceptance re ihe ground fxits wespresd 2°27 Fe ep sll pee py spend roti Wenn wore ey etre during the exibition eto ly 2007, te journalist Joseph dving ths ime in Gaza Mi y other manner of repr ring pots mepenhng 2 ue inp Sebi Jom jlo iyo Yr Th ter he fan p26 i z the American military Pf tn itn ts do eyo etn a See rte conic woul Wl dam have ere const 8 a pe Di aber, mag scion of he ence fe Steyn htop Bs een 8 F esinage rope, the Phogaph ( m tues Ls fi oment en, ol : Eka feces becoming en object then co = acne sn becoming pct” (1 “hry ple pene Tr = spit the es ofthe iy nd hoe ee inion feos nee reine ngaon oi Da and Jooatt Interest to chow at pemoreon tice lie St "T se cnr oft oe sn pecs Ba 8 seo ns is ethers Se cre OES 53= 4 Se LK of ort Th Page ST Me sea Anew Hey of ote (Caer Knees 1998), p 106 Fen ie rected he nton of he MATS te ney rss swat ust of Dager= ng ren ith Nae tendo te enn deoied to ee pdr olen Te vopstonce pepe are prime of ees photog yey rend opt he Western rare = ae a Teor ding She exibition At of State: 1967-2007 at Minsha Art 2 = galery, Te Av, uly 2007, the fourm. oveph Agay deseribed he prohibition os ang se ina ary Pretamaon 96 probs een ora ler nner of epetenmion communicating = cps” Quote in Jp Sheba Jonathan Kutta, The Was Bank and the ete ey Ne Yon he tana amin and Law = Jat Sere of Man), p26 fas, for instar, the American riery governenprobiin of PRO | yoo gn os ae Po od imited in tine Oe coed wnt bigoted nag 1S “oneal pot hve become constant Did tera,ay ng tt rs Ninos Gor pote ence oh potoepeastis eens ae ephy bedevil ene Sse OT eee tx Poe oe Tid eens sb 2S era a er lt ot sk SOE {a ance ihn expres smcaron eh = enthes:am becming pect” PBA) nc ete pprnre eer teins tinction be sghy hn of tsa it Be 6 of pblis ry he ent, of curse, nl tobe probated amd br Ta vn a ly poses ne em omens #8 + ocean he lan oy Te Boyan he re olen (08), The Contes of Mecing (Cambri, MA: MIE SEY 1989); Carol Squers (ed), Onaesped says on Cantera Phoogeaphy (Sew Yorks Neve on, 1999) an Sadr Philips, Mar Haworth Booth snd Carol Squiers (is) ales Pears: The Phoagraph os Eidence (Sn Francis: ‘Chronicle Books, 997). cee ote ae o eotogrphy see oh TB Euan ‘Truth and 53ie elvis CONTRAST OF PHOTOSNAREE vil 2 rovatston andr Photography Reader (London: Routledge, 2003). oe A Tse ay of Monat Fo we 50, This inequality does receive mention in vations places, bat i Serre Lenges The Aspen to an Indepth discussion, Foe instance, in the album issued on the, gy See DOT es Women's We lle yar 2000, inthe case of inequality egiding the ote ‘wens Thompson, empha onthe et dat she conser lig thE Tish to court (ldhoh shed, of core, she acd th ta is presented aan amnsng anecdote See Robin, Les 10 pho die SI On the dtinction betwen cizenship and becoming a seh “Azula nd Ad Opt, Be Daye: Bewen Dt ond Utopian Metre) Resing, 2002) y $0, leach readers need not be reminded how quickly the bodies of Jee a ew 1 ? ales are covered after ero ates. S ee vamp, ores DHE Sa Tir fs the legiltve propos of 1639 a presented by te Fre St Cesc Fri ‘inter to the Chamber of Depts on June 15,189. ene (Pass: Maes See ian raga th an so doubt changed the lif ofthe nivel, but che benefit they bg ed Abr Lond (Names 3 and priate Boe mvs cecaship 3 nore NT ® $5. On the formation of the observer in the end ofthe elghtemth cen 7, Becavye Pome 2 ities tS the begining ofthe nineteenth, se Crary, Tecniqus ofthe Obes 56 ‘The eine proces oocrred among the lac popalatin i the Un States, who ltoogh deprived of clzenshp pertpated in the nascent rte phioyraphy from te beginning tensforming into x weapon In he bation Segal See Deborah Wil, Reto n Black (New York: W.W. Norte, 200 pone aman Coto iszenship of ‘the Enghist esc tony pty wll thse pon yA vay co merc wr notte ih tha pote wit mes ath AE is onan a Imalycone on et Te ark on wore of pao as (ab penpals ee coe cheat thee prepa in the matt prt ofphoteeraphy ee 1. ty Pern ete x ey ai oeing cd” Wale Beja Seed ane Witang Pn 3, 1995-938 ede Howard land snd Miche! Jonge (CM on Iago A: Ballas Pest of Harvard Unies, 202), p. 1. So, ian Sontag, ltr (New Yr: Pear, 197) p- 0, Onthe gl protec ac Vi, ger POP 61, These est appar in Robi, Le 10 plots dsl 2. The pelferaton af local photographers during the Sst infu == intrativecain pn. and iv action, represe™ spun Soecrsron prodet of ot cally ashi ry be systema ts they produced es of phot quantities of suon tetris ctrtoresn ils Dee es ewan Captian Scapa a Ms Aberin nist Mens ren 97) Pe ones ange “The fg! I Noe Forgot eon and Sy wilians (es), luinasons: Wee's Writings an Photocopy im the 1850s to Sea (London: 1 Tur, 1996), Peep Sota, On Pnorphy (Ne York: Pedr, 1977 9-3 Ee tid, pr 67, See Arundt, The Human Condition. oe prea th wed enh of zens vinghsde nomen ee “pays Opi od Do ey ill Foncna, Te Birth of think: dn Acar of atl Pe pon Nee Yr: Rando Howe, 173) Tee cgonple, Geog De tbermen’s book on the photography ponent in Charts, reso de te Chara moa reser daospie rs Msn 1988) nd Dens Brac nd Av eerie yok on Abert Lande who wa one of he photographers who wore re Tiesto er Lnde ames Canon, 183) pecan een nee ally alee races cf iininton ae ended cnr to bene ne, ths preserang the ap bese the een Bl jowe: sees he entation of the Engshmon Hear Fox Tote Frit New Hoy of Paarl. ence on ht aon asap th pablo of tea ly an ad ss nore to erp interest does ak the pla ofthe misig con. The content every ecology poss uci ie Tha for example he asus lene ie he pa daar tee cv way nin mos eee ect wl ind do 0 wri However the ana he am cleaner dv tak place the raewerk "plant vl pace abn india tote, spe te veesarna hve rion, epesent thr actos, street the sume challenge from the CCuapran Thun: Tas Sereviron Is Cate 70 ‘TAKE PART 1. A photo, ke product of work, can be destroyed, and in extreme cases J, The treatment by the Nazis of the lrge can even be systematically annie frome quantities of photos they produced is one well-known case, Thi Is an ext sus