h. and finally that interpretation by the picture-maker is part of the constructed "transforming vision- limited in photography to "what is shown or not shown- according to Berger.
In suggesting these things be considered, Berger was looking at photography in the overall context of its history to that time (1968) - which pre-dated the application of digital imaging manipulation. It has been noted that.
". the history of photography as art evolved independently and parallel to the history of painting. Fear of contact between the two was great, disputes sometimes harsh, a reconciliation seemed hopeless."" .
This question will be examined later.
But specifically in this essay he was looking at photography in the political and social context of his own life, and we will consider this aspect first, because it shows the peculiarity of his vision. At that time, Berger was already a Marxist. He was born in 1926, had a 1930's childhood and like Picasso was influenced by the economic poverty of the times and the violent struggles between Fascism and Marxism (Guernica See image 1.). To many people of that era, the more obvious evil of the Fascists could only be counteracted by Marxism, which had close links with the more egalitarian principles associated with Christianity. However, from its practical beginnings in Russia, Marxism had been divorced from the spiritual and emotional aspects of humankind - limiting itself to the cult of the body and mind - the physical material and logical rational.
Thus if we look at his essay in detail, it seems clear that one of the primary "purposes- of it was simply to claim photography as a proletarian image-form: .
"few photographs have been preserved (by museums) in sacred isolation, it means that the public have not come to think of any photographs as being beyond them."" .
At the close of the essay he talks of:.
"Every photograph- being "a means of testing, confirming and constructing a total view of reality.