Search

Roland Barthes's "Camera Lucida. Reflections of Photography" is a book that attracted attention not only from researchers of photography, but also those of other visual expressions, philosophers, and cultural critics. The last decade has seen intensive analyses of the relation between his photography and phenomenology. Meanwhile, this paper suggests a different approach - reading "Camera Lucida" in the context of all Barthes works, i.e. in the framework of his theoretic thought. In the analysis of his theoretic thought we explore the meaning of the question: "What does my body know about phenomenology?" asked by the author in this book. This question describes an approach to photography that could be named "corporeal knowledge". Corporeal or body knowledge in the description of emergence, formulation and production of signification is a common topic in Barthes's works. A look at the corpus of his works makes it apparent that Barthes cared about several essential problems that connect his works of different themes and styles into one methodological field. One of such problematic threads continues in a dashed but consistent fashion all the way until his final works is the signification of body (or corporeality) in the production of meaning. This paper studies how the conception of "corporeal knowledge" is spread in a book dedicated to photography. The paper carefully looks at the Barthes's photography researchers' notion that in "Camera Lucida" the author returns to phenomenology, since such concepts of phenomenological philosophy as perception, experience, memory, and imagination have never left Barthes's sight. We raise an assumption that instead of talking about a turn or return to phenomenology, it is better to talk about the isotopy of body and corporeality in the Barthes's works. Therefore the further discussion raises the questions of: how is Barthes treating the concept of body? What does he call the corporeal knowledge? What does the body mean generally in an attempt to answer the question what is photography? This paper shows that in Barthes' "Camera Lucida" for the first time an ontological question is raised, i.e. it aims to understand what is photography itself, what is its essence. The author has never raised the question of essence and not signification before, since structuralists or semioticians do not raise such questions. The analysis of the chronological way the author follows in his descriptions of the phenomenon of photography shows how he starts with photography as a message without a code and gradually reaches the concept of photography as an object, in which expression, content and the referent (the reality) coincides. This identity is photography's essence without signification that, according to Barthes, cannot be described by any traditional analytical methods. A rational, analytical view takes apart and generalizes; therefore, it cannot reach the essence of photography. This view is counterpoised by a personal view. Therefore, it is argued that the only possible way to understand what photography is in itself is to research the primal, true relationship between the viewer and the photographical image that takes shape before any conceptualization. Such relationship is exactly what Barthes calls "corporeal knowledge", where the basis of understanding is the position of the personal "1". Unlike in his other works, in "Camera Lucida" Barthes asserts that there are such fields or phenomena, where only this alternative (personal "corporeal knowledge") understanding is possible. Further on this study analyzes the conditions for such alternative view. The third part analyzes Barthes's description of the essence of photography by using two concepts studium and punctum. This analysis shows how these two elements of photography are connected to corporeal knowledge. 1t shows two conceptions of punctum. Several important aspects of corporeal plane are elucidated: describing punctum with corporeal terms (wound, stab, sting, cut, etc.) he attributes this element to the plain of corporeal senses instead of rational cognition. 1n the further description for the first time he conceptualizes the essence of photography - that which allows understanding the point of photography is indescribable, experienced and unarticulated. 1t also shows how the temporal aspect of punctum (photography shows that the object existed) is linked to the bodies' direct relationship. The conclusions propose that even though Barthes's last book "Camera Lucida" stands out among other books dedicated to photography and other expressive objects due to its conceptualization of the plain of "corporeal knowledge", a lot of issues still remain. That is especially because in his works Barthes has not described the conception of "body". 1t is stated that only by analyzing the fragments that create the isotopy of corporeality in his theoretical works it is possible to reconstruct the Barthesian conception of corporeality. By interpreting Barthes's question "What does my body know about Photography?" in the context of all his works, it becomes evident that on the one hand, the descriptions of the signification of photography and the search for its essence are inscribed in the systemic structure of the development of significations. 1n his analysis of visual objects Barthes uses the structures of linguistic significations, which means that he also faces challenges that arise in the text theory. One of such challenges is the place of corporeal experience and meaning in the description of signification, its emergence and comprehension. Therefore, after considering the development of his theoretic thought, what is in his critique called Barthes's return to phenomenology appears to be a consistent step towards the description of those uncoded, irrational and unsystematic elements of meaning that Barthes assigns to the plain of "corporeal knowledge". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Referring to the surviving photographs, artworks, reminiscences by contemporaries, and other written sources, the paper discusses the representation of the naked body in visual arts and its public reception in Lithuania in the 1920s and 1930s. Nude photographs of the Russian-born ballet dancer and painter Olga Dubeneckienė-Kalpokienė (1891-1967) become an impetus to discuss what might have been the reasons for a woman to undress in front of the camera and what meaning this kind of act had. The paper analyses the general attitude towards the naked body made public, referring to the origins of the movement of nude aesthetics and naturism, and the spread of its ideas in interwar Lithuania. The analysis of the history of creation of the artist and ballet dancer's nude photographs and portraits allowed to highlight the fact, which has not been previously emphasized in Lithuanian art history, that painter Petras Kalpokas (1880-1945) used photography as an aid in his works. The author of the paper presents new facts attesting to the close relationship between Dubeneckienė- Kalpokienė and Kalpokas, which began earlier than is asserted in traditional Lithuanian art history. This proof is important not only for the biographies of the above-mentioned artists, but also for that of Vladimiras Dubeneckis (1888-1932), as it may explain several dramatic moments in the famous architect's life. Moreover, Dubeneckienė-Kalpokienė and Kalpokas's wedding date is specified (1935). A sketchbook, which was thought to belong to Dubeneckienė-Kalpokienė, is newly attributed to Kalpokas. Research of the public attitude towards the naked body in the interwar period has revealed that even the priest Juozas Tumas-Vaižgantas did not hide his fascination with partially naked portraits. Dubeneckienė- Kalpokienė's allegorical nude photographs received exclusive attention from exhibition visitors and reviewers. Even the nude photographs by foreign artists, displayed in an international photographic exhibition in Kaunas (1938), were acclaimed by some professionals. However, despite the fact that interwar society was becoming more modern, it was not ready to accept fellow-countrymen's nude photographs about which we learned only in the 21st century and which are still 'without a place' in the history of Lithuanian photography. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]