|
|
| 2. What are the advantages/deficits of
visual mediation of events and concepts in this period? Can images
provide knowledge that is distinctive and different from textual
sources? How do images either correspond with or differ from their
textual commentary? What does this reveal about the combination of
image and text? Can representations by their nature capture popular
attitudes? Are inherent male/female upper class/popular class tensions
either captured or effaced in these images? |
| |
 |
question
2 Warren
Roberts, 6-9-03, 9:50 AM |
|
|
 |
RE:
question 2 Jack Censer, 6-10-03, 1:05 AM |
|
|
|
|
RE:
question 2 Warren Roberts,
7-2-03,
9:53 AM |
|
|
|
RE: question
2 Barbara
Day-Hickman, 7-1-2003,
3:17 PM |
|
|
|
RE: question
2 Warren Roberts, 7-2-03, 12:53 PM |
|
|
|
RE:
question 2 Jack Censer,
7-26-03,
10:17 PM |
|
|
question
2 Vivian Cameron,
7-6-03, 6:05 PM |
|
|
Final
thoughts Warren
Roberts, 7-18-03, 5:38 AM |
|
|
| Subject: |
RE: question 2 |
| Posted
By: |
Jack Censer |
|
| Date
Posted: |
6-10-03, 1:05
AM |
|
I certainly want to agree with
Warren that images can tell us much that texts cannot.
I also think that he has clarified his point very well
here. I think my suggestion might be a need to fit in
his view that Prieur’s image richly describes the crowd
with the chronology of the production of images. Are
such powerful images of the action of the crowd depicted
in the same way over time? Specifically, does the most
significant symbol of the crowd and force—that of the
lamppost—ebb and flow with the fortunes of the Terror?
Also, I would like Warren to be a little more precise
with where Prieur is heading regarding the hanging
of Foulon. In image 32 (on Foulon’s execution), how
does the contemporary viewer know how to link this
image to Desmoulins instead of the royalist versions
of this event?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
