On Photography

The author begins by saying that photographs are not only a way for us to be educated of the world around us, but that they give us the ability to see what we cannot normally see from where we are standing. That since 1839 almost everything has been photographed and that it has never been easier to have the ability to see things that would normally be separated from us by natural and social barriers.
She continues to say that printing words may be easier and safer, but the words of a person are just an interpretation. She says that prints and movies and television fade away with the time that they represent but Photographs are a still capture of a moment in time that last forever. That the importance of photographs as a form of knowledge helps us connect the past to the present without the use of words and instead uses the imagination of the viewer. The entire essay is a comparison between books and photographs and how images are more powerful and easier than words.
I can tell from the word choice and sentencing flow that this author is very passionate about photography. I enjoy the way that she compares television and books to photographs but the way that she glorifies photographs as a whole does not sit well with me. I can see that she is only trying to emphasize the importance and dependency of pictures, but they are not the only source of knowledge. Yes pictures do help us connect visually with the world around us while books only give us words to imagine off of, and yes Photography is still a very important form of art. But like printed words and moving images on a screen, pictures do not last forever. They fade and change with the times and sometimes they do not remain at all.
The author was trying to say that photographs are more dependable than books because of the way that they visually stimulate you into imagining the scene with you in it. Pictures are meant to help the viewer put themselves in the place of the camera holder, its how we connect without words in a way that helps us gain a better understanding of the world around us. But I enjoy books as much as looking at photos, maybe even a little more. I agree that books are more about interpretation than photos. But that is what makes books so interesting to me, they help me imagine the world that I want to see instead of just looking through the eyes of another person. I like to feel the movement of the words more than looking at static images. Images do last a long time, and they can help us remember but I personally do not feel they are as "decisively important" as Miss Susan makes them out to be. They are not the only important source of information, books and movies are just as influential.