This text contains eight short photography-related chapters, which examine relations between history and photography, memory and photography, memory-images, difference between one person's "history" and "memory", how public image of a person differs from their real life, how photographic image differs from the painted one, what are differences between photography in the present and photography in the past.

Kracauer reflecting upon a photo of a Grandmother resembles Barthes, later reflecting upon a photo of his Mother, and also raises questions - is he talking about a real photograph, or is it an imaginary example? Does it matter? How does talking about the real object differ from talking about the imaginary object? Is it connected to the lack of details, or, on contrary, as too much details in the story can be a sign of lying (imagining in this case). Does it matter, if a Grandmother is the Grandmother, if she's Kracauer's Grandmother? Is the personal attitude important in this case, or a photograph can be analyzed in the same way, regardless of existence or absence of personal connection to the subject? Kracauer also examines building one's "history" from their memories, which can be connected to narrative therapy - direction in psychotherapy, which works with building narratives around the person. Kracauer states that "a portrait painter who submitted entirely to "natural necessity" would at best create photographs". How can this statement relate to Gerhard Richter's paintings? Why does Kracauer ignores specifications of mechanically produced images (grain, colour, focus, etc.), which differ them from the image of the reality?

One of the general themes, touched by Kracauer is the subjectivity of the person, which affects their memories and building of their personal and public image, and how people tend to simplify one's image.

#photography #painting #memory #history #family