No Caption Needed

Stupid question: so why does every single image there need a caption?

Thanks for pointing this blog. Interesting analysis. A good reminder of what true even classic photojournalism can be. Could be ?

Hey Stupid: (it’s so wonderfully freeing to call someone that and know that you are just using their first name…) Great question. I think their answer is, and I am paraphrasing, “No caption needed, however, plenty are provided.”

Stupid — Good question actually. There are several answers. First, the title “No Caption Needed” is something of an irony. We actually believe that all images are captioned in some manner — implicitly or explicitly — and so one of the things we are trying to do is take account of how the images operate in the context of multiple codings (captionings), You have to remember we are actually academics and so we get off on looking for complexity in the simple (but somtimes we try to find the simple in the complex too).

The more direct answer is that Aric provided the images with the captions. Hariman and I debated whether to use them or not. But since the photographer gave them — and since it would be hard for most people to recognize the part of the world or at least the political frame in which they were being offered — we included them. A judgment call I guess.

But I have a question for you. How do you think we should have displayed them? Any title at all? Just the overalll title (A Different China)? Or what?

Thanks for checking the images out. JLL

My view is that a site which calls itself “no caption needed” should be constructed to utilize work that needs no captions. As the last resort, I should come up with my own stupid ones.

Thanks for pointing out the images. I’ll go back and check them out. First time around I was too busy reading the captions to notice them.

Fair enough. But you sort of beg the question as to what a “caption” is. Would you include a “title” for the group of images? Would you attribute them to a particular photographer? Would you give his/her biography? Don’t all of this “tags” function as “captions” every bit as much as the legends under the specific images? That is, can we ever really avoid captioning (however much they may not be “needed” … and again, that in itself is a troubling issue),

JLL

Great site, and great idea! I get weary of heavy-handed interpretational captions—ones that tell you what the photo means (the NYTimes does this online). I would much rather read a general heading about the work, along with minimal individual captions, little more than identifying the place or context. With long, overwrought captions, you don’t have a photo essay. The photos aren’t doing the work of driving the narrative; they are just occasions for the text.

If the photos are doing the real work of conveying the meaning, if it’s a real photo essay, then words should be in the background.

Photos have power. Why dilute it with words that assume a viewer can’t figure out what’s going on?

Note that this is NOT a commentary on Aric’s presentation on the site but my musings on the general topic at hand.

I think it would be good exercise to present the images twice, first with no captions, no headings, no information at all…. and second as they are currently.

For one, the images will perform much differently without captions. It would be interesting to critique the two experiences. They also perform in a broad range of meanings across cultures and political persuasions. In a traditional media sense, captions serve to clarify those agencies that can’t be seen but that have influence on the subject or story. Personally I am drawn to the way images perform without words at all. And I am aware that that performance can be widely varied within different viewers.

No captions needed, if you had an index page, as in any stupid book.

Thanks, Daniel. I agree that the site points to what could be, or should be, or might be possible.

No debate, just beautiful work Aric.

One question are the Uygur Indigenous people to the area?

Thanks, Lisa. The Uygur are indigenous. They had their own republic that was taken over by the Chinese in the rapid expansion in the ’50’s when they took over Tibet. They belong ethnically with the countries further west, Tajiks, Kazaks, and so on. If you walk through a market in Xingiang, it smells, looks and feels more like Afghanistan in culture than China.