My first draft was very basic because i didn’t feel comfortable writing without getting any feedback on the research that I had undergone. I didn’t do a new proposal for this new topic which was stupid of me because it was harder for me to decipher what my ideas were. however i was able to write what I wanted as a basic skeleton of an introduction and a few points I wanted to make. I tried to address my main points but I didn’t know how to start writing them.
Draft one feedback from Kate:
I then gained feedback from Kate which was helpful because she told me to look at the identity moreand I think this made more sense. She did say that the beginning of my paper seemed more like a psychology essay so I had to go away and rethink how I would write it so that it was more for the purpose of a photographer.
Draft Two:
I then went away and wrote some more, I needed to send in my work to my tutors so they could see my development but I knew for a fact that I hadn’t yet completed enough readings to full put together my ideas.
Draft Three:
As you can tell, I had done quite a bit of changes within the next draftf sbecause I started using my research better and making it more relevant to my topic. This definitely showed within my paper because I was able to write much more than I thought. I had highlighted the sections that I knew I needed to expand, delete or write about but this was a big turning point for me. I knew I had to go into more depth but the main points were finally coming together for me.
Feedback From Anthony:
I took my script to Anthony so I could gain more feedback as to how I was doing. Overall, I was nervous about this but it wasn’t so bad. My intial ideas and main points were all there they just needed to be teased out a little. He told me to go away and read a book by Susan Sontag called Regarding the Pain of Others. He told me that it was about war photography but thought it may have some relevance which i thought was strange because it was about war photography. However after reading it I did realise that it had a few valid points I could use.
Draft four:
Draft Five:
Throughout my next few drafts, I didn’t make many changes it was just a few tweaks here and there so that the flow of the writing made sense. I tried to insert images into my writing so that I could look at them whilst I was writing about that particular section whether it be the amateur or professional photographs that I was engaging with.
Final Draft:
My final draft was a lot better than my initial thought of what I could do. I had clearly analysed the information that I had researched to make it relatable to my topic. Once I had started to read a lot more I found that it was a lot easier to start writing my ideas down which surprised me. I wrote a lot better and more fluidly the more I tried to change it. Overall, I am very pleased with my final script that I presented to my peers and audience at the symposium.
Powerpoint presentation:
For my rehearsal that I did the week before the real event, I had put together a small powerpoint to go alongside my research paper. I tried to make slides as relevant as possible to my speaking. I hadn’t referenced any of the photographs that I used on my powerpoint which I didn’t realise I had to do. I was also told during my feedback after the presentation that it would be an idea to take out the social media slide, because it was necessary. We all know what social media platforms there are so I decided to delete this one.
This was my final presentation that I created, I had only taken away a few slides and then put in some extra ones which would be more relevant to what I was talking about. Kate and Anthony said that it would be good to have a title page and then go straight into the photographs because that way you engage with the audience straight away. I added in my references for the images so that anyone viewing them in the audience could research themselves at a later date if they so wished. I think my final presentation was a lot better in structure and flow because it made more sense to my paper.
The Representation of Self-Harm through Photography
When you hear of self-harm, what do you imagine? Depression, mental illness, cutting? It’s branded into its own. These can all be associated within this topic. However, how much do we really understand through the photographs we see?
By discussing the representation of these images produced by professional and amateur photography and online media sources, you can clearly see the differences. Exploring how they portray an online identity within the social culture of the present day.
The rise in the use of social media websites are being used to document social issues. This, in turn has coincided with a 70% increase in 2014 “in 10- 14 year olds attending A&E for self-harm related reasons over the preceding 2 years” (Selfharm.co.uk 2015). We will be looking at the influence these photographs have on the public who use these websites and discussing how these are used as a creative outlet for amateur photographers. By contrast, discussing the credibility and intentions, of what the professional photographers are trying to represent alongside amateurs intentions.
Self-harm is considered to be a shameful act that must be kept hidden, however through the rise of the Internet, it has become more socially acceptable which entices people to openly share their experiences. Now, we can use the Internet to our own advantage and post any material we choose. Amateur photographs produced by these self-harmers are then shared online through blogs and social networks such as Tumblr, Flickr, Twitter and occasionally Facebook. These methods of sharing ‘serve as a creative outlet for self-injurers’ (Seko 2013). These images tend to involve close ups of the body that have been harmed usually depicting cuts, blood, scaring, burns or tools used to inflict such injuries.
These close-up photographs depict a sense of self, creating their own identity branding them into this stereotypical brand of the ‘emo culture’.
Gunter Kress and Theo Van Leeuwen, (Kress, Gunter R. & Van Leeuwen, Theo1996 cited in Seko 2013) suggests that the ‘distance and focus as one of the most powerful elements that symbolizes social distance’ thus gaining a personal relationship with those viewing the images.
For example, you can see a visual image of a single body part with such cuts and scarring, but because the identity of the individual anonymous you can relate easier. A person’s face is a small factor into identifying the individual; eliminating the subjects face from the image allows it to become anonymous. You are able to impose your own identity onto the image. Creating a false representation of your own.
The images from social media sources create this anonymous identity, which enhances the fact that these individuals are not comfortable to appear in the photographs themselves. This takes away information that the viewer would need to decipher the correct interpretation through body language and facial expression. These images were sourced from various social media platforms, through searching for the hashtags of ‘cutting’, ‘self-harm’ and ‘depression’.
However, within the images on social media, they tend not to add in context or the individual will add negative remarks. As Roland Barthes suggests ‘a photograph invites to many interpretations and thus always needs accompanying texts to fix meaning.” (Barthes 1977 cited in Yukari 2013). A photograph alone does not provide all the relevant information. So the viewer takes their own experiences and knowledge which creates a personal interpretation. These images published on social media form a structure and narrate our stereotypical view of self-harm, from a media aspect these cultural identities are often portrayed as ‘negative traits’ that define an entire group. These images we see on the social networking sites are classified as the ‘norm’ for self-harmers, which receive general recognition for the social identity of self-harm. Amateur self-injury photographs posted online don’t help to define the culture in a factual state, but group’s people into this shameful stereotype. Because there is no text to provide context like Roland Barthes suggests, then we gain no further knowledge as to the reasoning behind the image. Fred Ritchin identified that when people engaged with content online that it was very detached from reality. People will see these photographs and group them together under the same category.
As Bernd Huppauf explains, ‘It was soon observed that, while they do not lie, photographs do not tell the truth either. Rather, they have to be seen as elements in a highly complex process into which both photographic techniques and the concept of reality has been dissolved’ (Huppauf 1995: 95) We can place these photographs under a category but it doesn’t mean we can understand, the truth in the photograph has been lost, therefore we cannot identify the meaning without further information. This loss of communication and representation of the photographs enables a false response to the truth, thus giving the power to the viewer to make any assumptions about what they are viewing.
Social media platforms has also recognised that the sites are being used for displaying these kinds of images and display helplines. They have taken it upon themselves to define what is appropriate and what is not to post online, prohibiting self-expression as an individual, deeming social responsibility towards their users to maintain a healthy community. Recently, Instagram has changed its term and conditions where it is stated not to promote or glorify self-harm alongside eating disorders. These policies stop users to express themselves as they wish.
The two types of photographs expressed online, amateur and professional, share a similar connection but hold a different context. These photographs that the professionals have created don’t define the social culture because they aren’t focused entirely on the self-harm topic, they look into the documentation of the issue. Photographs produced by Tiffany L. Clark, Kristina E. Knipe and Kosuke Okahara, gather information for the purpose of identifying the problem, not the ‘emo’ culture in which many self-harmers are categorised.
When you compared the amateur to the professional photographer you gain a different perspective. Tiffany L. Clark, a professional photographer working as a photojournalist and documentary photographer decided to look into self-harm and people’s stories. This body of work helps people to understand the anxiety and distress that addiction to self-harm portrays to an individual. This is something that you cannot say about the photographs shared online from amateur photographs. These photographs depict people’s lives and therefore seek deeper meaning into the culture.
For example, from this image here by Clark it not only seeks the expression of self-harm but also doesn’t address it directly as the amateur photographs do. It is a documentation of the life of that particular individual, showing a different form of identification. The fact that the woman’s face is present here shows we can immediately identify her in a way that you couldn’t with the amateur photographs. The expression that the woman holds is one of contentment, showing a sense of confidence over the scars that she beholds on her body. The background also holds significant emphasis on the identity, because we can tell that these images have been produced in a home, a safe environment, meaning the woman could be vulnerable to such criticism that the amateur photographs hold. Susan Sontag expresses that ‘Conscripted as part of journalism, images were expected to arrest attention, startle, and surprise’. (Sontag 2004: 20) The images created by professional photographers are to document the story, to gain attention from a wider audience to show an understanding for the life style that these self-harming individuals live.
In comparison, Kristina Knipe, a photographer in New Orleans, shows images of not only the individual within their own environment but also of belongings and personal items to gain an overview to their situation. Knipe having struggled with self-harm herself wanted to create this documentary piece to enable understanding. In an interview about her work she expresses “those who self-injure are largely misunderstood. Each individual has a different relationship to this act; many harbour an immense amount of guilt about their scars, often going to great lengths in order to hide them.” (Knipe cited in TISCH ND) This in itself expresses the differences between the professional photographs to those posted online through ‘attention seeking’. The comparison between the two shows that individuals wish to hide or cover their scars and cuts whereas the cuts in amateur photographs overtake the image itself; giving it it’s own identity.
The work of Kosuke Okahara, a Japanese photographer, produced a body of work called Ibasyo which is the Japanese term for ‘roughly defined as the physical and emotional place where a person can exist, a location or a state of mind, where a person feels comfortable or at peace’ (Sett 2015) which is what has been represented within the series. The images themselves hold an outsiders perspective of someone’s life with self-harming issues. The images are highly contrasted, mostly underexposed which gives the viewer a darkened outlook into the image.
The way in which Okahara wanted the work to be viewed is within this book. This method of presenting work enables the viewer to look through the images at their own pace, thus gaining a different perspective as to those that would see images online. A book is a physical object that you can hold onto and look through at your own pace. This in itself gives the work a different meaning. Okahara only produced six copies of this book with good reason, as there were six participants within this documentary series. The purpose of the work was to ‘serve as a window in the world of those who suffer from self-harm’ (Okahara 2015) as Okahara expressed.
The book served as an open space where the viewer could write comments and notes within the blank pages at the back of the book. These 6 books would then be passed back to the participants so that they could feel that the audience had been consumed by their lives.
The way in which the professional photographers have chosen to depict their chosen subject is being communicated through a personal viewfinder for these sufferers. You can clearly see the difference between the structure and narration of the work. However, it is important to recognise that the photographs posted by the amateur photographer should be acknowledged in a less negative aspect. As shown within Clark, Knipe and Okahara’s work, the identity of self-harm has been expressed as a documentation of the lifestyle that they lead, whereas you cannot gather this information from the amateur photographs. These images do not hold the same context, especially with how they are being viewed. As identified by Susan Sontag, “Whether the photography is understood as a naïve object or the work of an experienced artificer, it’s meaning and the viewer’s response – depends on how the picture is identified or misidentified.” (Sontag 2003: 25) If the viewer has less knowledge on a subject, then this then aids how the work is interpreted. Identification of the subject plays a vital role to conclude the meaning of the work.
Bernd Huppauf (1995) ‘Modernism and the Photographic Representation of War and Destruction’ in Fields of Vision, ed. by Devereaux, L and Hillman, R. University of California Press, 95
Okahara, K. Handependent (2015) Ibasyo Book Journey Project [online] available from <http://ibasyobook.com/about/> [21st January 2015]
Sontag, S. (2004) Regarding the Pain of Others. New York: Penguin
Evaluation:
I think on a whole my presentation went quite well considering how nervous I was before getting up to present. I thought I got off to a good start but I knew that I was stuttering a little bit and when I tried to address the audience I would lose my place within my script. I did engage with the audience a lot more than when I had in my rehearsal the week before but I don’t think it was enough. I talked a lot slower than I did previously but I probably still could have slowed down a little more, even though I was within the 10 minute margin that we had been set. I did however, forget to change one of my slides when i was meant to as I had prompts on my script of when to change them. I don’t think it was overly noticable but I did panic when I had realised I hadn’t changed it. I made it through my talk without having passed out because I could feel myself going, however I pulled it back and concluded my paper. Because I had kept to the 10 minute margin this meant I had plenty of time to answer any questions that the audience had prepared for me after hearing my research. I felt I was well informed on my research that I was able to answer the questions to the best of my ability. I was a little nervous as to what questions might be asked but they were simple enough for me to inform the audience with my answer. The event was really successful in my opinion and we gained a wider audience through our social media platforms.
The whole project in itself was a big challenge for me because I don’t feel I am a writer. I am not academically minded and I did struggle with starting to write, I could do the research but actually putting my thoughts onto paper scared me a little incase I was writing it all wrong. It took me a lot longer than I thought to get my head around some of the academic papers that I read because of the language, and also I had trouble with actually finding relevant research to back up my theories. It did make me worry a little bit because I appeared to be behind a lot of my peers, they seemed to have been able to create drafts whereas I was still making notes. I know now that within researching I need to keep it quick and simple to get my points down and then conduct my research into drafts as soon as possible because I don’t think I had many drafts. Even though I feel that I have produced a good research paper on my topic, there is probably more room for improvement which I may go back to in my own time to challenge myself. I have learnt a lot of new theories and information from reading about self harm because I have gained a wider understanding of the topic, even though it’s a personal experience for myself. I do believe that I have captured an essence of the topic to express that people that do self harm aren’t something to be ashamed of and informed the audience into a ‘culture’ that people may not have understood or even known about before. I feel that I have helped in making people to understand.
Overall, I do feel that the symposium module has gone down well even after a rocky start from panicing over what i could actually write my research paper on. I have come away from this feeling a lot happier within myself becauses I have been able to present a paper to a bigger audience than I would like, including people I do not know. I feel strongly that I am able to accept my work and not doubt myself.
Bernd Huppauf (1995) ‘Modernism and the Photographic Representation of War and Destruction’ in Fields of Vision, ed. by Devereaux, L and Hillman, R : ,University of California Press, 95
Okahara Kosuke (2008) Hiromi stores medicines for when she overdose to get rid of her anxiety. She has been carried by ambulance many times because of overdose, Ibasyo [online] available from < http://kosukeokahara.com/?pid=story_detail&id=8>
With just one week to go before the symposium, we all did a practice run through our papers to see if there were any final tweaks that needed to be done. The whole event was ran over 2 days so we had to split our lectures into 2 groups to give the idea that it was the real this. Within the curation team, which I was apart of, we structured a time schedule for when everyone would speak. We allotted 20 minute time slots for everyone to present and then have question time at the end for the audience.
I presented mine on the Tuesday which was scheduled for 2:30 which may have later changed due to hearing peoples presentations and seeing if they fit within the correct category. I was extremely nervous before presenting but I tried to put that energy into my speech and use the adrenaline. Whilst presenting, I stumbled over myself quite a bit but I did manage to make sure that I changed the slides during the presentation so that it had a flow to it and it wasn’t jumpy. I feel I spoke loud enough for the audience to hear but I knew that I was talking fast, due to my nerves. Half way through I realised that I was speaking fast and tried to slow myself down but once I was in that pace I couldn’t seem to stop. I think this made it hard for the audience to hear what I was saying and take in the information that I was presenting to them.
After my presentation, I got feedback and a few tips of Anthony and Kate:
Try to slow down while I am speaking.
Make sure that I look up and engage with the audience because it’s not nice to listen to a speech without acknowledgement from the speaker. I think was due to lack of rehearsal of my paper.
Good use of visual evidence to back up my theories that I had expressed within my paper.
Elaborate on the section that talks about the content warnings on the site to do with self harm. maybe add in a small section to explain what is happening here.
It wasn’t clear to Anthony and Kate why I used the term ‘identity’ but they understood my meaning behind why I had written it like that so they said i should maybe use the term ‘anonymous’ to express what I am trying to explain easier so the audience can understand.
Overall, the rehearsal didn’t go as bad as I thought and I came away feeling a lot more positive than what I had first thought. I had an irrational feel that it was wrong but I learnt that I need to have more faith within my work. I think this will help me when I am presenting my final script next week at the real event and hopefully be able to speak a little slower.
This particularly book was one of the first books that I read, and I found that it had no relevance or helpful information within it. It was written as if it was a story of someone, even though my initial idea was to look at the body as a metaphor for pain and suffering I didn’t think that this helped with my research any further. It expressed that ones body is simple a poetic trait for someone to explore, and to dress it how the pleased.
Body Modification
Body modification was recommended to me because it spoke about Orlan’s performance work but because I later on chose not to look into Orlan I saw not relevance anymore. I think the only thing that I initially took from this book was that it explored the idea of ‘inscribing identities’ onto the body to make it their own (meaning the individuals body).
However, one part that looked at self mutilation was said to be a form of body modification. These self mutilations were classified as a mental health issue and was a way of expressing a suffering self image. This can be said towards the amateur photographs that I have looked at. They are not so much just an image but one of concern and to raise alarm bells for anyone viewing them.
Fields of Vision
This book expresses how film and media have shaped our culture. It looks into the power of photography and film which looks at how we look at ourselves. Looking at the representation of the way these images are looked at. The representation of war is to engage with the audience and I think this comes across with the self harm images. I think this is because both war and self harm photography are expressing tragedy, even though it’s not the same it’s within the same category.
The Media Studies Reader
‘Often negative, traits are used to define an entire group’
‘stereotypical images to achieve audience recognition ensures that such representations of social identity continue to be one of the most researched and written about areas in media education’
Through reading this book, I found it interesting to look at how self harm is considered to be a stereotype.
Regarding The Pain of Others – Susan Sontag
‘Conscripted as part of journalism, images were expected to arrest attention, startle and surprise’ page 20
‘Whether the photograph is understood as a naive object or the work of an experienced artificer, it’s meaning – and the viewer’s response – depends on how the picture is identified or misidentified’ page 25
‘The viewer may commiserate with the sufferer’s pain’ page 36
‘It is always the image that someone chose; to photograph is to frame, and to frame is to exclude’ page 41
‘Harrowing photographs do not inevitably lose their power to shock. But they are not much help if the task is to understand’ page 80
This was a very interesting book, even though the context of the book was about war photography it seemed very relevant to what I was trying to say about the photographs to do with self harm. The quotes that I picked out were relevant because they talked about the context of the photographs and the subject that was within the photograph itself. It talked about how the image was calculated in a certain way to portray what the photographer wanted the audience to see, framing the image correctly. Images were to narrate and to engage with the audience. I will definitely be using some of the quotes that I have picked out of this book.
Bibliography
Devereaux, L. and Hillman, R. (1995) Fields of Vision: Essays in Film Studies, Visual Anthropology, and Photography. 1st edn. ed. by Devereaux, L. United States: University of California Press
Featherstone, M. and Featherstone, M. (2000) Body Modification. 1st edn. United Kingdom: SAGE Publications Ltd
O’Sullivan, T. and Jewkes, Y. (1997) The Media Studies Reader. United Kingdom: Distributed exclusively in the USA by St. Martin’s Press
Slattery, D.P. and Romanyshyn, R. (1999) The Wounded Body: Remembering the Markings of Flesh. United States: State University of New York Press
Sontag, S. (2003) Regarding the Pain of Others. United States: New York : Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2003.
This was a very interesting article to read, it expressed how the images were shared online and how these were effecting how we understood self harm. It talked about how images were banned online, and people were being stopped for posting self harm images. I think this was something interesting that I could look into.
It also talked about how the image was used to contextualise the truth behind the social issue but this wasn’t the factual statement for it. It expressed how everyone had been through something, whether the pain was self inflicted or not, so would these images help to gain truth and understanding for the topic. The use of internet was too broad to help define the social issues.
Picturesque Wounds: A Multimodal Analysis of Self-Injury Photographs on Flickr
Within this paper, I noticed that it was expressed that social media platforms were being used more often to visually create a personal representation of themselves, especially within self-harmers. Within the paper is was said that there was many works on the text based structure on self harm but never on visual aspects such as photographs and videos. The text method of looking into self harm was expressed to create meaning whereas images did not. However pictures are said to speak for themselves but not all images can be correctly represented without context and text along with the image. By using these photo-sharing methods, you are self-expressing what you think or feel. If the images had text it would allow the viewer to read into the image more, which helps us to place some context.
The interesting part for me within this paper was how it expressed the different ways in which we can photograph. It was said that there were 3 ways.
First person – where they take the photograph as if it were through their eyes and how they see it.
Second person perspective – how someone would photograph you from the other way.
In the mirror – where you use your reflection to see what you are looking at.
All the photographs taken here are within this first person category so they are only showing the viewer what they want for them to see. Making the viewer look at them how they see themselves.
People Who Self Harm Will Do So Anyway: ‘A Report On The Role Of Social Media In Self-Harming’
This was a very interesting article about how social media platforms are being used as diary entries to help express people’s opinions and talk about their lives. However, people are beginning to think that what people post online is affecting those who read them and enables people to start self harming. They argue whether social media is to blame with the rise of self harming within teens because of the internet usage of teenagers in the 21st century.
Public Disorders: Self Harm in Social Media Communities
This article explores how the internet may play a role in encouraging people to self harm by what they are experiencing online, whether it be through the photographs or the cyberbullying that they are experiencing through these social platforms. It is apparent that it is worrying parents that what their children are witnessing online is encouraging them to see self harm as a normal thing to do. However, not all uses of the internet were negative, it was expressed that a few individuals used these negative social issues raised online to help themselves to look for communities to guide them through their difficult times. I do feel that this article is hitting my main points of interest for what I’d like to say, I just need to figure out how to apply this to the photographs that I have sourced.
It was also brought to my attention that certain people that may be susceptible to to self harm may see these images as damaging and give the wrong idea.
I found this interesting whilst doing my research because it seems that self harm has been acknowledged to have a negative response online. This is only about Instagram but whilst collecting my research from Tumblr it also presented itself to me that Tumblr had changed their policies to help stop people looking and posting certain things online.
Instagram changed their terms and conditions so that people couldn’t openly express themselves how they chose, which meant they were being conditioned to how society thinks they should be. It was expressed that any photographs that displayed anything to do with self harm, eating disorders or any type of mental health issue was to be withdrawn from the site. I feel that this in itself stop these issues being heard or even dealt with. But on the other hand, it also stops users from participating in the act of becoming mentally ill.
Online Identity Construction
This video was particularly interesting in how it explained what it meant to identify someone through their online profile. You could gain information quickly by scrolling through and seeing what they had posted or written about.
It was clear to me that online profiles play a big part in online identity. A part of the powerpoint said that representation that was authentic didn’t always mean it was true. Which could be said for the self harm images. Self harming is just a small factor into someone’s life and how they are.
The Real and Simulation According to Jean Baudrillard (in “Simulacra and Simulation”)
It was clear that from this we can sometimes decipher what is real and what is not. Jean Baudrillard uses the term ‘simulacrum’ this means the representation of someone or something. This idea of online identity is fake, so we cannot gain any meaning or truth behind what we are viewing online.
I found this article to be quite challenging to get my head around Baudrillard’s theory. Even though it holds some significance to my work I don’t feel that it would be a big part in my ongoing research.
Throughout my next few drafts, I didn’t make many changes it was just a few tweaks here and there so that the flow of the writing made sense. I tried to insert images into my writing so that I could look at them whilst I was writing about that particular section whether it be the amateur or professional photographs that I was engaging with.
Kerrie Caine 
