PANOPTICON AS COLONIAL GAZE: A STUDY OF THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE NAGAS IN CHRISTOPHER VON FÜRER-HAIMENDORF’S COLLECTION

Imchasenla Longchar

Abstract


In the colonial era, the act of photographing echoes ideas of panopticism. In this essay, the metaphor of panoptical gaze is applied to refer to a typology of images that characterised early anthropological and colonial form of photography. Many images from the colonial era do, after all, portray colonised subjects in a way which is objectifying, decontextualising or simply exoticising (and even eroticising). Therefore, using Michel Foucault’s discussion surrounding panopticism, this essay examines the relationship between photographic works that use the camera as a panoptical device and how the ethnography fieldwork symbolises a panoptical space during the colonial period.  To demonstrate and to challenge the ideas relating to panopticism, a critical study of Christopher von Fürer-haimendorf’s photographs of the Nagas of the Northeast India has been attempted and studied how the Nagas are represented through the lens. This essay also aims to encourage a critical attitude on the part of readers to the historical interaction of anthropology, photography and colonial administration.


Keywords


Panopticon, Ethnography, Photography, Representation, Rewriting, Nagas.

References


Barthes R. (2000). “Camera Lucida”, Vintage, London, p.4.

Bhabha H. (1994). “The Location of Culture”, Routledge, London.

Bloustein G. (2003). “Introduction. envisioning ethnography—exploring the meanings of the visual in research,” Social Analysis, Vol.47(3), p.2.

Channa SM. (1992). “Nagaland: Contemporary Ethnography”, Cosmo Publications, New Delhi, p.5.

Bourdieu P, and Wacquant L. (2002). “An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology”, Polity Press, Cambridge, p.167.

Clifford J, and Marcus GE. (1986). “Writing Culture: the Poetics and Politics of Ethnography”, University of California Press, Berkeley.

Collier J, and Collier M. (1986). “Visual Anthropology: Photography as Research Method”, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Das D. (2014). “The Construction and Institutional of Ethnicity: Anthropology, Photography and the Nagas,” The South Asianist: Journal of South Asian Studies, Vol.3(1), p.41.

Foucault M. (1977). “Discipline and Punish: The birth of the prison”, Pantheon Books, New York.

Goodacre M. (nd). “Anthropology, Photography and the Problem of Textual Framing”, available online: http://www.academia.edu/3602301/Anthropology_Photography_and_the_Problems_of_Textual_Framing

Green D. (1984). “Classified Subjects: Photography and Anthropology: The Technology of Power,” Ten, Vol.8(14), p.31.

Lewis LA. (2004). “Modesty and Modernity: Photography, Race, and Representation on Mexico’s Costa Chica (Guerrero),” Identities Global Studies in Culture and Power, Vol.11(4), p.491.

Longkumer A. (2015). “As our ancestors once lived: Representation, Performance, and Constructing a National Culture amongst the Nagas of India,” Himalaya, the Journal of the Association for Nepal and Himalayan Studies, Vol.35(1), pp.52-53.

Lotha A. (2007). “History of Naga Anthropology (1832-1947)”, Abraham Lotha for Chumpo Museum, Nagaland, p.4.

Mabry H. (2014). “Photography, Colonialism and Racism”, International Affairs Review, available online: https://www.usfca.edu/sites/default/files/arts_and_sciences/international_studies/photography_colonialism_and_racism_-_university_of_san_francisco_usf.pdf.

Maxwell A. (2008). “Picture Imperfect: Photography and Eugenics 1870–1940”, Sussex Academic Press, Portland, OR.

Mirsa PK. (2003). “J.H. Hutton and the North-East,” in Subba TB, and Ghosh GC. (ed.). “The Anthropology of North- East India”, Orient Longman Private Limited, New Delhi, p.50.

Niranjana T. (1995). “Siting Translation”, Orient Longman Ltd., Hyderabad, p.82.

Ortega M. (2013). “Photographic Representation of Racialized Bodies: Afro-Mexicans, the Visible, and the Invisible”, Critical Philosophy of Race, Vol.1(2), p.164.

Ryan JR. (1998). “Picturing Empire: Photography and the Visualization of the British Empire”, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, p.1.

Soukup M. (2014). “Photography and Drawing in Anthropology,” Slovak Ethnology, Vol.4(62), p.542.

Stockhausen AV. (2014). “Imagining The Nagas”, Arnoldsche Art Publishers, Vienna, p.145.

Vokes R. (2018). “Photography, exhibitions and embodied futures in colonial Uganda, 1908–1960,” Visual Studies, Vol.33(1), p.12.

• BIBLIOGRAPHY

o Atkin L. (2016). “Photography in relation to the Panopticon: An examination of Sophie Calle’s‘Suite Venitienne’ and Kohei Yoshiyuki’s The Park. From the series “The Park” by Yoshiyuki 1971.

o Barthes R. (1977). “The Rhetoric of the Image.” in Stephen Heath (ed.) “Image Music Text”, Fortuna Press, London, pp.32-51.

o Bourdieu P. (1996). “Photography: A Middle-Brow Art Cambridge”, Polity Press, (First published 1965. This translation 1990).

o Farnell B. (2011). “Theorizing “The Body” in Visual Culture”, In Marcus Banks and Jay Ruby. (Eds.). “Visions of Culture: A History of Visual Anthropology”, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

o Feighery W. (2009). “Tourism, stock photography and surveillance: a Foucauldian interpretation,” Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, Vol.7(3), pp.161-178.

o Evans J, and Hall S. (1999). “Visual Culture: The Reader”, Sage, London.

o Pinney C. (2012). “Photography and Anthropology”, Reaktion Books, London (First Published 2011).

o Poole D. (2005). “An Excess of Description: Ethnography, Race, and Visual Technologies,” The Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol.34, pp.159–79.

o Tagg J. (1988). “The burden of representation: Essays on photographies and histories”, Macmillan, London.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Send mail to ijmss@ijmss.com with questions or comments about this web site. 

International Journal of Management and Social Sciences, All rights reserved.