著者

小倉 健太郎

出版者

成城大学

雑誌

成城美学美術史 (ISSN:13405861)

巻号頁・発行日

no.19, pp.63-81, 2013-03

---

American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914) categorized the various classes of signs, one of which is the index. Peirce insists that photographs "belong to the second class of signs, those by physical connection." In other words, photographs belong to the index. In the 1970s, American art critic Rosalind Krauss (b. 1941) introduced Peirce's idea about photographs in an article. Since then, this idea has resulted in many arguments among photography critics. Until now, these arguments have fallen into a blind alley. It appears as though the term "index" is useless in describing the twenty-first century notions about photography. However, is Peirce's idea true? In this article, I contend that the index is still relevant in the digital age. According to Peirce, the fact that a photograph "is known to be the effect of the radiations from the object renders it an index." Therefore, the important factor necessary for a photograph to function as an index is that, as Jean-Marie Schaeffer (b. 1953) said, "We know that it is a photograph and know what this fact entails." According to this knowledge, a photograph functions as an index. In the digital age, the function of a photograph as an index is fading. There are two reasons for this. First, in the digital age, the flood of images prevents our efforts to reach the origin of the images. Second, CGI (Computer Generated Image) is indistinguishable from the photographic image, and we know that these CGIs are widely used. Thus, in the digital age, we may not be able to distinguish that it is a photograph.American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914) categorized the various classes of signs, one of which is the index. Peirce insists that photographs "belong to the second class of signs, those by physical connection." In other words, photographs belong to the index. In the 1970s, American art critic Rosalind Krauss (b. 1941) introduced Peirce's idea about photographs in an article. Since then, this idea has resulted in many arguments among photography critics. Until now, these arguments have fallen into a blind alley. It appears as though the term "index" is useless in describing the twenty-first century notions about photography. However, is Peirce's idea true? In this article, I contend that the index is still relevant in the digital age. According to Peirce, the fact that a photograph "is known to be the effect of the radiations from the object renders it an index." Therefore, the important factor necessary for a photograph to function as an index is that, as Jean-Marie Schaeffer (b. 1953) said, "We know that it is a photograph and know what this fact entails." According to this knowledge, a photograph functions as an index. In the digital age, the function of a photograph as an index is fading. There are two reasons for this. First, in the digital age, the flood of images prevents our efforts to reach the origin of the images. Second, CGI (Computer Generated Image) is indistinguishable from the photographic image, and we know that these CGIs are widely used. Thus, in the digital age, we may not be able to distinguish that it is a photograph.