Chapter 4: Nature of Art

     "Not only can art simplify in order to show what matters, but it can also often show us things previously unseen; art shows us more." (Leslie 36) Was the first quote that stuck out to me. This quote however is not necessarily true. Sure, in the most honest and wide range sense can art show the bigger picture, but artist also have the ability to crop out and filter unwanted things from their works, thus displaying a false truth. The use of selectively documenting specific aspects of something in general can be seen as untruthful, or deceitful. There is an attempt to hide something, to write a specific narrative, even without the photographer being conscious about it sometimes.

   "Art persuades, in part, by evoking emotions and feelings. The emotional impact of art can influence and communicate just as effectively as spoken, elucidated ideas." (Leslie 39) This quote, I agree with entirely. It's sort of like racing a car with music on, changing how aggressive you may be with throttle inputs based on the intensity of the music. Any form of art can change your emotion on a certain idea or topic, solely on the emotion it brings the viewer. Political cartoons convince viewers to dislike the opposition, and those dog shelter ads make you feel bad into donating to them. I suppose those could be more considered media instead of art, but a piece of art can do the same thing.

    "Documentarists always knew that some manipulation was necessary in order to make a point, however much they denied it." (Leslie 44) This refers to what I'd stated above. These documentary photographers need to manipulate a story. It's merely impossible to display an entire scenario in all it's details in a matter of a few photos. There is always a side to be supporting, a story to be conveying (regardless of whether or not that story is true, or displayed accurate) and a narrative to be writing about someone, or something based on the viewpoint of the photographer themselves, or the organization commissioning them. So that begs the question: Is there such thing as factual photography? I'd still argue yes. It is possible to capture just what is going on without any context, but even still I feel like naturally we choose a side to take, even with little to no context.