'Knowledge of a phenomenal world begins with the excited condition of the retina and develops according to the constitution of this organ. the posing of external objects, as well as concept of shape, extension, solidity come only after this founding experience.' (Crary, 74)

This quote from Jonathan Crary embodies the new, or modern, scientific theory of how sight works. The idea that the eye constitutes the image, and that perhaps the the image is not an image of the eye cannot registered produces a lot of related thought. If it is us, as human beings, as observers who create the image, then how accurate is what we see? Does what people see differ despite the object being the same? These questions open us up to a whole realm of subjectivity that leaves the observer in the ruling seat. The ruling seat; the position of control over what we see, the ability to question what we see, this seems to be what makes an observer modern.

Crary goes on to say that the camera obscura model becomes redundant when we consider the modern observer. We do not simply project an image, we engage with it before we see it. Crary also states that the new observer constructs his 'real world' with the absence of 'referentiality' (Crary, 91). However, I find this to be contradictory. In order for a modern observer to engage in a way that is 'modern' is to bring his modern sensibilities, his modern repertoire to the subject that he is observing. But if it is the case that to be modern in our methods of observation we must be free of an influenced repertoire then no modern observer could ever exist. To be told to 'think freely' is just another social constraint.

Comment on this page