Vision of the past

As I study the photos (Gordon parks, /American Gothic, 1942) and (Rea
Tajiri/still) from history and memory, 1991). They are eerily the same. Even though the picture and video, are of three different people I am still drawn to the similarities that they both have. The first evidence I can draw you to, is that both of the authors chose to use black and white versus using color. Maybe the choice of not using color is to make a more dramatic statement. There is nothing happening in the photos but you are drawn to stare and to try to get an understanding of why the photographer would use these particular people for the shots. Obviously the people are posed in a ridged state, not smiling and basically just staring straight ahead.
In the (Gordon Parks, photo) above, the lady is situated in front of a flag. It is a black lady, standing behind a mop and a broom with a vertical American flag as a backdrop. The lower half of the flag is faded for visual effects, basically nothing is happening in the picture, other than it might be making a point about our history. Possibly the time when black Americans boycotted busses and domesticated workers had to walk to walk to suffer the point about equal rights. The female does not look like she has received her American dream even if she were to smile. As you compare the photos they are similar in look, but different in concept. The use of race is very evident in pictures, a black in (Gordon Parks) and Asian in (Rea Tairi).
In viewing the video (Rea Tairi), the black and white imagery gives off the concept that there American dream has not been achieved yet either, and the still is from 19191. I feel the photographer chose the black and white format and dull lighting for a more visual effect. The woman is standing as if to say this is my family I stand behind him here in America. We are here and you have to deal with our presence the flag is to make a more dramatic effect to bring the point home. Since the picture was taken in the forties, I feel the still would represent a different type of viewing. You would think they were in an interment camp and were staged in front of the flag for more of a political statement. Even if you don’t have a clear understanding f history or race in the media, some can still identity with the characters. I work as a domestic, and if had to be shot to symboling what I do for a living, I would do the same thing as to be shot in black and white for a more dramatic flair.
From the (course reader pg 11.) Richard Dryer states, “Racial imergy is central to the organization of the world. At what cost regions and countries export their goods, who’s voices are listened to at international gatherings, who bombs and is bombed, who gets the jobs, housing, access to health care and education, what cultural activities are subsidized and sold, in what terms they are validated. These are largely inextricable from racial imagery.” I agree with this author. Every picture movie or still, you will see with a racial eye. You can’t help, if you are a non-white, you might wonder why there are not enough people of color or why there are no people of color. Most of the time you probably wouldn’t care what race, just mix it up a little bit sometimes.
Every thing in life is not just about white any more. Viewers make meanings (chapter 2,pg 49 Sturken and Cartwright)
Images generate meanings, yet the meanings of a work of art, photograph or a media text do not strictly speaking, lie in the work itself, where they were placed by the producer waiting on viewers to find them.

(1) Richard Dryer, (”On the matter of whitness”) course reader/Milwaukee, Professor Greene, 2009
(2) Martha Sturken/Lisa Cartwright,” viewers make a meaning” Practices of looking”, Sturken, Cartwright second edition, 2009,pg49