在地形基础和新殖民主义愿望之间:1902年智利-阿根廷边界案例中调查摄影的“最佳实践”

IF 0.2 4区 艺术学 0 ART
Matthias Johannes Pfaller Schmid
{"title":"在地形基础和新殖民主义愿望之间:1902年智利-阿根廷边界案例中调查摄影的“最佳实践”","authors":"Matthias Johannes Pfaller Schmid","doi":"10.1080/17514517.2022.2126160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article investigates photography as a tool of neocolonial territorial politics in the Cordillera of the Andes Boundary Case of 1902, in which Chile and Argentina re-negotiated their border in Patagonia. To avoid an impending war, they brought their case to the English King for arbitration. Scientists from all three sides compiled reports, maps and notably, photographs, providing proof for each country’s interpretation of the border. In a first step, I argue that the images of the hitherto uncharted land posed a challenge to the understanding of this land as national territory, having first to undergo a process of overcoming the uncertainty of empty space and acquiring scientific meaning during the arbitration. In a second step, I trace how the photographs and the case itself were resignified as expressions of neocolonial modernity and nation building. In this process, the previously limited capacity of photography was extended to support legal claims. The analysis of the development of the visual material in the trilateral negotiation distills the key factors that made the survey photography of this case successful in terms of contemporary imperial standards, or in other words, an example of ‘best practice’.","PeriodicalId":42826,"journal":{"name":"Photography and Culture","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Between Topographical Groundwork and Neocolonial Aspirations: The ‘Best Practice’ of Survey Photography in the Chilean-Argentine Boundary Case of 1902\",\"authors\":\"Matthias Johannes Pfaller Schmid\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17514517.2022.2126160\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article investigates photography as a tool of neocolonial territorial politics in the Cordillera of the Andes Boundary Case of 1902, in which Chile and Argentina re-negotiated their border in Patagonia. To avoid an impending war, they brought their case to the English King for arbitration. Scientists from all three sides compiled reports, maps and notably, photographs, providing proof for each country’s interpretation of the border. In a first step, I argue that the images of the hitherto uncharted land posed a challenge to the understanding of this land as national territory, having first to undergo a process of overcoming the uncertainty of empty space and acquiring scientific meaning during the arbitration. In a second step, I trace how the photographs and the case itself were resignified as expressions of neocolonial modernity and nation building. In this process, the previously limited capacity of photography was extended to support legal claims. The analysis of the development of the visual material in the trilateral negotiation distills the key factors that made the survey photography of this case successful in terms of contemporary imperial standards, or in other words, an example of ‘best practice’.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42826,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Photography and Culture\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Photography and Culture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17514517.2022.2126160\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"艺术学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ART\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Photography and Culture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17514517.2022.2126160","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ART","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文考察了1902年智利和阿根廷重新谈判巴塔哥尼亚边界的安第斯山脉边界案中,摄影作为新殖民主义领土政治的工具。为了避免一场迫在眉睫的战争,他们将案件提交英国国王仲裁。来自三方的科学家编写了报告、地图,尤其是照片,为各自国家对边界的解释提供了证据。首先,我认为,迄今为止未知的土地的图像对将这片土地理解为国家领土提出了挑战,必须首先经历一个克服空白空间的不确定性并在仲裁期间获得科学意义的过程。在第二步中,我追溯了这些照片和案件本身是如何被重新定义为新殖民主义现代性和国家建设的表达的。在这个过程中,以前有限的摄影能力被扩展到支持法律索赔。对三边谈判中视觉材料发展的分析提炼出了使本案调查摄影成功的关键因素,就当代帝国标准而言,换句话说,这是一个“最佳实践”的例子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Between Topographical Groundwork and Neocolonial Aspirations: The ‘Best Practice’ of Survey Photography in the Chilean-Argentine Boundary Case of 1902
Abstract This article investigates photography as a tool of neocolonial territorial politics in the Cordillera of the Andes Boundary Case of 1902, in which Chile and Argentina re-negotiated their border in Patagonia. To avoid an impending war, they brought their case to the English King for arbitration. Scientists from all three sides compiled reports, maps and notably, photographs, providing proof for each country’s interpretation of the border. In a first step, I argue that the images of the hitherto uncharted land posed a challenge to the understanding of this land as national territory, having first to undergo a process of overcoming the uncertainty of empty space and acquiring scientific meaning during the arbitration. In a second step, I trace how the photographs and the case itself were resignified as expressions of neocolonial modernity and nation building. In this process, the previously limited capacity of photography was extended to support legal claims. The analysis of the development of the visual material in the trilateral negotiation distills the key factors that made the survey photography of this case successful in terms of contemporary imperial standards, or in other words, an example of ‘best practice’.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
33.30%
发文量
22
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信