Super Highway 8 Opposite Opinion

Super Highway #: Opposite Opinion

This image of a country road in an unnamed bucolic town is problematic in its banality. Part of the photo’s banality is that it revels in non-specific images and values. The image shows a simple dirt road with a rustic wooden fence on the left side of photo. On either side of the photograph are non-descript trees. It’s impossible to determine what type of trees is depicted exactly. It’s impossible to determine where exactly the road is in the world. This image can be linked to websites and books all over the nation and internationally as well. Furthermore, there’s no way seeing where the road leads to: there’s no final destination at the end of the road. This gives a sense that the “journey” the spectator is on, is largely suspended in time, hanging in the balance with uncertainty. Hence the who and where that connect to the image are obscured and impossible to pinpoint for the purposes of this paper.

While some might argue that there is something sacred in capturing the simple serenity of this country road, there is also something deeply banal about it. This image can be found on Google images, surrounded by identical or almost identical images, used to manipulate the same emotions from the spectator. Wanting the spectator to feel calm, the photograph is captured in warm, almost dusky light. The grass is a vibrant green. The fence does not give an impression of protection or thwarting away potential intruders, instead it’s just a rustic accessory. The lack of a portrayed final destination means that the spectator can just imagine the most ideal place to him or her that the road leads to, essentially absolving the photographer of having to make any choice at all. In this sense, the photo is no longer a realistic portrayal of nature, but a manipulation. The photo seeks to manipulate the viewer to feel something specific, regardless of whether or not that is natural. In this manner the photograph is akin to certain wildlife photography and the artificial manipulations that occur in that field. “For nearly eighty years, filmed images of the natural world conformed to the classic documentary aesthetic: Such images were perceived to be an expansion of human vision, a means of entering into a world that was invisible to the human eye. Today, the impulse to document nature is augmented by the much higher stakes endeavor of ‘preserving’ animal life in a virtual world. Looking over the precipice of an earth depopulated of its wildlife, the goal of nature filmmakers becomes the capture of animals, at least in images, so that society and science have a record of what was lost” (Horak, 459). Hence, in this manic desire to capture a fleeting element of these animals, the captured images start to look forced and an artificiality begins to pervade this type of photography. Rather than get a slice of what existence is like for this animal, the photo in its entirety begins to feel like a snapshot of an empty void. This can occur when the manipulations take over the subject—which is exactly what is occurring in this photograph.

Another problem with the photograph is that it doesn’t challenge the viewer even remotely. It doesn’t require that the spectator need to think, process, consider, or even transcend one’s own opinions or previously conceived notions. In this manner, the picture is able to help the spectator engage in shallow emotions and other sensations. Hence one can compare it to the way that pornography functions: pornography just titillates the viewer, arousing and creating expectation. But pornography asks very little from the viewer (Schaschek, 29). The viewer has all shallow feelings and needs met by communing with the image, much like the experience of this photograph.

As the first paper discussed, this image is often found on websites that promote health and healing, new beginnings, freedom—such as with drug rehabilitation centers, doctor’s offices, hypnotherapy sessions. This is largely problematic because in order to achieve what these small businesses promise—liberation from bad habits and a transformation of self, the individual is going to need to dig a lot deeper than the shallow emotions and ideas presented here. One could argue that as a race, it’s our job to challenge ourselves—to become better, stronger, and more fearless, with higher standards of aesthetic value. This image of a non-descript road, manipulated to force some sense of comfort from within the individual is not useful or helpful, but reflects “the human need to image the banal and the trivial in our everyday lives in today\\\'s contemporary society and digital culture, our incestuous and inextricable bind with the visual needs more introspection and examination” (Ibrahim, 2015). Because without a close examination of this tendency, one will just enable more photography of the banal, rather than photography that excites, disturbs, provokes, and questions. Essentially, this photograph of the non-descript road, in the unknown town, in the unknown part of the country is comparable to a photo of a bunch of puppies or kittens sleeping: cute, and evokes shallow emotions, but doesn’t provide any real value when it comes to the needs of the human race.

Furthermore, it’s very possible that this photo will elicit anxiety in the spectator, without intending to do so, thus failing in its very basic objective to soothe and calm. As established, the photo’s biggest flaw is its lack of specificity, the clichés that it relies so heavily upon and its refusal to allow anyone to place it or identify it. Hence, by not showing a definitive destination at the end of the road, and refusing to even suggest a definitive destination, puts the spectator in a sort of limbo (Gross & Hen, 545). There could be a haunted house at the end of the road, or a mental institution, or a prison, or a host of other unsavory places. The refusal of the photograph to “meet the spectator halfway” and show what is lurking at the end of the road, can very easily stimulate a sense of anxiety, or even panic in some viewers. This is obviously the inverse of what the photographer wanted to achieve.

Moreover, one could argue that the usage of this image on so many sites and small business that promote positive change, healing and transformation, is just misguided. While these entities no doubt would like to stimulate a sense of calm or even empowerment for prospective clients, the heavy reliance on this image borders on deception. Most processes of transformation are difficult and take a tremendous amount of time and commitment (Kotter, 66). Showing an image of a soft and pretty path in the country is hardly an accurate metaphor for what the process will be like for the average person. The path of change and transformation is often treacherous, and deeply arduous. If these companies wanted to present their services with any accuracy, they should shown pictures of people scaling mountains or wading through swamps. Real change happens when people are ready to look deep within themselves and do what is difficult. Hence, this photo is hardly appropriate for many of the ways it is used.