Elkins, J

Just Looking

Elkins, J, (1996) "Just Looking" from Elkins, J, The Object Stares Back pp.17-45, US: Harcourt Inc

Staff and students of Nottingham Trent University are reminded that copyright subsists in this extract and
the work from which it was taken. This Digital Copy has been made under the terms of a CLA licence
which allows you to:

* access and download a copy;

* print out a copy;

Please note that this material is for use ONLY by students registered on the course of study as
stated in the section below. All other staff and students are only entitled to browse the material and
should not download and/or print out a copy.

This Digital Copy and any digital or printed copy supplied to or made by you under the terms of this
Licence are for use in connection with this Course of Study. You may retain such copies after the end of
the course, but strictly for your own personal use.

All copies (including electronic copies) shall include this Copyright Notice and shall be destroyed and/or
deleted if and when required by Nottingham Trent University.

Except as provided for by copyright law, no further copying, storage or distribution (including by e-mail)
is permitted without the consent of the copyright holder.

The author (which term includes artists and other visual creators) has moral rights in the work and neither
staff nor students may cause, or permit, the distortion, mutilation or other modification of the work, or any
other derogatory treatment of it, which would be prejudicial to the honour or reputation of the author.

This is a digital version of copyright material made under licence from the rightsholder, and its accuracy
cannot be guaranteed. Please refer to the original published edition.

Licensed for use for the course: "PHOT20115 - Critical and Cultural Practice in Photography"

Digitisation authorised by Lisa Warburton

ISN: 0156004976
These words bring to
mind the diagram of light
entering the eye. That
diagram that we have
become used to ‘seeing’,
which is now becoming a
overlay with the example
of the technical skill of a
lens. The crossover of
the two provide a link
between eye and lens.
“not more than one or two
minutes a day” - The exposure
of the eye?
“But vision, I think, is more like
the moments of anxious
squinting that the years of
effortless seeing” Is Elkins
suggesting that we are
constantly taking in energy that
we see in order to anticipate the
next moments. That anxiety is
achieved through the awareness
(visual awareness) of one
requirement to ‘see’
Photography is
fascinated with ‘the
moment’, and the death
of those moments. From
Camera Lucida to The
Death of An Author,
critical texts surround
themselves with the
moments that are lost.
Elkins states that
Light is not seeping
into our eyes, but is
forced into and
through our eyes.
Could you argue
that the act of
opening your eyes
is accepting the
light?
Elkins could be referring to a
philosophical term of ‘seeing’ or
’sight’ which in turn links itself to
religion and the ‘prophets sight’.
The ability to ‘see god’ etc.

Is the saleperson trained

in ‘looking’ for the
anticipation? Is that not
the role of photography?
To be aware of those
anticipated moments, to
be able to capture those
moments that you and
others look for, to then
photograph them

This idea of objects tugging at

us, prodding you and pulling
you to a direction. To buy into
and in a sense be a certain
person
 Elkins metaphorically
speaks of the objects as
if they’re talking/
whispering to him, but
also the objects are not
those of life, but stillness
and not of activeness
The idea of hunting is almost
primal, it suggests that the idea
of shopping is instinctive.

Elkins states that

‘looking’ is hunting, not
just shopping. But any
form of looking is
hunting, searching.

‘More like dreaming’ this

suggests that the ideas of
looking can be totally
involuntary, although you are
choosing to look, sometimes it
is so effortless that it could be
seen as involuntary?
 ‘Just Looking’ is both
hunting the world for
what you want, but also
the world hunting for you
focus, but then also
presenting the world like
a dream like state where
you float around gazing
at things

Elkins is unsure about why

‘love’ comes to mind when he
discusses looking, but love is
essentially looking. The love
with an object, or a person is all
in the same. Both are deemed
attractive, to the ‘looker’.

Love + ‘You are

always looking out’

All sense of looking is

directed, through some
meaningless meaning. There
is always a purpose for the
looking.
 The way Elkins describes the
act of looking reminds me of a
surveying drone, how is scans
everything, looking for anything
of use, all the time 24/7

Everything is the slight

reminder of the thoughts
that you have left un-
answered. This is the brain
making intertexual
references, from a cup to
water, to thrist. It is the
brain making the links.

Every ‘look’ is weighted with the

idea of ownership, or at least
some form of lust/love. The idea
that you’re ‘just looking’ isn’t true,
you are longing to want the
object, the person, or you are
rejecting the object/person. Of
course there is an in between,
nothing is that polar, but the areas
of grey are always bleak.
 Elkins suggests that the
moments of looking when
you aren’t looking for
anything in particular, are
like the moments of slight
break.
This could be link to the
moments when our view of the
blurry world as infants, comes
into focus. These breaks are
the reconnection to the world.

You aren’t relaxing when

you’re looking in a
gallery, although you
can be passive in the
objects, but you will
always be active in
looking at them.
You’re knowledge of an object,
or even an educated guess/
informed opinion of an object
will continuously altering the
way you look at something to
get some gratification out of it

If you have an invested

interest you body/mind
Elkins suggests that you cannot will push you to a
remain silent on the matter of response of some sort.
pictures, they want you to
respond and they want you to
discuss them. That it the purpose
of images, to invoke a reaction.

This states that

sometimes all we look
for is the sense of
mediocre interests, this
is appliable to the
success of dry boring
art.
 We understand the ease of
seeing, the minimal effort or
energy put into seeing,
however we constantly put
ourselves into others
mindsets. We try to scrutinse
the way we ‘look’ and see,
many will challenge
themselves to not be ignorant
This idea of categorising
a ‘look’ of an illness or a
type of person, is similar
to that of the study done
by a photographer who
collated his images of
criminals onto glass
slides, to then give the
‘look’ of a criminal.

Although this text is purely

scientific, you must be aware of
the text’s context. It was written
during the colonisation of North/
Central/West Africa, therefore
the french doctors would have
had opinionated views of the
‘eunuch’. This muddles the
scientific writing, making the fact
become blended with opinion.
Elkins suggests the diagnostics,
of the man is so impersonal that
The fantastical story
is removes us from his situation
that the doctors retell,
and makes us detached from the
is inputted in the
horrors
scientific research to
make the reader ‘feel’
something, but they
only use this to then
completely remove our
sense of ‘love’ when
looking at his image.

Elkins is suggesting the image

by itself is harmless, it invokes
the gentler side of ‘seeing’. This
is the side of looking that is
empathetic, is caring and loving. The words that are
linked with the image is
the aggressive side of
looking, the
researchers bias
opinions and moulded
scientific views
Seeing can be violent, seeing can alienate the man, they
be destructive. If the act of seeing ostracised him.
is done to reduce someones
nature, then the very act is
aggressive but also, then seeing
that act and doing nothing could
be as equally violent
 Our vanity doesn’t let
us advance on the way
we critique art and
photos of ourselves.

Elkins links the ideas

(explored by R.Barthes in
Camera Lucida) The Photo
captures an essence of life
in the film and the image.
An image has
developed throughout
time to capture the very
being of a person. A
single photograph can
be held against you as
a summery of you,
entirely.

A collection of images, you

could argue, is the presentation
of you from a time period. But
the ‘sitter’/‘viewer’ would attempt
to add all the images in the
series into a single picture of the The acidic, metal of the
sitter. Elkins argues, that each film is the coldness of a
snapshot would build on the photograph. The
last. opposite of a warm
human?
The very act of looking is pain,
but this is also relatable to
images. Some images are only
made to cause pain.
Would this pain be down
to the manner that the
Dr’s describe his
condition? Or would he
The image makes us relive the be ashamed of the very
event, it will call upon the nature of his condition
memories to make the
photograph come alive.

An image will bring the

moment back to life,
but these moments are
always filled with some
emotion, whether its
pain or lust, the image
will hark us back to
those emotions.

To see something is more

complex than just the science
behind ‘vision’, it is ‘seeing’
which is ‘more’.
 You will project your
desires on to the
world, and the images
you are seeing. You
will see what you want
to see?

Photography has been a gateway

to explore all desires, but these
desires are not ‘already
embedded within the image’ they
are projected onto the image, by
the individual?
 All images are stimuli
for an activation of
deeper feelings? But not
in the sense of pure
emotion, it can be as
slight as possession/lust

Elkins is suggesting that art

history does not in fact outwardly
tackle the issues of “gender
constructions” etc, but we see
our own theories within the art
history.
We are only interested in
our own lives, this is carried
“We become archeologists of our
through art. We will invest
desires”
our time and life into
exploring our own lives, to
use art as our means of
expression?

Elkins writes that the

Parisian Doctor has made
a bias and opinionated
report of the eunuch, that
the report is so removed
and so opinionated that art
history is as one the same.
It also removes itself from
the art and talks about what
IT sees.
 Elkins suggests that art is
an object, which implores
us to discuss it and to
interact with it. It is
seducing us at all times.

The metaphor of astronauts

being the most aware of all, for
they are trained to not think
about the unattainable when
they are so far away. This has a
beauty in it, as we look up
wanting to see more, they look
down wanting to have seen less.

Elkins discusses the very

inhuman nature of
scientifically writing
about every moment that
one sees.
“We are so deeply involved in
the world, so desperately
dependant on it, that we must
pretend that we have some
distance in order to go on at
all”

Elkins is suggesting that we

force ourselves to remove
ourselves from the world, we
think of ourselves as ‘higher’,
to then be above being at one.
The world is “our” world, when
we are in actuality one in the
same thing

Yellowstone National
Park - could this want
to be ‘on top’ of the
world be grounded in
the awareness of our
own insignificance? We
are determined to
make our mark?

This links back to the Parisian

Doctor, depending on the
context of your work, it will be
riddled with the opinions of the
society you are apart of.
 Elkins writes that the
eyes have developed, or
rather not developed, to
see everything. The ears
are selective, but the
eyes are scanning
always.

The setup of a sentence to then

instruct the readers how to
destruct their preconceived
opinions on the way we see
 Paintings have a
given importance, yes
they are historically
important etc. But we
do provide their
importance, we see
which images fit the
criteria and the
knowledge of the
society.

The Objects do not existed in

solidarity, they are all in effect
with one another. The object
you are exposed to will be in
discourse with the other object
you have seen. Our brain
makes links between the two.
 Elkins suggests that with
the images we have been
presented with
previously, it will spark
thoughts when viewing
the next image.

But with images that you

have previous seen, you
will always see the image
of Jesus.
Text