This article was downloaded by: [New York University]

On: 20 April 2015, At: 09:06

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Visual Anthropology: Published in cooperation with the

Commission on Visual Anthropology
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gvan20

The visual essay: Affinities and divergences between

the social scientific and the social documentary modes
Luc Pauwels a
a
Department of Political and Social Science , University of Antwerp , Wiltijk, Belgium
Published online: 17 May 2010.

To cite this article: Luc Pauwels (1993) The visual essay: Affinities and divergences between the social scientific and the
social documentary modes, Visual Anthropology: Published in cooperation with the Commission on Visual Anthropology,
6:2, 199-210, DOI: 10.1080/08949468.1993.9966615
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08949468.1993.9966615

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the
authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not
be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis
shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and
other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation
to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to
anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Visual Anthropology, Vol. 6, pp. 199-210 ©1993 Harwood Academic Publishers GmbH Reprints
available directly from the publisher Printed in the United States of America Photocopying permitted by
license only

DISCUSSION

The Visual Essay: Affinities and Divergences

 between the Social Scientific and the Social
Documentary Modes

This article examines the visual essay as a special verbal/visual mode of expression that
is practised both by social scientists and social documentarians, although still on a very
limited scale. Examining some of their commonalities and differences sheds light on
the particularities of the scientific versus the social documentary approach more
generally. To conclude, a photo-essay from a social documentary photographer is

1
discussed, as it comes close to what could be termed a sociological approach. This
0

2
borderline application allows elaboration of some of the specifics of the visual essay as a

i
mode of visual anthropology/sociology.
r

0
THE SYNERGY OF WORD AND IMAGE
:

t
Typically a "visual essay" or "photo essay" is a combination of images and texts that
a

]
is built up to a whole according to some sort of rationale (or "theory"). Its major
y

s
strength resides in the synergy of the distinct forms of expression that are being
r

v
combined: images, words, layout and design.
i

U
The photo-essay puts higher demands on its producer than does a single

k
picture, a stand-alone text or a loosely related series of pictures. It presupposes a
r

Y
conceptualising of the whole. If the photographer is not at the same time doing the

w
writing and the layout then conflicts of vision are likely to arise, as many
e

N
photographers experienced when working for magazines such as Life, which since
[

y
its foundation in 1936 was for decades one of the most prominent promoters of the
b

d
photo-essay. Notwithstanding the fact that images can never be restricted to
e

d
serving one viewpoint or goal, but can always be applied for a variety of "stories", a
a
 o

l
well thought out and consistently developed verbal/visual whole in general will
n

w
result in more arresting and valuable products than an assembly of words and
o

D
images that were not developed in tandem.

Defining the visual essay as a combination of visual and verbal material could
easily become a catch-all category. However I prefer to limit this concept to verbal/
visual applications that combine words and images in such a way that these two
distinct forms of expression add to the vision or statement that is being provided,
each in their unique, complementary way. So the use of visuals as mere illustrations
of a verbal statement would not fit in this definition.
Compared to what could be called "systematic forms of visual data gathering"
whereby images often are treated as mere collections of raw data that need to be

199
200 DISCUSSION

transformed into more "convenient" (read quantitative) information (by counting

occurrences, measuring distances, making inventories, etc.), the visual essay is a
more "visually sophisticated" mode of visual anthropology/sociology. Within this
mode images are not considered an intermediate phase of the research process but
they form an integral part of the end product, exploring both the mimetic and
expressive potential of the camera-image and offering unmatched opportunity for
integrating theory and observation.

EXPRESSION IN THE SOCIAL DOCUMENTARY TRADITION

Those photographic traditions that are generally denoted with terms like "social",
"social documentary" or "documentary" offer a rich overview of the many unique
and often ambiguous capabilities of the camera image, challenging or reinforcing
existing institutions, serving the quest for "objective" records of society or exploit
ing the blind belief in its authenticity through minor to blunt forms of manipulation
(deception).
When trying to focus on the affinities and differences between the visual essay as
5

1
part of a social documentary or an anthropological/sociological approach, it soon
0

2
becomes clear that both terms of the comparison are problematic. Before further

r
investigating the sense and nonsense of using the labels "anthropological" or
p

A
"sociological" with respect to images, some attention should be paid to the

2
problems of delineating social and/or documentary imagery as distinct categories

0
of photographic and filmic production.
:

9
0
"Social photography" is often used in a very restricted sense, referring to those

a
kinds of image that depict and challenge the situations of socially deprived, or, in

y
one way or another, aggrieved groups of people. However, most definitions are
t

r
unclear about the criteria that are being used for attributing the quality "social" to
e

i
particular kinds of image production or their products. Many questions remain
n

U
unanswered. Does this "special" feature reside in the personal conviction or the

r
intention of the image producer, in the usefulness of the depicted situations to
o

Y
support a certain theory, or does the use of the description "social" rather depend

e
on the potential of the images to bring about change in the depicted situations, or
N

[
has it simply to do with a typical subject matter or a typical approach to it? Finally

b
one could ask whether the so-called "social" nature of an image is a visible and

e
inalienable quality?
d

a
The ambiguity with respect to using a term like "social" cannot be easily
o

n
overcome. As pictures always are variously interprétable they can serve various,
w

o
even conflicting, purposes. So their form and content can hardly be defined as
D

"social" in a limited sense. The disposition of the spectator also should not be
overlooked: his readiness to interpret the visual facts and the way they are
presented as a "social" comment or document (and not as an arbitrary, atypical or
staged event with little reference to "real" life). All this does not refute the fact that
images produced and used within a certain context can prove to be very powerful
at raising a certain awareness and stimulating social change.
Even the at first sight more neutral term "documentary photography" poses
problems when trying to refer to a distinct category of images or a specific
DISCUSSION 201

photographie practise. Every picture could, in a sense, be considered a "docu ment", a visual reflection of a particular spatio-
temporal event. Most of the photography that is commonly referred to as "documentary work" could just as well be termed
"social" in a broader sense. The Paris street scenes from Eugène Atget, which were originally sold as an aid to painters, can be
considered a rich social documentation of the early twentieth century metropolitan environment. No less remarkable is August
Sander's visual sampling of the German people, for which (though somewhat recklessly) the adjective "sociological" is often
being used. Contemporary forms of social and documentary photography to an impor tant extent coincide with types of
professional news gathering but, apart from those, they remain an endeavor of individuals and groups (e.g. community
photography) with various perspectives and strivings.
Documentary work is often placed in opposition to fictional productions (feature film, advertising, art). This viewpoint overlooks
the fact that in both so-called fictional and documentary work there is always an amount of "mimesis" and of "expression." Every
documentary effort is to some extent a fictional "construction" based on theory or less explicit beliefs, and making use of a
number of established
filmic means and narrative conventions. Traditionally documentarians preferred to
5

present their products as authentic reflections of reality. Opinion is growing that

0

there need be no contradiction between the "documentary" status and the use of
l

filmic means to construct meaning. The shift of focus from reality to the (inevita
A

ble) use of camera and editing techniques acknowledges the fact that there are
0

many ways to address an issue or a phenomenon with equal rights to claim a

6

certain amount of authenticity which forces us to re-examine our preconceptions

9

regarding fiction and reality.

t

While the influence of the social and documentary approach on the use of
y

imagery in anthropology/sociology can still be felt, applications within these

s

traditions are being more and more criticised because of their use of simplistic and
v

ill-defined theories that tend to foster stereotyping rather than offer subtle ac
U

counts of complex social phenomena. Also the implicit and explicit claims of
k

objectivity tied to this genre have often been (mis)used to cover up very tenden
Y

tious productions.
w

For these reasons some social scientists are not satisfied with the readily made
N

identification of their visual work with social documentary projects. Some social
y

documentary photographers are well aware of the unsophisticated approach of the

d

tradition they are working in. One of them, the Dutch social photographer Lex van
d

der Slot, asserts that social photography, in order to be understood, needs to

l

express itself in strong characterisations, thereby often using outdated concep

w

tualisations (e.g., "labor" is synonymous with "men in overalls"). According to van D

der Slot, this blocks the road to identification with the spectator, since the pictures contain recognisable symbols, but ones that no
longer belong to the reality of the spectator [van der Slot 1983:15-16].
This assessment may seem somewhat exaggerated, as the history of social documentary photography indeed shows great
examples of skillful and sophisti cated social documentary work, including photo-essays. Nevertheless it should be admitted that
these examples are rare and more of an exception than the rule.
202 DISCUSSION

SOCIAL VERSUS ANTHROPOLOGICAL/SOCIOLOGICAL

IMAGE PRODUCTION

Social documentary work is not ruled by an agreed set of norms; at most some
vague notions like "authenticity" or "witnessing the social reality" are being used,
but an explicit theoretical framework to support the "real life witness" quality of
this kind of work as well as a methodology to obtain it are lacking. The norms for
scientific work aren't crystal clear and unchallenged either, but in any case it
should be considered an issue of major importance, whereas with regard to social
documentary work there are in fact no real arguments to call the absence of clear
norms a weakness of the approach.
Insofar as sufficient insight into their production context can be obtained, the
social documentary essay and documentary work in general can often be a rich
source for anthropological/sociological study, revealing much about the social
aspects of the depicted situations, about the viewpoint of the producer, and about
the way the targeted audience is being approached.
What distinguishes so-called "anthropological/sociological" imagery from other
5

types of image primarily has to do with the question of how and in what context
1

images are being produced and used afterwards. Imagery produced in an

l

"anthropological/sociological" context should be the result of a specific informed

p

set of social scientific ideas and an explicit and inter-subjective method. Thereby
0

the anthropologist/sociologist either produces images himself or at least closely

6

directs and monitors their creation. All other images that for a variety of reasons are
0

being produced (family pictures, advertising, picture journalism . . .) could be

0

labelled "societal products" and as such they are a potential data source or subject
]

matter for research.

t

The scientific value of a particular image or a series of images is not an intrinsic

e

property of these visual products. Furthermore, and this may seem somewhat
n

paradoxical, the scientific value (or usefulness) of a particular picture cannot be

k

read from the picture itself, least of all from the isolated one. Value is tied to a
o

specific interest and to the process or global context of production.

w

For those reasons I think it makes more sense to speak about "anthropological/
e

sociological image production" than about "anthropological/sociological imagery"

y

as such (this is true in particular when referring uniquely to the visual part of a
d

product of anthropological/sociological research, like the pictures for a visual

d

essay). Also in general it is better to think in terms of degrees of "scientific

o

practicability" than to speak about absolute categories like "scientific" and "non
w

scientific".
D

While few will subscribe to the view that a camera automatically records what is
useful for the researcher, nothing much has been done about a methodology to
obtain researchable data or ways to bring about a "scientifically informed" state
ment in film. What the nature of "scientific" visuals should be is an issue that gives
rise to fierce discontent though little constructive discussion.
The value of imagery that is explicitly produced for social scientific purposes is
dependent on a great number of choices, influences and circumstances during the
set-up, the data gathering and the processing.
DISCUSSION 203

Some general recommendations have been formulated by a number of authors that

give a rough idea of what "scientific" production of imagery involves.

1. Exploring society with the camera requires thorough preparation and considera
tions with regard to the field and the subjects involved. An explicit and appropriate
theory should steer the image production and processing in all of its stages. The
researcher not only needs to have a sufficient degree of technical knowledge,
allowing him to produce images with enough visual detail, but he should also be
aware of the conventions regarding the medium he is using, and consequently of
the perceptual cultures of the academic or non-academic audience he intends to
address.
2. Almost every choice that is being made has epistemological implications. The
researcher should be fully aware of these and should be able and willing to
substantiate meticulously his decisions of a theoretical, methodological or technical
nature in his reporting (integrated in the final verbal/visual product or as an
addendum to it).
3. He should also have a keen eye for unintended and uncontrolled influences on the
5
researched situation that could be attributed to his and/or the camera's
1

0
presence (or to some other "limiting" or "disturbing" instances; e.g., forms of
2

l
censorship before, during or after the shooting). Further, he should evaluate
i

p
how and to what extent these influences and instances affect what is consid
A

0
ered "normal" or at least what could be considered acceptable within the set
2

6
up of his research, and be knowledgeable of techniques to reduce the
0

9
occurrence of various forms of obtrusiveness (or find ways to take advantage
0

creatively of them).
 t

]
4. Equally important is that the researcher make every effort to situate the subject
y

s
of his research in its broader context, both visually and verbally (which
r

v
involves more than the use of wide-angle lenses). Significant contextual
i

n
information should as much as possible be part of the visual product itself, but
U

k
the relative meaning of the visual product (which may or may not contain
r

Y
verbal types of information) will also need to be related to, and confronted

w
with, information obtained through other sources and techniques.
e

Much of this was covered many years ago by Karl Header [1976] in an effort to
y

systematize the components that add up to what he termed the "ethnographic

d

d
ness" of a film. His study has been criticised as being a prescription of a very
a

o
restricted set of techniques and approaches with the implication that all others are
l

w
excluded, but few have managed to come up with a more lucid account of the
o

subject. While it is clear that Heider favors a particular mode of scientific produc D

tion I doubt it was his intention to "rule out almost all stylistic means of articulating
theoretical ideas", as Biella puts it [1988:49]. If it were the case I too would fiercely
challenge this implication, but still regard his contribution as a constructive basis for
further reflection about a methodology for the production or evaluation of visuals for
social scientific purposes.
While the guidelines mentioned above in general are sound research principles
which will be helpful for quite a number of situations or approaches, they do not at
all assure the creation of intellectually stimulating products that will capitalise on
204 DISCUSSION

the real strengths of the visual (combined with other means of expression); nor can
they be used as exclusive criteria to evaluate the "scientific" value of a particular
production (be it moving pictures or a series of static image/word combinations).
The theoretical and methodological discussion about the scientific production of
imagery surely needs to be broadened to include approaches that are more
sophisticated with regard to the use of filmic language and that do not slavishly
mimic a classic documentary style.
Without our ever being able to set forth a set of rigid rules or a recipe that
automatically assures the delivery of a flawless "scientific" product it should be
possible to make a start with drawing the contours of what scientific modes (how
varied in form) of word/image combinations involve. Such a body of knowledge
 should be considered a non-restrictive basis for vivid and constructive discussion.

"THE BURDEN OF EXISTENCE", A BORDERLINE VISUAL ESSAY

A particularly interesting visual study that positions itself on the borderline of

5
social (documentary) and anthropological/sociological work is the photo book and
1

2
exhibition entitled Bezwaard Bestaan, foto's en verholen over verstandelijk gehandicapten

r
("The Burden of Existence, photographs and stories about mentally retarded").
p

A
With this work the Dutch photographer Marrie Bot challenges with much rigor

2
stereotypes with respect to mental deficiency. Hundreds of pictures and verbal

6
testimonials underpin the central statement that "the" mentally deficient is a non
0

9
existing category and that such an obstinate generalisation has severe conse
0

a
quences for the acceptance and integration of the people involved.

y
Although "The Burden of Existence" was made without explicit scientific ambi
t

s
tions (and thus should be regarded primarily as a "societal product"), it has a
r

v
number of qualities which would suit a well conducted visual social science study.
i

U
As such it may illustrate both the quality of some recent social documentary work

k
and a number of critical aspects of good anthropological/sociological work.
r

w
• Theoretical grounding and broad contextualization. The author has spent quite some
e

N
time doing "prior ethnography" which resulted in an insightful historical and
[

y
orthopedagogical introduction, offering a useful background for understanding
b

d
and integrating the viewpoints of the management of the institutions, the
e

d
assistants, the parents, the family members, the (minor) mentally deficient, as
a

o
l
well as the more implicit viewpoints of the author who had full control over
n

w
image production and processing, over the texts and even over the graphic
o

D
design of the whole.

• The complementary use of verbal and visual means. The images offer a tangible context
for the verbal information and testimonials. Also they contain specific data about
the complex reality of the mentally handicapped that cannot be verbalised (joy,
sorrow, relationships with parents, remedial educators and companions, their
areas of interest and their aspirations, the arrangement of their physical environ
ment), both by details in isolation and through the interrelations between the
visual elements. The author clearly is aware of the specific strengths and
weaknesses of words and images whereas many photographers still proclaim
that "pictures should speak for themselves".
DISCUSSION 205

• Acceptance in the field and ethical standards. Bot's study is characterised by a high degree
of respect and trust between the photographer/interviewer and the
subjects/respondents (which in some cases the pictures clearly indicate). These
visual and verbal records could only be obtained through a gradual development of
relations in the field. The rights of the people involved were carefully looked after
at all stages of the project, which took about eleven years to complete. Not only
was prior consent obtained for the photography, but all texts and pictures were
discussed with all parties concerned. Very strict arrangements were made
regarding future uses of the verbal and visual data.1
• Visual technique and visual language. The author adopted a very sober, functional
style. No dramatic effects were sought for their own sake; rather the pictures resulted
from a skillful and sensitive interaction with what was happening. The meaning and
impact of the images are primarily disclosed and reinforced by the broad context of
the verbal and the visual. Bot's pictures are seldom photo graphic masterpieces in a
purely esthetic sense.
Apart from being a varied data source, "The Burden of Existence" is a nuanced
plea for better understanding and integration of these kinds of people without ever
5

1
becoming a verbal or visual pamphlet about a social injustice or abuse. This study
0

2
offers the spectator/reader a theoretically grounded field experience which cannot

r
be acquired by consecutively reading about the subject, looking at a series of
p

A
pictures about it, or even spending some time in an institution for the mentally

2
deficient. "The Burden of Existence" is not a textbook illustrated with pictures, nor

0
a photo book with anecdotal captions. Its "holistic" impact is a powerful argument
:

0
in favor of the visual essay: an argument that cannot so easily be made with words

a
alone.
]

v
IDENTITY AND EXCHANGE
i

It is clear that social and cultural scientists and social documentary photographers
k

can benefit from looking at each other's theoretical approaches and/or expressive o

means. Especially in the field of the visual essay or photo-essay, where several

e
"languages" are to be skillfully combined, this possibility of mutual fertilisation
N

[
becomes apparent, opening up new ways of expression for both types of practi

b
tioner.

e
When confronted with work like that of Bot, the question of whether it should be
d

o
termed an anthropological/sociological or social documentary essay seems to
l

n
become insignificant and the answer certainly has little to do with its intrinsic
w

o
value. However, although it may prove impossible to draw a strict line between
D

these two ways of approaching the world and acknowledging their potential for
mutual enrichment, it would be unwise to remain blind to some essential differ
ences.
Social documentary work (based on static or moving pictures) or other products
that are not explicitly intended to contribute to science may depict an aspect of
reality as thoughtful and nuanced as is demanded from a sociological or anthro
pological production. However scientific integrity is no primary criterion for the
documentary image producer. Visual productions that claim to be sociological or
anthropological should be able to meet the demands that are being posed to other
206 DISCUSSION

types of scientific labor, though these demands should at some points be custom
ised to account for the specifics of the visual.
The terms "social documentary" or "anthropological/sociological" therefore
should not be used as purely arbitrary labels since in the end they have to do with
the ambitions, the functionality, and the purpose of a particular piece of work, and
thus with the criteria by which it should be evaluated.
The visual essay is far from being a simple and unchallenged or widely accepted
scientific practice. This should not be a surprise since to date the large majority of
scientists still consider the use of imagery incompatible with the true nature of
science. Doubts about the scientific status of an unorthodox practice like the visual
essay are further boosted by its apparent similarity, both in format and in subject
matter, with the essay practice of other "societal" image producers (e.g., social
documentarians and photojournalists who also produce "illustrated stories"). Also
 it should be admitted that visual anthropologists and sociologists have not been so
successful in advocating and clarifying the visual essay's proper strengths, and
many of their word/image applications don't succeed in meeting their (verbal)
proclamations.

5
However much a controversial approach, for those that have developed a more
1

2
subtle way of looking at the visual world and its recorded reflections, the visual

i
essay is a most refreshing scientific venture that needs to be further explored,
r

A
through the production of ground-breaking essays, but also by reflection on and

2
discussion about its theoretical and methodological possibilities and limitations.

DISCUSSION 207
D

A selection of pictures and texts from Bezwaard Bestaan ("The Burden of Existence") by Marrie Bot, 1988
(The texts were translated from Dutch which inevitably means a loss of information with regard to the specific ways the respondents verbalized their thoughts and
feelings.)
5

Group leader: When we go outside the institution with our boys we are always being stared at. You get used to
v

that. I was never embarrassed with them, because in some way we regarded them as our own children, so close were
U

we to them. Sometimes we did get annoyed by the staring and by comments like: "look, how pitiful" or "you can't
k

come anywhere nowadays without encountering these lunatics". On the other hand I always realized that we, with o

our boys, were indeed very conspicuous. They walk rather awkwardly, they make unexpected gestures and noises
w

and sometimes they even start screaming. No wonder people look at them. When I'm confronted with someone who e

deviates, like a punk or such, I also stare. But often we tend to forget our own reactions when we get agitated by
N

other peoples' reactions. IBot 1988: photo, p. 73; original Dutch text, p. 75]
y

208 DISCUSSION
5

Annet—the parents: He: She's got periods when she's mad about one specific hobby, and she then can be very

0
forceful. She then only wants that and nothing else. As an infant she always wanted to sit in the wall unit to listen
:

0
to the radio; for a long time she had a police cap she would never take off her head. Now she is a Michael Jackson fan.

a
Each day after school she sits on the couch with her walkman, preferably with the TV set tuned in to Sky Channel,

y
and alternates with playing tapes with street organ music. Then she mimicks an organ puppet with two drumsticks.
t

i
We let her do this, she enjoys it, and it always passes over and new things come up. [Bot 1988: photo and original
s

e
text, p. 110]
v

DISCUSSION 209
D

to
5

/oo/> a«d Corrie: He: We are living here together for a year now and soon we are going to get married. Corrie is 35
2

years old and lam 40. It didn't all go that smooth, but we finally made it (. . .). When we both attended the dance
6

course, I fell in love with her. We wanted to be together, and so she came to live in the same group home (Community 9

based residence for adults) as 1 did. We said: we want to live together. Then we placed our beds in my room and lived
t

in her room. We also got engaged. The management started working with us so that we would be ready for living

independently. We had to learn to do everything by ourselves: do the cooking, the laundry, the shopping. Towards
y

the end that resulted in disgruntled faces with some of the other residents. (. . .)In the beginning there was much
s

too much guidance. We didn't like that. Everybody was meddling in our lives. It has always been that way, at home
v

it was just the same. If my mother were still alive, 1 would never have left home and I most probably never would
n

have been able to marry. I then should have stayed with her. She always said "You are my problem child as long as 1

live". Maybe that was so, but because ofthat 1 was never allowed to do something. Not go for a swim or such. Well, 1 o

now have three swimming diplomas and I live on my own now. You simply have to do it yourself. (. . .)We want to
Y

stay here for awhile, but in the long run I want to have a little house with a small garden. We have achieved what we
w

wanted to achieve, and that's just fine. [Bot 1988: 209]

N

NOTE
d

1. The photographs in this article may not be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, w

microfilm or any other means without written permission from the author, Marrie Bot, D

Rotterdam.

REFERENCES
Biella, Peter
1988 Against Reductionism and Idealist Self-Reflexivity: The Ilparakuyo Maasai Film Project. In Anthropological Filmmaking: anthropological
perspectives on the production of film and video for general public audiences. Jack Rollwagen, ed. Pp. 47-72. Chur/ London: Harwood Academic
Publishers.
210 DISCUSSION

Bot, Marrie
1989 Bezwaard Bestaan: foto's en verhalen over verstandelijk gehandicapten. Rotterdam. Third
printing September 1989, (first printing 1988).
Heider, Karl
1976 Ethnographic Film. Austin/London: University of Texas Press.
Pauwels, Luc
1991 Visuele Sociologie? De Camera en de Verbeelding van Wetenschap en Samenleving. Amster
dam: Ph.D. dissertation, Social-Cultural Science Dept., Free University of Amster
dam.
Ruby, Jay
1986 The Future of Anthropological Cinema-A Modest Polemic. Visual Sociology Review,
2:9-13.
Slot, Lex van der
1983 Sociale fotografie ter discussie, de cliché's. Skrien, no. 127:14-17.
Wagner, Jon C.
1979 Images of Information: Still Photography in the Social Sciences. Beverly Hills/London:
Sage.
Luc Pauwels

Department of Political and Social Science

5

University of Antwerp
2

Wiltijk, Belgium
r