Louise Lawler and Perception

In “Louise Lawler: Souvenir Memories,” Krauss discusses Lawler’s particular style of changing the viewer’s perspective by photographing art installations and introducing distorting lenses. This reminds me of the efforts by Levine where she focuses art on the viewer’s response and the photographer’s gaze by photographing the works of Evans. The obvious difference is that Levine’s works are nearly identical replicas of Evan’s while Lawler photographs other works in a new time and space. Both, however, directs the viewer to analyze the role of perspective by adding an additional layer of indexical distance between him and the actual event. To me, the effects of this extra distance in Lawler and Levine’s works are completely different. While Levine’s work invites the viewer to investigate the different meanings that might result from a feminine or masculine gaze, as Krauss suggests, Lawler’s indexical distortions are a reflection on workings of human memory. As the act of creating and retrieving a memory would distort an event, Lawler’s photographs distort their objects through the use of a distorting lens. Similarly, as each viewer might perceive the exact same event differently through his prejudices and focus, the same scene can be photographed differently if a different camera or lens is used. To me, this distortive aspect of memory is made even more significant due to the traditional view of photograph as evidence and proof. While an individual’s personal recollection of an event is often questioned based on his history, photographic evidence is almost always perceived as undisputable proof. Lawler’s photographs work against this notion by literally distorting their subjects, reminding viewers that the photograph can be an imperfect index. Thus, her work also adds a new dimension to the concept of the optical unconscious. In light of Lawler’s work, the optical unconscious is not just about the details which can be captured by the camera and missed by the unaided eye. It also includes details that can be added by the camera by the simple act of creating an index. These distortions are all the more fascinating as falsified images, through either camerawork or digital manipulation, are more commonplace than ever before.