By Jena McGarey

Today, photography is most commonly used to capture moments and breathtaking sights that we eventually hang on our wall. After we hang the photograph, we step back and stare at the piece of art in admiration, not thinking too much about the root of photography. Photography has a long history of racism as Europeans were the inventors and distributors of photographs, therefore, they tell the stories. During colonization, Europeans would stage and take photographs of people of color from around the world and build narratives about them. This practice stemmed from mental institutions to diagnose and treat patients. Scientists would use photographs as evidence to diagnose people with mental illness. Photography is often used in science and law as evidence to prove a theory or prove that something exists. Photography in science is often something we overlook but when it comes to the wonders of space, photographs prove those phenomena. Or perhaps when one witnesses a crime and they see a suspect, the police have photographs of people with arrest records. Although the origin of using photography in science is racist and based on pseudoscience and not science itself, it is a useful tool. The essay, “The Body and the Archive” written by Allan Sekula, unpacks the racial division and the nonsensical science used to advance photography and how we use it today. 

In Allan Sekula’s “The Body and the Archive”, it is argued that “photography came to establish and delimit the terrain of the other, to define both the generalized look-the typology-and the contingent instance of deviance and social pathology." [1] In photography, there is a concept called The Other, in which it means a person who is different from oneself and of the norm. In most photographic prints, The Other usually refers to a person of color who originates from  what European colonists may consider “uncivilized” roots. Due to the difference of The Other, photographers felt the need to Photographic prints that contain The Other typically involve The Other being exploited at the hands of European colonists (the norm) for other Europeans. The Other would intentionally be positioned or posed in a way that would display The Other’s cultures or features. J.T. Zealy’s Renty (1850)  presents an example of The Other, as Renty was a slave and the portrait displayed his features to exploit the differences between the normal and abnormal. Renty, being at his most vulnerable, is humiliated by being put on display for exhibition to be examined by European colonists. Using photography to distinguish features of The Other is deeply rooted in racism as European colonists found The Other as inferior. 

In other examples of photographic prints, The Other also refers to a person who displays mental illness that are used for scientific purposes. During the nineteenth century, scientists practiced a concept called Positivism. The definition of Positivism is to be certain of something that comes from true or authentic knowledge that is to be considered scientific evidence. Using this idea, mental patients would undergo experiments that would contort their face and when that happened, the photographer would take a photograph. The photograph would be used to find differences between a “normal” person and The Other. Scientists use these photographs to determine if a person has a mental illness. This practice results in phrenology and physiognomy. Both phrenology and physiognomy have the same concept of studying features that result in the belief of being able to determine one’s personality based on those features. Based on their photographs, scientists would conclude that people who have a certain ear or head shape, would display a certain personality trait. This then evolved into diagnosing a person who has certain features with having mental illness. Today, phrenology and physiognomy are considered pseudoscience, as a person’s features do not determine whether or not they have a mental illness. Both pseudoscience studies and their uses of photography has led to other ways to utilize photography. 
     Photographs have been used to lend a hand in science, as scientists felt that photographs served as evidence to their hypothesis. French police officer and biometric researcher, Alphonse Bertillon produced the concept of anthropometric photos to identify and document features using physical measurements. Polymath Francis Galton’s composite portraits consist of using common facial features of people of the like and compositing those features to predict what a person may look like. Sekula differentiates the two men’s work by stating: “Betillon’s system of criminal identification was integral to the efforts to quarantine permanently a class of habitual or professional; criminal. Galton sought to intervene in human reproduction by means of public policy, encouraging the propagation of the ‘fit,’ and discouraging or preventing outright that of the ‘unfit’.” [2] Bertillon’s anthropometric photos such as the photo of John Welhouse (1914) was a way to identify criminals by measuring their features. As with the similar thought processes of other scientists, Betillon used measurements of features to determine and identify other criminals with similar features. Although unintentional, Bertillon invented the mugshot in which we still use today to keep records. On the other hand, Galton's The Jewish Type (1878)  showcased what a model Jewish person would typically look like by taking images of Jewish people and placing the images atop each other to make one person. Galton’s portraits were a way to identify different races and criminals. It was believed that composite portraits gave insight to one’s character, health, profession, or personality. Galton also developed eugenics, which is the study of manipulating reproductive genes to produce desirable genes, as a way to eradicate The Other and produce more or the superior race. For reference, the concept of eugenics was the core of Hitler’s views during World War II. 
     Although Bertillon’s and Galton’s work had differences, they also shared similarities. Bertillon’s work of the anthropometric photos was not an accurate way to characterize what criminals would look like. Similarly to Galton’s work of the composite portrait, using multiple photos of different people of the same background is not an accurate way to predict personality. The composite portraits were not evidence enough to prove one’s character or personality as photographs cannot reveal such things about a person. The same with Betiilon’s work with anthropometric photos. These uses of photography are nothing more than pseudoscience. Pseudoscience was used as a way to identify The Other and keep them inferior and oppressed. Both men used the concept of phrenology and physiognomy as a way to determine what a criminal would look like and how someone would look like to determine their personality and character.  This concept is not science as it is impossible to determine such things using only a photograph as evidence.
     In closing, Sekula unpacks the pseudoscience that photography lended a hand in, along with racism. With European colonizers, inventing, using, and distributing cameras and photographs, they hold the power of narrative. The idea of photographing The Other may sound educational on paper, but it comes with racist intentions.

The Other would be photographed and put on display to be criticized and seen as inferior to European colonizers. Perpetuating the racial depictions was a sure way to keep Europeans superior and people of color oppressed.

The Other also consisted of undesirables, such as people with mental illnesses. Mental illness was diagnosed and treated through pseudoscience that was believed to be proven as science. Researchers and scientists would use instruments to illicit reactions out of their patients and record those reactions. The reactions were seen as enough evidence to use a baseline to diagnose patients. From there whenever a person would display a certain facial expression, that would typically lead to another diagnosis. Sekula goes on to talk about the works of Alphonse Bertillon and Francis Galton. Bertillon’s anthropometric photos used measurements to record and determine what criminals would look like. In the process, he incidentally invented the mugshot. In Galton’s work of composite portraits and eugenics, he used photography to project what a race would look like and how they are inferior or superior. He would also inter that certain physical features would imply certain characteristics of people. Although the root of photography has been used as a tool to perpetuate racism, photography has come a long way as the uses of photography in science has changed. Science no longer solely relies on photographs as definite proof but as an aid in their research.