In “The Body of the Archive,” photographer Allan Sekula discusses the progression of Photography through the exploration of generalizations and the classification of those considered the “other”. To that point, Allan Sekula states, “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] Photography captures reality in ways unattainable by any other medium completely basked in realism; photographic realism elevated in stature and prestige through, “the imperatives of medical and anatomical illustration.”[2] The power of Photography rests on the foundation of utter realism, which can also threaten conflagration and anarchy, an incendiary leveling of existing cultural order.”[3] Photography exists as a snapshot of that period in time, which “promoted the adoption of photography by the police, arguing the convicted offenders would,” be unable to exist lawlessly without a constant visual representation of their faces displayed in mugshots. [4] Allan Sekula, discusses the impact of photography in criminology by showcasing the work of Alphonse Bertillon and Francis Galton.   

"Othering" is a concept within the human race to patronize and categorize those deemed outside of the norm. Human society thrives when there's a group of oppressors and then those that fall under the sword. This foundation is promoted through the creation of an average or the stigmatization of a particular group with the intended purpose to exploit. "Othering" within photography allows the artist to easily choose shock value, subjects out of the norm for the idea of capturing something magnificent. The focus on differences can create a dangerous precedent because it allows those in power to abuse without consequences. Photography plays a pivotal role in the process of creating our ideology and prescription of society. Social structures are inspired by the individuals who are then influenced by the group. One does not exist without the other, implying the unbreakable link between the two relations. As we have learned throughout this semester, photography has assisted in the formation of our society, our social norms and our perceptions of the individual and the “other.” Photography allows the viewer to separate themselves from the group, which directly implies the power of a photograph. 

Photography plays a vital role in the formation of the norms we have become accustomed to. The development of photography aided the stigmatization of the mentally unstable, which led to the incorrect diagnosis of illness. Photography allows the picture to stand alone. Therefore, an interpretation can easily lead to a generalization that can cause negative consequences. A stereotype of a race or the declaration of an average can create unrealistic beauty standards that can destroy generational self-esteem. Throughout our human history, social norms have prevailed through the justification of scientific evidence. The criminal activity was considered a type of “moral insanity.”[5] Through the use of phrenological categorization, the standard of good and evil was set through ethnic ranking. The claim that criminal activity is tied to biology formation can be dangerous because current social norms will taint ethical morals. For example, the implementation of Eurocentric beauty standards was done so by the promotion of an average,  “it is demonstrated that positive characteristics and traits are attributed to those with lighter skin, while those with darker complexions are frequently placed into stereotypical categories and judged severely by their physical appearance. Though discrepancies between light and dark complexions generally speak to categorizations of race, colorism is a specific phenomenon of stratification that has been formed within the African-American community.”[6] Similarly, photography has been used to aid in the oppression of women. As we learned in class, the social inequalities placed upon women allowed them to be in a position to be taken advantage of. Women, often, were checked inside mental institutions for reasons that were completely unrelated to their well-being, without the ability to advocate for themselves. The oppression of women allowed their narrative to be told by the only individuals with access: photographers. Often, when an individual is visibly and physically hurt, it seems more natural to sympathize instead of mental illness that is unrecognizable to the untrained eye. Mental illness became an excuse for individuals to disregard those who were undesirable to them, “within history, there exists a desire to visualize mental illness within art, medicine, and popular culture. This history reflects a desire to control mental illness and protect the boundaries of presumed normality. With a historical contextualization of the visualization of mental illness, art education can recognize that the collective representation of mental illness consists of repeated images and stereotypical ideas that can be identified in 16th-century artworks as well as contemporary pop culture.”[7] Female biology was uncharted territory. Therefore women who had been abandoned became easy prey to an array of tests and experiments. A woman's value, then, depended on her physical attributes. Therefore, the depiction of women within the asylum with dysfunctional hair, no makeup, ripped clothes, and wandering eyes created a dangerous precedent in the dehumanization of those with mental illness. Through a historical lens, women have been categorized as the "other" to the benefit of the man. We live in a patriarchal society that is supported by an androcentric mentality. Social construction further perpetuates the desire to patronize women. Social norms of masculinity and femininity determine the behavior of the self and the perception of the other. The question lies in determining at what point does the photographer separate themselves from work itself. The intention of a piece of work is influenced by the individuals standing within that society, making that separation implausible. Self-awareness leads the purpose of the photograph, whether it be so, with intention or unintentionally. 

 Positivism promoted different forms of communication and thinking, which supported the advancement of technology and human development of progression. Such a concept aided in the rise of photography because the influence to try was so prominent and prevalent. The idea of positivism is one derived from scenery experience, the attempt to capture authentically what is seen. This idea promoted the longevity of photography because there was a desire to attain pure knowledge, one that coupled with scientific experimentation; which again promoted the exploration of photography. 

Victorian scientist trusted the accuracy and truthfulness of photographic images due to the mediums hyper-realism and its scientific approach, “photography doubly fulfilled the Enlightenment dream of a universal language: the universal mimetic language of the camera yielded up a higher, more cerebral truth, a truth that could be uttered in the universal abstract language of mathematics.”[8] The approach was backed by a scientific method and articulated through the culture of photographic realism.[9] Photography became another way of obtaining pure knowledge, because of the translation from sight to medium. Victorian scientists promoted the exploration of photography because unlike other forms of artistry photography was being articulated through scientific grounds and study.

Alphonse Bertillon’s approach focused on a more anthropological approach, focusing on physical attributes and measurements to determine the ultimate results. Understanding the prevalent problems of classification, Bertillon states, “the collection of criminal portraits has already attained a size so considerable that it has become physically impossible to discover among them the likeness of an individual who has assumed a false name.”[10] Such inefficiency is promoted through a set of “errors and oversight.”[11] This assessment led Bertillon to take a more biological approach, “Bertillon’s police archive functioned as a complex biographical machine which produced presumably simple and unambiguous results. He sought to identify repeat offenders, that is, criminals were liable to be considered “habitual” or “professional” in their deviant behavior.”[12] Although Bertillon’s method was innovative and progressive, his application lacked consideration of the criminal type and psychic recognition.[13] Lacking knowledge pertaining to criminology, Bertillon was more prone to become swayed by social pressures; therefore, influenced by bias played a role in his photographic artistry. Bertillon's goal was to effectively categorize criminal offenders by eliminating the constant pressure of human error. Above all else, “Bertillon sought not to relate individuals to species, but to extract the individual from the species.” [14] With the use of anthropometrics, which is the measurement of the physical body with a series of tests through a “refined physiognomic vocabulary, and statistics.”[15]

His approach relied on the consistency from one human body to another, and such assumptions lead to the formation of the “average man.”[16] The theory of the average man led to the conviction of thousands of innocent bystanders. Bertillon relied heavily on the power of photography, understanding it to be the main identification of criminal behavior. Bertillon's study stems from the belief the skeleton and the physical body's exterior is the strongest indication of criminal standing due to the implication of profession and/or everyday behaviors. 

Francis Galton created a method of identification that gathered DNA recognition through fingerprints.[17] The combination of fingerprinting and the Bertillon method of measurement served as the main form of criminal identification. Both Bertillon and Galton study through the use of typology, which is the study of a collection of images as opposed to a stand-alone image. Nonetheless, their lay faults on both approaches, “Bertillon and Galton traded jibes at their respective systems. Bertillon faulted Galton for their respective systems. Bertillon faulted Galton for the difficulties encountered in classifying fingerprints; Galton faulted Bertillon for his failure to recognize that bodily measurements were correlated and not independent variables.”[18]   

The projects of Bertillon and Galton generate the “positivist attempts to define and regulate deviance.”[19] Bertillon and Galton both elevated the collective understanding of photography by examining photography from different angles. Bertillon insisted on standard focal length, "just as Bertillon sought to classify the photograph by means of the Vitruvian register of the anthropometric signalment of the binomial curve, so also he sought to translate the signs offered by the photograph itself into another, verbal register. Thus we were engaged in a two-sided, internal and external, taming of the contingency of the photograph.”[20] Bertillon's creation of the verbal portrait was an attempt to access visual empiricism. Through the examination of an array of individuals, "Bertillon the mastery of the criminal body necessitated a massive campaign of inscription, a transformation of the of the body's signs into a text, a text that pared verbal description down to a denotative shorthand, which as then linked to numerical series.”[21] As opposed to a generalization created from one image, the foundation of Bertillion's approach stems from a more holistic approach, "Bertillon's reputation lies in the way in which his method, which runs counter to any metaphysical or essentialist doctrine of the self, could be regarded as a triumph of humanism.”[22] Bertillon focused on the individualism of the subject who was being captured. 

Galton created the scientific approach to the development and study of heredity. Different from Bertillon, Galton focused on the collective through to formulate the average, "Galton's passion for quantification and numerical ranking coexisted with a qualified faith in the physiognomic description. His writings demonstrate remarkable parallelism and tension between the desire to measure and the desire to look.”[23] Galton focused on the effects of light espoused through constant manipulation, “his composites by process of successive registration and exposure of portraits in front of a copy camera holding a single plate. Each successive image was given a fractional exposure based on the inverse of the total number of images in the sample.”[24] Through that exposure, Galton was able to capture an image and then use blending through hereditary means to gather the ideal average. 

Alphonse Bertillon's anthropometric photos have higher construction to light and darkness. His photos focused on measurements of the individuals face to gather an accurate image to assist in arrests. Thorough measurement of the physical body and facial features Francis Galton’s anthropometric photos focused on creating a generalization of race, social class, and gender. Galton desired to predict criminal behavior through a set of measurements of previous individuals that could classify a future offender. Galton focused on hereditary hierarchy and these ideals directly correlate with racial profiling we see today feed by socioeconomic inequality. Both photographers changed the response to criminology through the scientific and statistical approach of photography, but “where Bertillon was a compulsive systematizer, Galton was a compulsive quantifier. While Bertillon was concerned primarily with the triumph of social order over social disorder, Galton was concerned primarily with the triumph of established rank over the focus of social leveling and decline.”[25] Bertillon wished to identify, while Galton desired to predict. 

Conclusively, Sekula demonstrates the foundation of criminology by comparing Bertillon and Galton artwork to highlight their contributions to the progression of photography. Both individuals approached their study with a rigorous set of measurements and through the scientific approach. Although their work created dangerous generalizations, which are still in effect today, their attention to a holistic approach to criminology was unlike anything that had been done before.