This article deals with photographic encounters in the Kalahari. The author discusses the role of photography in ethnographic fieldwork and issues surrounding photography as representation. He writes reflexively about his own experiences taking pictures in the Kalahari, his motivations and subjectivities, the reactions of his subjects, and the nature of financial demands made. The author compares his own photography with that of two photographers well known for their imaging of the San—Paul Weinberg and A. M. Duggan-Cronin—while dealing with his own subjectivity in relation to ethical and representational issues.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Denzin, N. K. (1998). That Psychiatrist. In N. Denzin, Cultural Studies, a Research Volume (pp. 281-284). London: JAI Press.
2.
Duggan-Cronin, A. M. (circa 1918). Unpublished ethnographic/anthropological journal notes. McGregor Museum, Kimberley, South Africa.
3.
Duggan-Cronin, A. M. (1929). The Bantu tribes of South Africa: The Suto-Chuana tribes, subgroup I, the Bechuana. Cambridge, UK: Alexander McGregor Memorial Museum, in association with Cambridge University Press.
4.
Duggan-Cronin, A. M. (1939, September). Ethnic photographic studies of natives of Africa. Rhodesia Scientific Association Proceedings and Transactions, 37, 7-10.
5.
Edwards, E. (1990). The image as anthropological document. Photographic “Types:” the pursuit of method. Visual Anthropology, 3, 235-258.
6.
Edwards, E. (Ed). (1992). Anthropology and photography 1860-1920. London: Yale University Press, New Haven and London, in association with the Royal Anthropological Institute.
7.
Fabian, J. (1983). Time and the Other: How anthropology makes its object. New York: Columbia University Press.
8.
Fabian, J. (1985). Culture, time and the object of anthropology. Berkshire Review, 20, 7-21.
9.
Faris, J. C. (1996). Navajo and photography. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico.
10.
Feldman, S. (1977). Viewer, viewing, viewed: A critique of subject-generated documentary. Journal of the University Film Association, 29(1), 23-36.
11.
Fiske, J. (1979). Semiotics: its contribution to the study of intercultural communication. Educational Broadcasting International, 51-56.
12.
Foster, C., & Foster, D. (2000). The Great Dance: A Hunter's Story [Motion picture]. Cape Town, South Africa: Earthrise Productions.
13.
Michaels, E. (1991). A primer of restrictions on picture-taking in traditional areas of aboriginal Australia. Visual Anthropology, 4(2), 275-295.
14.
Nichols, B. (1981). Ideology and the image: Social representation in the cinema and other media. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
15.
Nichols, B. (1991). Representing reality. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
16.
(in association Visual Anthropology et al.).
17.
Scherer, J. C. (1992). The photographic document: Photographs as primary data in anthropological enquiry. In Edwards, E. (Ed.), Anthropology and photography 1860-1920. London: Yale University Press, New Haven and London, in association with The Royal Anthropological Institute.
18.
Selden, R., & Widdowson, P. (1993). A reader's guide to contemporary literary theory (3rd Ed.). London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
19.
Stoller, P. (1992a). The cinematic griot: The ethnography of Jean Rouch. Chicago: University of Chicago.
20.
Stoller, P. (1992b). The taste of things ethnographic: The senses in anthropology. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
21.
Tomaselli, K. G. (1996). Appropriating images: The semiotics of visual representation. Højbjerg, Denmark: Intervention Press.
22.
Tomaselli, K. G. (2001). Blue is hot, red is cold: Doing reverse cultural studies in Africa. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 1(3), 283-318.
23.
Weinberg, P. (1997). In search of the San. Johannesburg, South Africa: Porcupine Press.
