Quetelet sought to create the "average man" using anthropometric data and labeled any divergence from the social norm as a "monstrosity" or displays of "biosocial pathology”; Bertillon invented a system to classify criminals using photographs as the “conclusive sign for identification”; Galton strived to construct “a program of social betterment through breeding” (much like the Nazis during the Holocaust) by fabricating composites of individuals that were grouped into categories such as “the higher race,” officers and enlisted men, and convicts.

Why do you think the concept of categorizing humans (specifically using visual methods) has been so prevalent throughout history all over the world? Do you think we still practice such categorization in our current society, whether knowingly or unknowingly? If so, how, and what are the benefits and drawbacks? (Ariel)

As I read the the Sekula reading I made a connection to the Berger essay titled "Appearances". Berger argues photography is unique as it "quotes not translates" and that a photograph cannot tell a lie, but still not a whole truth. It arrests a moment in time and says this happened. In this sense, meaning can be often ascribed to a photo depending on the context it is presented in and in often cases photos can be manipulated and used to define a truth that in reality is not the actual truth.

The pictures that were used by Bertillon and Galton took pictures of a certain real event. But, we know they were used to support racist and classist theories based on false realities. Given this juxtaposition of a real moment within a false argument, how were real photos distorted to create false narratives and what is the proper response to someone who would say there is correlation between physical traits and certain negative characteristics? (Iman)

Trying to classify objectively and scientifically social values that are objective (As we understand them them today)

mix empirical science (social sciences) with criminology.

working class was only photographed was in a criminal context, portraits at the time were the privilege of the wealthy and bourgeoisie

Francis Galton (type) (UK), tried to create the average man from photographs

amalgamated greek and roman portrait to create a higher race

“average man”

similar to Nazi ideology—visual description of race.

composite photographs, created an average man

“dissolve the boundary between criminality and the working class poor”

nature versus nurture, is it a cause or effect?

biological determinism

Alphonse Bertillion (France), finding an individual person from photographs

made an archive. at first too many photographs.

later was more successful. filing cabinet.

relied on the camera as objective tool to investigate reality, the language of mathematics.

saw criminal as a class, that there’s criminality is a character.

Bertillon chose body parts (physiognomy) to identify people, were Galton tried to generalize.