A Post-Structuralist Look at the Relationship Between Still and Moving Images

Abstract or Introduction

Photography and film are closely intertwined; yet a significant void remains between the two mediums. This essay explores the relationship between still and moving images, and draws upon a number of pieces of evidence in order to illuminate the dialogue between the two. The essay argues that the relationship between still and moving images has changed considerably over the last 200 years, and that the narrative continues to evolve.

The literature about the relationship between still and moving images does not give a direct answer to the question of the relationship between still and moving images. As words, "still" and "moving" seem to be different concepts that are a dichotomy, which means they are opposite. One of the main questions to ask is why these two concepts are polarised.

This essay tackles one of the most difficult questions in contemporary art. Since it began, people working in photography have tried to understand how to capture movement. The essay uses post-structuralist theory to try to explain how maybe people are actually right when they feel that there is something wrong about stillness and movement having to be different things. The theory can help to show that often the things that we take for granted aren't right at all, and that actually we invent a lot of the things that we think are basic truths.