Bourdieu (et al.’s) Photography contends that it is the fate of photography to remain for ever ‘a middlebrow art’. This is partly because its technological character is held to be inimical to canonisation as a high art-form, but also because it lacks a class willing to invest time in its reception. Here, I argue, Bourdieu has been proved wrong: photography has now been consecrated, including, ironically, his own photography. Support for this claim is drawn from the field of art in Russia. The Russian Revolution and the Constructivist movement brought into the public gaze artists such as Rodchenko, El Lissitzky and Valentina Kulagina, who saw photography as one of a series of genres that might renovate the social order and transforms the public’s habitual perception. Photography became central in the movement to replace Academic art and thus a key route to photography’s consecration. However, as Benjamin pointed out there is a danger of decontextualising and ‘eternalising’ the photographs or photomontages that make the transition into the art museum. They may remain neither the art of the community from which they emerged, nor be recognised as an expressive resource for later dominated groups; instead such canonised works may become a status adornment of those with cultural capital.

中文翻译：

---

俄国革命与摄影：封圣的悲剧性悖论


布迪厄（Bourdieu）等人认为，摄影的命运是永远保持“一种中庸艺术”。这部分是因为它的技术特性被认为不利于作为一种高级艺术形式的经典化，但也因为它缺乏一个愿意投入时间接受它的阶层。在这里，我认为布迪厄已被证明是错误的：摄影现在已经被神圣化了，具有讽刺意味的是，包括他自己的摄影。俄罗斯艺术领域支持这一说法。俄国革命和建构主义运动将罗琴科、埃尔·利西茨基和瓦伦蒂娜·库拉吉娜等艺术家带入了公众视野，他们将摄影视为可能翻新社会秩序并改变公众习惯认知的一系列流派之一。摄影成为取代学院派艺术的运动的核心，因此是摄影奉献的关键途径。然而，正如本雅明所指出的，向艺术博物馆过渡的照片或蒙太奇存在去语境化和“永恒化”的危险。它们可能既不是他们产生的社区的艺术，也不是后来被统治的群体的表达资源;相反，这些被封为经典的作品可能会成为那些拥有文化资本的人的地位装饰。