‘All photographs are ambiguous.’ (Berger, 1982:91). Discuss Berger’s statement, and the narrative abilities of photography, using a selection of texts, and your own choice of visual examples.
Photographs are known for being characteristically simple, depicting a singular frame from any situation. Uninterrupted and continuous time is frozen in a snapshot, forever paused within the frame, never to be altered or modified: a memory captured with a touch of a shutter to remain calm and static. Imagery relies on the referent to resonate with the viewer to create or remind them of the context, however, what happens when there is no context or clear subject. Is this form of imagery able to narrate its correct representation, or is the observer left to hypothesise its inevitable conclusion?
Back when photography was born in the 1830s, the concept of time was crucial to any form of photographic imagery: from the preparation of the plates for exposure, to posing solid for minutes at a time whilst waiting for the process to work. Freezing time has always been at photography’s core, and is the main concern for those using this medium due to its nature. Pressing a shutter instantaneously halts the event or situation within a singular frame which allows that event to be re-lived and experienced over and over. The main issue with this core value is how this moment is then recounted. James Elkins discussed the problematic subject of time and experience: “It may seem as if visual art is different from novels or music because it is all seen at once, in an instant: but we do not see things in an instant, and we do not stop seeing them after an instant.” (Elkins. 2009). This statement reiterates the idea that a photograph is purely a moment of time, and does not compare to the overall experience. A photograph attempts to store all information regarding that situation within that singular frame, offering the viewer a catalyst for reminiscing that point in time. However this bypasses the events before, and after that very specific moment. Elkins also offers a comparison between the variety of medias and shows how the narrative capabilities differs between them, as they use unique techniques to portray a sense of story. For example, a novel endeavours to show the entirety of the plot through a lengthy descriptive recount.
Understanding a photograph requires a considerable amount of context in order to gain a complete knowledge of the events surrounding that singular frame. One famous example of this dilemma is this image (Figure. 1), shot by Alfred Eisenstaedt. Shot on the day World War II ended, this image appears to show a couple reuniting in happiness and joy after a tormenting period of time. However, without context and an example of the events before the frame, a viewer would be unaware that in fact, this apparent passionate and romantic situation is just a spontaneous moment in time. Just before the shutter was released, the American sailor took hold of an Austrian-Jewish refugee, kissed her deeply and went on his way. Without learning the history of this image, the core context is left relatively speculative for the viewer to visualise the rest. Relying on context directly affects how we view imagery, and can dramatically influence the overall understanding of the photographers intent. 
Due to their nature, photographs are unable to correctly show how the event has progressed over time to portray the entirety of the circumstance. 
In his widely respected book Another Way of Telling, John Berger explains the actuality of a photographs essence within their reality. “A photograph arrests the flow of time in which the event photographed once existed. All photographs are of the past, yet in them an instant of the past is arrested so that, unlike a lived past, it can never lead to the present.” (Berger. 1995: 86). Imagery is often used as an incentive to remember past events, and to retrieve lost memories that are long forgotten. The core of the photographic image relies on a moment in time to be frozen to allow it to exist forever, so it is impossible for photographs to exist in the present or the future. As the event is frozen in time within the frame, the event is effectively removed from time and any continuity.
This lack of continuity within still imagery is a very large problem when trying to decipher the context and meaning. Berger comments on this issue and uses this as a basis for his argument regarding the true nature of connotations: 
“All photographs are ambiguous. All photographs have been taken out of continuity. If the event is a public event, this continuity is history; if it is personal, the continuity, which has been broken, is a life story. Even a pure landscape breaks a continuity: that of the light and the weather. Discontinuity always produces ambiguity.” (Berger. 1995: 91)
Berger relates the issue of time to the argument that images cannot accurately show a correct portrayal of the meaning. As an image is just a singular representation used to demonstrate the entirety of an event, it is impossible to gain an accurate feeling or idea of the actuality of the background behind it. It is natural to view images out of their continuity so it is expected that they will be deemed historical in quality rather than in the present. The lack of continuity in any form of still imagery directly disturbs what a viewer can learn or understand within them, as they have no point of time reference to grasp onto. This leaves the viewer to hypothesise the reasonings, meanings and overall narrative: so how are we as viewers expected to interpret stories without any form of time and context? 
It is clear from Berger’s discussion in ‘Another Way of Telling’ that the photographer has a commitment towards the viewer to provide them with a sense of reality and a significant time-frame in order to gain a correct understanding of what they are studying. Without these factors, the audience would be unable to recognise all the ideas surrounding the concept. Terry Barrett deliberates this important fact in his essay ‘Photographs and Context’. He begins: “An understanding of the differences between the picture and the reality from which it was made is essential to understanding the photography.” (Barrett. 1997: 116). Barrett states that it would be  absurd to believe that a viewer would be capable of interpret the purpose and reasonings for the photograph without correctly understanding the realities behind it. It is therefore not only the photographers responsibility to create a correct and accurate viewpoint, but ensure that the image is realistic enough to gain exceptional understanding. Barrett continues: “When these distinctions are ignored, the photographer drops out, the photograph becomes transparent, and the viewer is lead to mistake the photograph for a real-world object.” (Barrett. 1997: 116). It is distinct that without any form of reality, the photograph looses most of its integrity and recognisable traits. As viewers, it is paramount that an image shows not only accurately what is in front of the lens, but accurately shows what the photographer is attempting to convey. Without these traits, a photograph retreats into a meaningless exposure.
Accuracy and authenticity is crucial to the audiences trust in the artist, especially when it comes to documenting real-world problems. Photojournalists often - notably those in the front line of conflicts - find themselves not only in harms way taking the photograph, but also rely on the viewing public to completely understand what it is they are witnessing. One extremely famous example of this is ‘Falling Soldier’ taken by Robert Capa during the first stages of the Spanish Civil War (Figure. 2). It depicts a pretty gruesome sight - the moment a bullet strikes a loyal soldier in the head. With this being an extremely raw and unprecedented portrayal of the war, it is completely understandable that the public found it extremely moving, which resulted in this defining Capas’ career within agency at Magnum Photos. However, since the 1970s the authenticity of this photograph has been called into question - after a journalist claimed Capa had confirmed that the images was staged. With no way of confirming this - as Capa died in 1940 during the Indochina War - we as viewers are left to contemplate the true credibility of the events surrounding the photograph, as well as the photograph itself. There is no procedure to confirm legitimacy within photographs (except testimony from the photographer themselves) so it is incredibly difficult to find a common-ground and connection within the context, content and presentation of the moment. How viewers understand and perceive incredibly important and ‘influential’ moments in time is essential for the work to reach its full potential.
This idea filters through most art mediums, especially experimental works. Many in the psychology field used this concept of perception and concept to create and perform experiments on the public. One famous example is ‘An Experimental Study of Apparent Behaviour’ performed by Fritz Heider and Marianna Simmel back in 1944 (Figure. 3), where they showed subjects a short stop-motion film and asked them to pay attention to what was happening within the scene. The film consisted of multiple shapes (a large triangle, a small triangle and a circle) moving in various directions and speeds moving in and out of a large rectangle with a door which opens and closes. Without any form of context, many viewers ended up giving the shapes human characteristics and created their own narratives. This proves that even though context provides an important distinction viewers use to gain a certain insight into the work, it is completely acceptable - and often the point - to interpret works in a personal and imaginative way. If this aspect was removed, artworks would be extremely mundane to experience.
Concepts of visual references - and lack of - are not sought after within abstract artworks within most processes and mediums. Due to their nature, this category of art is littered with sometimes unrecognisable visual language traits which, although make sense to the creator, can be indistinguishable to viewers who do not understand the relevance. In their book ‘Interpreting Visual Culture’, Ian Heywood Barry Sandywell comment on the ways which photographs of this nature need to be read: “Formalist aesthetics reflect its empiricist heritage by supposing a differentiation between, first the having of sensations and perceptions and, second, the attribution of meaning and value to those sensations.” (Heywood, Sandywell. 1999:12). The importance of living an event, situation or location is paramount to understanding of anything relevant to it. Utilising past experiences helps reflect the artists reasonings, therefor creating meaning for the viewer. This fact can directly impact what the artist can include within the content of the work, and has an influence on what the viewer learns from it. However if the content is non-representational - much like the work within abstract art - it is much more challenging to completely understand the meaning. 
As previously discussed, ambiguity is related to time and content, which has the power to adapt the image to what the viewer can understand and gain. However what happens when all points of reference is removed from the image? How can viewers even attempt to interpret artwork with out any obvious reality?
Understanding what the artist is attempting to interpret is imperative to identifying the underlying connotations within the work. One artist who is known for this is Una Barth, who creates work using visual perception as her subject. ‘Sundial’ (Figure. 4) is a piece of work which looks at how light moves around a house over a certain amount of months. However, the majority of the images are shot with blurred backgrounds and cropped frames, which directly affects what the viewer can even see within the work. This fact makes it almost impractical to try and decipher the content. Barth stated regarding this project: “In photography, subject and meaning are usually linked, and I wanted to take that connection apart. I wanted the meaning to be located in the activity of looking, not the activity of thinking about what was being looked at.” (Barth. 2007). It is clear that Barth’s aim was to encourage the viewer to actually look carefully at what was being shown. This takes the photograph back to its routes and really simplifies the overall understanding, ultimately allowing the viewer to create their own personal links and connections within the piece of work. However, how is the viewer expected to conclusively understand what Barth is attempting to convey - this is left speculative for the viewer to hopefully answer for themselves. 
Another piece of work which follows a similar theme to the previous is Hiroshi Sugimoto’s project ‘Seascapes’ (Figure. 5). Using comparable techniques to the previous project, Sugimoto has employed an extremely blurred technique and repetition to document extremely still scenes of the sea. Each image within the 220 part project is methodically similar to each other, creating an extremely consistent language - however some are set up differently, as some are more blurred than others. This affects what the viewer can actually recognise within the frame, as some are so blurred that they look like pure gradients. Utilising blur also can distort the overall texture of the image as it relatively removes it, so the detail within the ripples and waves is therefor lost. It is unfathomable that a viewer can see past the softened facade to the correct subject matter, so how is even questionable that as photographers we ask the audience to attempt to correctly decipher the work we make so abstract?
Interpreting abstract art becomes extremely difficult when the frame lacks a lot of information to grasp a reality from. Martin Heidegger commented on this topic within his book ‘Being and Time’: 
“In interpretation, understanding does not become something different. It becomes itself….Nor is interpretation the acquiring of information about what is understood: it is rather the working out of possibilities projected in understanding” (Heidegger. 1962: 188-9)
To translate any form of non-figurative art is difficult as there is no definite space or time to compare it too. This leaves the work to sit with the viewer on a purely personal and intimate level.  Each separate member of the audience will have a differing interpretation, due to their personal surroundings and life experiences. Considering that artwork with no sense of reality can be relatively confusing to bare witness to, it would be considered an ultimately sophisticated accomplishment to be able to decipher and perfectly narrate purposely hypothetical work. 
© Anna Woods, University for the Creative Arts - 2017
Bibliography
Arnheim, R. (1974). On the Nature of Photography. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press
Barrett, T. (1997). ‘Photographs & Context’ In: Goldblatt, D & Brown, L (ed.)
Aesthetics: A Reader in Philosophy of the Arts. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall
Barth, U. (2007). [Interviewed by David Horvitz]
Fig. 4. Barth, U. (2007) Sundial. [Photograph] At: http://utabarth.net/work/sundial/#image-3. (Accessed on 02.04.17)
Berger, J and Mohr, J. (1995). Another Way of Telling. New York: Vintage International
Fig. 2. Capa, R. (1936). Loyalist Militiaman at the Moment of Death. [Photograph; 35mm Film]. At: http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/283315. (Accessed on: 02.04.17)
Fig. 1. Eisenstaedt, A. (1945). V-J Day in Times Square. [Photograph; 35mm Film] At: [http://100photos.time.com/]. (Accessed on: 30.03.17)
Elkins, J. (2009). ‘Time and Narrative’ In: academia.edu [Online] At: https://www.academia.edu] (Accessed on 29.03.17)
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time. Oxford: Blackwell
Fig. 3. Heider, F & Simmel, M. (1944). An Experimental Study of Apparent Behaviour. [Film; Animation]. At: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9TWwG4SFWQ. (Accessed on: 01.04.17)
Heywood, I and Sandywell, B. (1999). Interpreting Visual Culture. London: Routledge
Fig. 5. Sugimoto, H. (1980-Present). Seascapes. [Photographs] At: http://www.sugimotohiroshi.com/seascape.html. (Accessed on: 02.04.17)

"How have contemporary approaches to photographing 'place' responded to the claim that 'landscape is not the ideologically neutral subject many imagine it to be' (Bright, 1987: 143)? Respond using a selection of texts, and your own choice of visual examples?
Landscapes are considered a natural and serene environment, and we are educated on the idea of natural surroundings at a very young age. Within the medium of photography, the idea of landscape is a genre in itself, and is very wide, broad and popular, with many of the greatest photographers working within this idea of documenting a landscape. But are photographers actually documenting the landscape with truth, or are they depicting hidden ideologies to influence the viewer's opinions? This essay will respond to the idea of a landscape within photography, and aims to discover whether or not a landscape can be an ideologically neutral subject matter.
  In order to fully understand what a landscape is, it is vital that the concept of a 'place' is grasped. The notion of a place is a development on a space - a space being the physical location, and a place being a site that provides context to individuals. The concept of a place was disputed and defined by Tim Cresswell: "Place is a meaningful site that combines location, locale, and sense of place." (Cresswell, 2009: 1). A space will always include location (in reference to where the place is) and locale (the way a place looks, which includes material structures found at that location). The concept of sense of place is more personal and meaningful, as it refers to the feelings evoked in a place, and in turn develops a space into a place. Each place can have various, contrasting meanings to separate people as situations which determine someones opinions and feelings are mostly circumstantial. Using geography systems, Cresswell described the contrast between a location and a sense of place.
"Meaning marks the most obvious difference between 33.3251° 44.4221° (a mere location) and ‘Baghdad’ – the place that occupies that location. Cruise missiles can be loaded with information like 33.3251° 44.4221° but not with ‘Baghdad’ and all the meanings that that place implies. Meanings can be very personal and connected to individuals and their personal biographies – places where we fell in love, or where loved ones are buried, or where we went to school. But meanings are also shared and, in some important ways, social." (Cresswell, 2004: 1)
Numerical values, especially when referring to a location, are notably irrelevant to a persons everyday feelings. Coordinates directly pinpoint a location, and is a simple way of doing so as every spot on the earth has its own unique set, creating a very neutral and basic construct for a space. Using this example, Cresswell shows that these numerical values have little influence on our emotions towards that location, but as soon as it is realised that the coordinates are those of Baghdad, that location becomes more of a place. Those that have visited Baghdad will have their own opinions and emotions towards that location, but some will only have the opportunity to gather knowledge from other means, such as TV, the internet or word of mouth. However this does not necessarily mean that Baghdad is not a place to those people, as meanings can be greatly influenced from other sources. TV is one of the most influential media outlets, depicting certain stories and ideologies which will no doubt have an impact on the viewer, especially those stories relating to political issues and war.
Capturing the idea of sense of place is probably the most complex part of a location to attempt to portray through a single frame. The act of capturing a place instead of a space is seen as difficult, due to the fact that when we photograph a landscape, we create a two-dimensional representation of what we see. Liz Wells looks at how photographers represent location, and in fact discovered that photographers reverse the idea of a development between space and place: "Photographs slice space into place; land is framed as landscape. Representation envelops reality; it becomes an act of colonisation." (Wells, 2011: 56). Hinting to the physicality of a photographic image, a  print of a landscape can not replace the location. The two-dimensional image of a landscape may restore memories and help the viewer remember situations or events, yet it can not compare to the original feeling of that space. The concept of accurately depicting a place requires a high amount of context and relevance that the viewer can understand fully. Wells is also describing how images of landscapes cannot have any sense of place, as the viewer is not fully aware of the physical and emotional traits a landscape can have, therefor a photographic representation of a scene cannot have any personal meaning to viewers, and provides little ideologies to represent.
Landscapes are natural environments which are considered to be a neutral subjects with no specific ideology to follow. Jens Jäger describes how landscape within photography has no great system of ideas to influence the viewer or photographer with. "Photographs were seen as exact copies of the features of nature, not interpretations by an artist and, as such, better suited as proof of the distinct character of a landscape." (Jäger, 2003: 121-122). A photographic image of a landscape ultimately is just that - a representation. It may not be the same as feeling and witnessing that location first hand, however a singular frame can be enough to gain some second hand knowledge about that landscapes sense of place. Take Baghdad for example: some people have never been, but are aware that it can be an incredibly hostile place. This ideology is easily depicted in imagery of inhospitable and dangerous lands, and with thanks to the media, this premise is fed to thousands if not millions of people. Those who have never visited Baghdad will be given an example of a situation, but have been left unaware of what it is like to live in that area, and given no chance to witness the space for themselves. The image of a landscape does not mean anything other than documenting the exact landscape that the photographer found it in. 
Documentation of a landscape is important to preserve the memory of that certain place. Representations of landscapes can easily be used as a substitution for the authentic landscape and  experience. Nonetheless, imagery can be sculpted to fit a certain agenda. Abigail Solomon-Godeau explains how documenting a natural and neutral landscape can be taken and used to justify reasoning. "It is reasonable to assume that such photographic documentation, showing so much of the world to be empty, was unconsciously assimilated to the justifications for an expanding empire." (Solomon-Godeau, 1981: 159). Photographic imagery can be easily faked to fit a certain ideology, and it is not rare for a harmless, plain documentation of a boring landscape to be used to suggest something. Most natural landscapes look unnaturally empty, due to the lack of people, movement or development. Whilst these portray the idea of a picturesque landscape, it can provides a backbone for proposed development. It is not an unusual notion for photographic imagery to be a useful for councils and governments whilst debating future plans for advancements for various landscapes.
Ideology is almost overlooked within landscape photography, as many believe that it is a natural, or even neutral subject matter. W. J. T. Mitchell commented on the power of a highly targeted outlook:
"Landscape as a cultural medium thus has a double role with respect to something like ideology: it naturalizes a cultural and social construction, representing an artificial world as if it were simply given and inevitable, and it also makes that representation operational by interpellating its beholder in some used to impact the viewers beliefs more or less determinate relation to its givenness as sight and site." (Mitchell, 2002: 2)
The concept of a sense of place occurs when the everyday person interacts with a location, and develops emotions towards that location. When a viewer interacts with a photographic image of a landscape, the prospect of establishing a true connection and a plethora of feelings is almost inconceivable. The only person in that situation who would have gained genuine knowledge and experience with that landscape is the photographer, who can now have the power to influence the viewer with their own ideology. The landscape will then become a non neutral subject, as it now has a theory to prove to its viewer.
When it comes to ideology within photographic representations of landscapes, photographers have the choice whether or not to try and make a directed statement at a setting, or to use it as a type of documentation to keep the memory of that landscape alive. It is photographers like Deborah Bright, who assume that depicting a landscape in a pure non-subjective manner is relatively unattainable. The ideology of a landscape can be relatively confusing, but the consensus for Bright is that the whole concept of a landscape is a facade. She begins: "Nature was redesigned, we might say, for middleclass convenience and efficiency." (Bright, 1985: 128). Bright proposes that a natural landscape just does not exist, and that every landscape contains that ideology that picturesque scenes are for a specific class of people. The intention of paintings of a quaint scene for example, are only for the walls of professionals. She continues: "In this enterprise, photography rapidly surpasses other modes of graphic illustration to play a central role in merchandizing landscapes for public consumption" (Bright, 1985: 128). Here, Bright suggests that the concept of landscape photography is purely to provide business to these landscapes.  Photographic representations have allegedly 'surpassed' imagery such as painting as photographs are seen to be truthful, unless manipulated to match a certain ideology. Scenes from charming and beautiful locations such as the National Parks are supposedly photographed with a desire to bring business, tourists and money into the area. This notion shines light on the concept of the aesthetic - is there any such thing? Or can photographs always belong in advertisements?
When it comes to 'natural' landscape photography, names such as Ansel Adams and Edward Weston are prominent. However in the 1970s, the idea of landscape photography was redefined by the exhibition New Topographics: Photographs of a man-altered landscape. The exhibition featured 9 photographers (including Robert Adams and Bernd and Hilla Becher) who focused on the aesthetics of banal and mundane landscapes. Bright also commented on the works extensively, looking closely at the clear focus of form, line and texture.
"But there is no “Form” outside of interpretation. Formal orders are human structures and perceptions, not given essences. Though Jenkins asserts that the photographers take great pains to prevent the slightest trace of judgment or opinion from entering their work,” these representations (no less than those of other landscape traditions) are charged with meanings that derive from the personal identities and histories of the photographers and which, in turn, are relayed to audiences with their own social and psychic predispositions" (Bright, 1985: 131)
According to Bright, it is almost impractical to document a landscape from a unbiased perspective. It is also futile to focus on the aesthetic, form and appearance as this does not depict the true nature of the landscape. This not only creates an un-natural representation, but now there is no premise to follow. It is clear that Brights conclusion is that all landscapes have a ideology to follow, even if that isn't the intention of the photographer. Photographers will unintentionally photograph subjects which they relate to and can determine meaning from regardless of motive. 
This image (Fig.1) was taken by Lewis Baltz, who was apart of the New Topographics exhibition. His work especially looks at form, line and shadow - typical features of the aesthetics in an image. Black and white imagery was prominent throughout the New Topographics works, as it simplified the subject matter. Without colour, there are no other distractions. In this image, the attention is on the form and shadows of the building, which reduces the debate about the ideology within the image. It raises the question, whether or not there even is a theory or argument that it is trying to concur with. Utilising a mundane subject matter does support the objective of simplifying the outcome, but this does not necessarily remove all ideas as to its proposal. Baltz employs this to make the structure of the building stand out, which in fact is the ideology within this work. The images represent the growing built environment through deceptively banal imagery, by eliminating all signs of life and everyday movement. In a way, this work serve as an ode to what our familiar locations are turning into - a boring and bland place to live. 
However, its not only the simplistic which can deceive us when it comes to ideology within landscape photography. Figure 2 is part of a photo series called 'Broken Land' by Eliot Dudik. Relatively dull to look at, this photograph features a typical field, surrounded by some extremely bare trees. In fact, the initial appearance of this landscape is one of derail and wreck. Titled ‘Battle of Monocacy, Maryland', the focus of this image is the location which the photograph was taken. Providing the viewer with a location provides a starting point in figuring out a superficial sense of place. If somebody knows where Monocacy is, and have visited, will  have a deeper  connection already rather than somebody who has never even heard of that place.  This location, and in fact all depicted in this series, are all scenes of horrific, deadly and devastating American Civil Wars. However, without knowing this, the subject matter far from portrays a location linked to political issues. Photographers have the capability of influencing their viewers with more than just the imagery they depict. Dudik for example, chose to give the viewer just a little bit of information as to the context, but not enough to explain everything. As  much as this fact can ultimately sway somebody to the idea of conflict and political debate, the dull, and somewhat uninteresting landscape can also eliminate the ideas of war and the ghastly.
Many believe that a landscape depicted through imagery will be ideologically neutral, as it features an impartial site. However, it is clear that it is difficult to be objective when it comes down to the specific location. Everybody feels different emotions and feelings in different locations, and various situations have occurred there at different times. It is virtually impossible to be detached from a landscape, even those seen as bland and boring. 
© Anna Woods, University for the Creative Arts - 2016
Bibliography
Baltz, L, (1974), South Corner, Riccar America Company [ONLINE]. Available at: http://www.cca.qc.ca/en/issues/11/nature-reorganized/176/the-new-industrial-parks-near-irvine-california [Accessed 14 December 2016].
Bright, D. (1985) Of Mother Nature and Marlboro Men. In Bolton, R. ed. The Contest of Meaning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Cresswell, T. (2009) Place. Oxford, United Kingdom: Elsevier (an imprint of Pergamon Press)
Cresswell, T. (2004) Place: A short introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Dudik, E, (2013), Battle of Monocacy, Maryland [ONLINE]. Available at: http://hawkandhandsaw.unity.edu/featured-artist-eliot-dudiks-broken-land/ [Accessed 14 December 2016].
Jäger, J. (2003). Picturing Nations: Landscape Photography and National Identity in Britain and Germany in the Mid-Nineteenth Century. In: Schwartz, J.M. and Ryan, J. ed. Picturing Place, Photography and the Geographical Imagination. London, United Kingdom: I.B. Tauris & Company.
Mitchell, W.J.T. (2002) Landscape and power. (2nd ed.) Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Wells, L. (2011) Land matters: Landscape photography, culture and identity. London, United Kingdom: I.B.Tauris.


Back to Top