In Pandora's Camera, Joan Fontcuberta talks about optical distance in reference to how a topic is presented. When you are optically close to a subject you are able to see all sorts of different possible angles and are capable of deep insight but also blindness (eg where you aren't looking, lack of overall context). When you are optically distant there is less bias, the subject is more balanced and the context is clearer, but it is also flatter, there is less detail.
I think he would agree that a person who is closer to the actual topic may have "deeper", more nuanced insights, but that does not necessarily mean more meaningful. Distance from a topic can perhaps lend to a different kind of helpful meaning and clarity.
This thread was started saying where are Sontag's great photographs, as if one must identify oneself with that which one critiques. Must the OP publish a successful book on photography criticism before they can start a topic on Sontag?
