15.5.2: Case Study- Lorna Simpson, Text, Image, and the Fragmentation of Identity

Lorna Simpson, 1978-88, 1990. Musuem of Modern Art

Lorna Simpson, Counting, 1991. Museum of Modern Art

Lorna Simpson’s work occupies a critical space in postmodern photography, where the relationship between image and meaning is no longer assumed to be stable or transparent. Instead of presenting identity as something coherent and easily legible, Simpson constructs photographs that resist clarity. Through the strategic combination of image and text, she reveals how identity—particularly racial and gender identity—is fragmented, mediated, and often misread.¹

One of Simpson’s most distinctive strategies is her pairing of photographic images with short, carefully chosen phrases. These texts do not simply describe what is shown; they complicate it. In works such as Necklines (1989), the viewer is presented with repeated images of a Black woman’s neckline, cropped so that the face is never visible.² The accompanying text suggests narrative or classification, but never provides enough information to fully resolve meaning. The result is a tension between what the viewer sees and what the viewer assumes. The photograph becomes less about recognition and more about uncertainty.

This fragmentation is central to Simpson’s critique. Traditional portraiture often relies on the face as the primary site of identity, offering the illusion that a person can be understood through visual inspection. Simpson disrupts this convention by removing or obscuring the face, forcing attention onto the body as a site of projection rather than revelation.³ The viewer is left without the usual cues that structure interpretation, making it more difficult to rely on familiar stereotypes or expectations. In this way, Simpson exposes how identity is often constructed through partial information and preconceived ideas rather than direct knowledge.

Her work also engages directly with the history of representation. Black women, in particular, have been subject to a long history of visual stereotyping, where images have reduced identity to fixed, often dehumanizing categories. Simpson does not attempt to replace these images with new, “correct” representations. Instead, she reveals the instability of representation itself. By withholding information and disrupting visual coherence, she shows that identity cannot be fully captured or contained within a single image.¹ ⁴

The use of repetition further reinforces this idea. In many of Simpson’s works, the same image appears multiple times, sometimes with slight variations. This repetition can suggest classification or typology—echoing earlier photographic practices that attempted to categorize individuals based on physical traits.⁵ But in Simpson’s work, repetition does not produce clarity. Instead, it emphasizes difference and ambiguity. Each iteration resists being fully defined, undermining the logic of categorization that the format initially suggests.

Text plays a crucial role in this process. Simpson’s language is often deliberately sparse, poetic, or ambiguous. It may hint at narrative, emotion, or social context, but it rarely provides definitive answers.⁴ The text and image do not align neatly; instead, they create a gap that the viewer must navigate. This gap is where meaning is produced. It forces the viewer to confront the limits of their own interpretive frameworks and to recognize how quickly assumptions can be formed based on incomplete information.

This strategy also engages with broader postmodern concerns about language and meaning. Drawing on ideas from post-structuralist theory, Simpson’s work suggests that meaning is not inherent in the image itself but emerges through interpretation.⁶ The photograph does not speak on its own; it requires a viewer, and that viewer brings their own cultural knowledge, biases, and expectations to the act of looking. By destabilizing the relationship between image and text, Simpson makes this process visible.

At the same time, her work is deeply political. The fragmentation of identity in her photographs is not an abstract concept; it reflects real experiences of being misread, categorized, or reduced within systems of power. Simpson’s images do not simply illustrate these conditions—they enact them. The viewer’s attempt to interpret the image mirrors the broader social processes through which identity is constructed and imposed.¹ ³

In the context of postmodern photography, Lorna Simpson’s work demonstrates how the medium can move beyond representation toward critical inquiry. Her photographs do not offer clear answers or stable identities. Instead, they create spaces of uncertainty where meaning must be questioned and reconsidered. Through the interplay of text, image, and repetition, Simpson reveals that identity is not something that can be fully seen. It is something that is continually constructed, fragmented, and negotiated within the act of looking itself.¹ ⁴

Footnotes

¹ “Lorna Simpson,” The Museum of Modern Art, https://www.moma.org/artists/5638

² “Lorna Simpson, Necklines, 1989,” San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, https://www.sfmoma.org/artwork/95.161.A-E/

³ “Lorna Simpson,” Tate, https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artists/lorna-simpson-2059

⁴ Kellie Jones, Lorna Simpson (New York: Phaidon, 2002)

⁵ Allan Sekula, “The Body and the Archive,” October 39 (1986)

⁶ Roland Barthes, “The Death of the Author,” https://writing.upenn.edu/~taransky/Barthes.pdf