The reversal of roles between nature and photography and me as a photographer

Reading "Each Wild Idea", by Geoffrey Batchen, was very inspiring for me. It reminded me of some statements by Roland Barthes in "Camera Lucida". 

I was also fascinated by the speculation on the relationship between nature, representation and photography, with this unexpected and interesting reversal of roles.

"......Mr Babbage in his (miscalled ninth Bridgwater) Treatise announces the astounding fact, as a very sublime truth, that every word uttered from the creation of the world has registered itself, and is still speaking, and will speak forever in vibration. ("Each Wild Idea", by Geoffrey Batchen, chapter 8, page 167)......"

Nature represents itself on paper or on video, through the means "light" and "photographic device". The human being can limit himself to the role of a semi-passive user of a recorder (the photographic device) or he can take on a more active role, up to, once again, being the painter, who uses light as a brush. 

I like to think that this is my role as a photographer and that it depends only on me, on my ability to express my vision of reality, on my ability to concentrate a story on a small area of ​​film or on a surface of photodiodes. 

In my opinion, if the photographer manages to keep this active role, then the images he obtains transcend the photographic medium and, above all, the technology they implement. 

Here I refer to the second reading ( "Ectoplasm: Photography in the Digital Age", by Geoffrey Batchen). 

I am not interested in photographic manipulation and the construction of images through digital tools. However, I do not recognize myself in the constant questioning of photography as a minor art form, of digital photography as a killer of analogic photography and, through this suppression, a killer of photographic art itself through the poison of possible manipulation. 

As I said earlier, in my opinion, the techniques of representation can be the most varied, from the painter's brush to the engraver's chisel, to the sculptor's hammer and chisel, up to the purely digital instrument. 

We have seen that even techniques of appropriation, sometimes considered at the limit or even beyond the limit of the right to copy, have been accepted as an art form. For this reason, these readings have certainly not disturbed me or made me think that I have dedicated my passion to something dying and, on the contrary, they have transmitted to me even more enthusiasm and passion.