Narrativity and Stasis

I believe it was August Sander who said "I want to photograph the world."  George Baker's essay discussing narrative and stasis does an interesting job of dissecting the difference between these two and how they relate to Sander's portraits.

Baker defines the two as such... "By narrativity, I mean simply those techniques that sustain a readable discourse, involving duration, movement, and inevitably a certain sense of plurality.  Stasis, on the other hand, involves signifying properties that are diametrically opposed to those of narrativity, encompassing primarily the petrifaction of motion, the freezing of time, and instead of plurality, the fixed or repetitive motif.  Photography is a static medium.  It is a moment frozen in time, and we are seeing a representation of that object, person, or landscape.  

To me, all photography, and most especially portraiture, has a narrative and a stasis.  While the photograph is a single frozen frame, it also presents a story.  We are humans looking at representations of other humans and therefore have a tendency to try and connect to their lives in some way.  In looking at one of Sander's images below- it is a natural development to begin constructing a story about the man depicted.  He is a chef- which we conclude by his presence in the kitchen and he is holding a mixing bowl.  While photography does not provide us with the future, it does give us clues to make guesses about what is about to occur.

Below I just included two portraits, the first from Bill Sullivan and the second from Anthony Blasko.  While in my own theory that narrative is created simply by context clues and our own imaginations- does it then matter if the narrative imagined is incorrect?