Second, the captions on the photos: I have to check the French edition, but I think they should be duplicated there. The captions quote the text, but never exactly. There is always distortion in captions' citing of the text, so that they function to clarify the photo in relationship to the text. But if there is an inexact citation of the text in the effort to accommodate the photo, can one really say that the captions help relate the text to the photo? For me, they disturb it.
Third, "I could do no more than await my total, undialectical death" (72): this is according to Barthes what happens when you "find" the photo, your photo. You stumble and hover on until your death, like you are already dead. But this is because indeed you have already died: the photo you find will have to be a mourning photo, a photo whereby the punctum for you shatters the image so much it buries itself in you if only because you are so absolutely ready to receive it--it is your punctum after all, your photo. When you find this, you die just as much as what you were mourning for in the photo. A real photo is a relation between two killed people, two dead people, and in that sense it cannot, must not be dialectical.
I'll thematize all this more, but I just wanted to get it out there.