Photography is an act of taking; and, today I really sensed the weakness of just “taking”. Why do I say that, you may ask? Although I cannot call myself a photographer, but the action of taking photographs have made me realize how much I am taking from the photo: its life, its reality, its truth. Yet, taking photographs is probably the only thing I do. How many times have I took pictures of happiness, anger, and even sorrow, and then walked away just like a stranger? When I came across a stray dog on the street today, I was shocked by the pain and loneliness embedded in its food-deprived, yellow eyes. It was a collie-type dog, a dog that would have been very popular in
As all these things were happening, I could have taken out my camera, capture a couple of shots and upload it, blog it, and that was it. Instead, as soon as I realize how easy it was for me to capture the weakness of the dog in my photo, but do nothing about it, I walked away, just because I chose to be a by-stander.
In no means do I imply that photography is a bad thing. Perhaps, I may be really wrong about this. However, in writing this, I only wanted to remind myself that photography is a powerful tool, yet a simple photo sometimes really understates the stunning reality behind it. Whether it be professional or amateur, if we could all become active photographers, then this world would probably change, in a good way. Right?
September 14th, 2007, a day of realization.
7 comments:
I think you are right about photography being a simple act of "taking" instead of giving as it is often left in the dark without further reflections. But I think the purpose of photography is making you "realizing" the fact that it is up to "you" to take actions. The act itself in photographing is taking actions. I think you've done more than you think. Some people may never realize that. Anyways, sorry for blabbering on, I am just glad that you feel the same way too. :)
coco d'or:
I really hope so. It's not only photography that alarmed me of how easy it is for us to be bystanders, when the world is in pain. This might be too pessimistic, but I think it is important not to dwell on the big things we are not capable of, because the smallest action may be very significant to others. It's only an inspiration. Thanks for sharing, I really appreciate it!
"but I think it is important not to dwell on the big things we are not capable of, because the smallest action may be very significant to others."
//Sometimes people are criticized for not taking the "smallest action." Kevin Carter, the South African photographer would be a great example of that. His image of a starving Sudanese toddler stalked by a vulture won him a Pulitzer Prize of the year, but he also came under heavy criticism for just photographing — and not helping — the little girl. Of course, it is easy to criticize Kevin Carter, for he didnt do the "small" things. But we all tend to forget the fact that a few pieces of bread DOESN'T save the kid. Kevin CAN'T save her.
And then the guy suicided. He was haunted by the vivid memories of the pain in life and the "small" things that he was not able to do.
And how here's also sth. about the "big things." Martin Niemoeller had a famous piece about bystanders:
First, they shut out the Muslim refugees
but I was not a Muslim
and so I said nothing.
Then, they shut out the other refugees
but I was not a refugee
and so I said nothing.
Then, they put stars on the immigrants
but I was not an immigrant
and so I said nothing.
Then they marked the citizens born elsewhere
but I was born here
and so I said nothing.
Then they numbered the citizens born here
gave them a card and confined them
but by that time
there was no country left to protect me.
I believe things he described in the poem are the "big things."
When the world is really in pain the masses tend to think they are not capable of doing anything.Ironically, they turn to be the next martyrs.
___________________
These are just some thoughts that I think might be interesting..
Sometimes I feel it's hard to tell what the big/small things are. The situation's always more complicated than we could think of.
anyway..i think i wrote too much xD
just want to say that you arent a bystander,cuz a real bystander doesnt say a word.
terry:
I guess this is a very hard question. In Kevin Carter's case, I am sure he took the photograph out of good intentions because he was trying to capture the reality of the situation. However, even if pieces of bread could not sustain the life of the little girl, I think I would have given the bread to her. At least, I think that would be the best I could do at the moment. To me, trying one's best to act is the most important thing. People always say, progress is more significant than the result, I guess that would well define this situation. You could say I might have been trying to save my conscience, but at least I tried. But then again, there is always another side of the story right?
terry:
(another thought)
I think the whole debate/concern towards Kevin Carter's photography ethics was not what he did not do. I believe people probably would have neglected the fact that he did nothing if he did not win the Putlitzer Prize. It was the Putlitzer Prize that put him on the stand of judgement. Who knows? Maybe it was recognition that stirred up other emotions.
"Maybe it was recognition that stirred up other emotions."
//Yeah that's a good point.
I guess I just simply don't like moral judgements =P
terry:
hey, that's okay because everyone has their point of views. And, thanks for commenting so much! I really enjoy reading them.
Post a Comment