When is a photograph a lie?
Written by duckrabbitIt’s hard to argue with a photographer when they point to a photo of their own that they once loved but now think is a ‘lie’.
Simon Sticker has done just that in an interesting post about a photo he took in Rwanda.
In photography he says, referring to his own pictures, a ‘lie’ does not have to be a staged photo or a photo-shopped monstrosity, it has much more to do with where the photo takes an audience when they look at it.
For me this is a really profound thought. Think about it. Why don’t we consider this more when we value a photo? Of course we do consider this a lot and sadly there has been a tendency to value photographs, particularly about the ‘other’, the developing world, that twist and bend the truth. That take us to a place that is no more real than believing the advert for Disneyland will give you the real America.
The classic example from recent years is Marco Vernashchi’s work in Guinea Bissau that is brilliantly executed but in terms of actual journalism was torn to pieces, and that’s before you even get into the question of just how much of it was staged!
Here’s an excerpt from Simon’s blog post (Story V Aesthetic). Do read it.
I remember one day in this old school in Rwanda where during the genocide 50.000 people were killed. Part of the dead bodies are conserved in the rooms and I was there to take photographs. A horrific place and the purpose of taking pictures was the only thing that kept me from emotionally breaking down while I was there. Later I was looking at the pictures and it striked me that some of them had this powerful aesthetics in it, what I loved at that time. Today I look at them and I’m not sure if I did a good job. Aesthetically, ya, maybe, but did I tell the story properly? I’m not sure. Another picture is nothing less than a lie for me today. There is nothing staged or so, but it is a lie, because of where it takes people that look at it. While I was in one of the rooms, I saw this big dirty part on the wall (no painting or something like that) that looked a bit like Africa in it’s form. With the head of one of the bodies in the foreground, a picture would create a powerful connection and tell a story. I was fascinated by that at the time. Easy to tell, easy to understand. But what I created was a stereotypical lie about Africa and the perception of the continent in the western world. It is just another excuse to make it easy to see no need to learn and understand more of the continent or ask.
Discussion (1 Comment)
I would agree on Colin Jacobson’s opinion voiced at Amnesty International talk “Does the camera ever lie?”: “A reflected reality is also set up, such as reflective photography. We can’t condemn that to the dustbin of history. It feels genuine and helps illustrate the story.” Read the rest of the transcript we wrote here: http://www.sojournposse.com/?p=4867
Digging a kid’s grave for a story is immoral. That’s forensic photography, not photojournalism.