Photography, art, and crisis
Two photos depict children seemingly at peace in the midst of crisis. It’s the contrast that makes these images memorable–and controversial.
June 17th, 2009 | by Anna Kramer
Photo: Kenny Rae / Oxfam America
This morning I saw an intriguing note from my Oxfam colleague Liz Lucas about yesterday’s post on Lens, The New York Times’ blog on photography, video, and visual journalism. “The picture on this blog is unbelievably beautiful,” Liz wrote. “Check out the photo and the forum debating whether photos of suffering constitute art.”
I should say that, although the written word is my medium, I’m a huge photography fan. I can spend hours exploring the hidden treasures on photo sharing sites like Flickr. Though I try to observe the details around me, I find that photos (even my own) often show me things that I’ve never noticed before.
The picture Liz was writing about is no exception. Taken by AP photographer Emilio Moranatti, it centers on a young boy sleeping soundly among the soft, misty folds of a mosquito net. The moment seems like a tranquil one, hushed and comfortable–until you read the caption and learn that the boy is a displaced person, living in a refugee camp outside Peshawar, Pakistan.
Moranatti’s photo made me think of another image of a young boy, perched in the wreckage of a bombed-out building in Gaza, cheerfully eating a piece of bread. This photo, taken by my colleague Kenny Rae, was featured on our Oxfam blog in February, and was recently named a finalist in InterAction’s 7th Annual NGO photo contest.
Both of these photos depict a child seemingly at peace in the midst of crisis. Both hint at suffering and at an unlikely happiness. It’s the contrast that makes them memorable–and controversial.
On the Lens blog, Moranatti’s photo inspired readers and experts to debate a number of questions. Is it okay to “make art out of human suffering” ? Does such a photo trivialize or elevate its subject? Is it the photographer’s duty to be truthful to what he or she sees, or is it up to him or her to cast things in a new, and surprising, light? And what are the moral implications when the picture is of a child?
At Oxfam, we think hard about these questions. Our photographs are a huge part of our identity as an organization; we try to use photography to convey the truth of poverty and humanitarian crises, while also depicting the people living in these situations as strong, dignified, and empowered. From my colleagues, I’ve learned that something as simple as shooting from below people’s eye line instead of from above (when you’re literally looking down on them), or showing them in action instead of standing passively, can make all the difference in viewers’ perceptions.
We do our best. But it’s always a delicate balance.
Comments
6 Responses to “Photography, art, and crisis”
Join the discussion
Author
Anna Kramer
Writer Anna Kramer joined Oxfam America in 2005. Based in Boston, she covers a broad range of issues for Oxfam, with a focus on our campaigns and organizing work.
See more posts from Anna Kramer
I applaud your efforts to maintain the delicate balance of human suffering through the medium of photography. When I saw the photo of the boy. I was thankful that he had a smile,
It did not communicate a \rosy\ scenario, and that nothing needed to be done.
Any rational adult would surmise this from the picture. I find it hopeful to see that children can still smile amidst truly difficult situations.(most adults cannot)
Bravo for first rate photography and for having the courage to post the picture.
If anything it emphasizes the complexity of the situation.
it does feel wrong at first glance. there’s a element of unfairness here which contradicts social norms – the photographer creates a piece of art out of someone’s misery and is rewarded financially(not always) and he receives credit for his work while the subject gets nothing. seems opportunistic even, doesn’t it?
but what if we didn’t have any photos from places where there is human suffering? whether or not they are beautiful ones. we may never realize the gravity of their situation. we do need photos of human suffering when words fail to tell their full story.
And if these photos do succeed in inspiring more help to these poor regions, the photos serves not just a reminder but a teacher to us all that there are those far less fortunate than we are. And they need our help.
If taking artistic photos of the suffering is wrong BUT these photos do help us realize the need for our help, Then maybe wat we need are “Poor quality photos of poor and suffering people”. Is this OK?
OR
BOTH the person(s) in the photo and the person taking it should be given credit for each beautiful photo. would this make it OK?
Is it okay to “make art out of human suffering” ? Art is not always loyal to the truth and most often it deviates or even distorts reality. I think pictures are no different. In the effort to create art, the photographer runs a real risk of portraying a perverse view of the situation.
Images have a powerful impact on people’s opinions.
that’s why advertisements can so powerfully influence crowds while being misleading at the same time right?
The human spirit prevails despite hunger, hardship, violence. To a child each day is new, and through their young eyes it is important to realize that hope, albeit challenged, is reality.
Thanks all for your thoughtful comments. Peggy and Virginia, it’s interesting that you brought up the particular resilience of children in difficult situations, which is certainly captured in both of the pictures under discussion. Kenny Rae, the Oxfam aid worker who took the photo above was just telling me about how he’s always surprised to see children playing and laughing, even in moments of great hardship or after disasters–and how he feels that it’s something that needs to be captured in order to tell the full story. I’ve asked him to do a follow up post here about his photographic experiences so hopefully he’ll have more to share on the subject.
John, you make some great points as well–particularly where you say that both the people in the photo and the person taking it should be credited. That’s somethign we do aim for at Oxfam: always credit the photographer, and whenever possible, give the name of the person in the photo and give some context about their situation. That way, as you say, the credit is shared (to an extent) between the photographer and subject. But maybe there’s more we could be doing?
In the field, following a disaster, I never think of photography as art. When I do take a photograph I think about the message it will convey to those who will view it, primarily on Oxfam’s website. My aim might be to convey the scale and impact of a disaster, and my photo might not include people, or they may be visible only in the distance. When people are the subjects I try as much as possible to present them not as victims, but by documenting their dignity and resourcefulness.
As Anna says, I am often amazed amazed by the reaction of children, who might be living in the worst of conditions, to a camera. Often what logistically should be a sombre scene is transformed by a bunch of children jumping around and laughing in front of my camera . I’ll give some examples of these in a separate blog post shortly.