Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 2

EduBlog Post October 30, 2017:

Karel Lagerfeld, a German photographer explains how photographs “capture a moment

that’s gone forever, impossible to reproduce.” Yet, the moment they capture may be understood

wrong without context. Photographs have the power to intellectually inform us, yet they also can

warp an event to convey the wrong message. Susan Sontag argues that these photographs can

only provide emotional knowledge, not knowledge about politics or ethics. A picture of a flower

or other “nature things” has only emotional significance - a representation of tranquility or

stillness, not a source of knowledge. However, some photographs challenge people’s ideas and

reveal hidden truths while others mislead people. For example, ​Nick Ut’s photograph of the

napalm bombing depicts the American atrocities in Vietnam and challenges the ethics of the

United States’ attack on Vietnam to stop the end to Communism. ​While most Americans believe

that Communism was an evil in the world, the United States has burned innocent children,

utilizing the immoral napalm bombing. Ut’s photograph challenges some Americans’ belief that

the United States’ were fighting for just and exposes the wrongdoing of the United States.

Similarly, Nilufer Demir’s photograph of a dead child on the shores of Europe provides evidence

that the current politics of restricting immigration into some countries is unethical and even

inhumane. The photograph implies that the policies of many countries deny even young Syrian

children asylum; the dead body symbolizes the unethical nature of these policies. Seeking to

inform viewers of a political message, ​Demir’s photograph still evokes emotion, despair and

outrage, while questioning the world’s government actions that harm innocent Syrian people’s

lives.
However, other photographs do not depict such ideas and only evoke sentimental

thoughts. Some even conceal the context of photograph, restricting people’s understanding of the

events. Kevin Carter’s photograph of the vulture peering at the child’s emaciated body only

evokes sympathy and despair for that little girl’s plight. Yet, it ignores how Carter made no effort

to help this starving child. People do sympathize with the abject conditions of children in Sudan,

yet they do not consider the true context that many photographers, like Carter, witness suffering

and do nothing to alleviate their misery or help the victims. One photograph can hide this

startling circumstance, limiting people’s understanding on the morality of Carter’s inactivity.

The iconic photograph of the American soldier returning after World War II and kissing a nurse

displays the jubilation of returning victorious, yet this photograph does not illustrate the suffering

of Jewish people during World War II. Millions of Jewish people died in internment camps, yet

the photograph does not allude to those deaths. It does not depict political or ethical knowledge,

only emotional knowledge that misleads us into believing that the war was a “happy” victory for

the Allies.

While photographs are considered to be worth “a thousand words,” without words or

without context, some are misleading and cause people to misunderstand the event. Sontag

claims that photographs hide worldly truths and fail to inform people about politics and ethics.

This is only partially valid. Some photographs do fail to reveal truths, and instead evoke

emotions and limit our understanding of the world. At the same time, other photographs

challenge people’s views to allow them to form a broader world view.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi