It was Robert Capa’s photograph of The Falling Soldier
that changed the perception of people about war photography. Capa shot the
photo in September 1936. Wikipedia informs me that war photography began nearly
eight decades before Capa’s iconic photograph – in the Crimean war of 1853-56, when
Roger Fenton became the first ‘embedded’ photographer to capture the action in Crimea.
The entry on war photography claims that first war photographs were shot by a
British army surgeon during the second Sikh war in the Indian subcontinent (now
Pakistan).
War photography brought the
horrors of the war into the living rooms and on the breakfast table through the
newspapers. Photographs such as Eddie Adam’s impromptu shot of General Nguyễn
Ngọc Loan shooting a Viet Cong spy on the streets of Saigon, or Nick Ut's
photograph of Kim Phuc and other young children running after being caught in a
napalm attack changed the complexion of the war in Vietnam, and turned the
public opinion decisively against the American misadventure.
(Incidentally, Kim Phuc is now a
Canadian, living in Ajax, Ontario).
The Gulf War and the advent of
CNN changed not only war coverage but also the media. Technology enabled the
horrors of war to be telecast into our living rooms as they happened. Among the
most memorable television images of that era are of CNN’s live coverage of the
coalition campaign’s bombing of Iraq captured through night vision camera. Peter
Arnett, CNN’s reporter in Baghdad, became a globally known journalist. Arnett
had also won a Pulitzer for his Vietnam coverage.
The attack on the twin towers, the
saturated coverage of the tragedy globally, and the second Gulf War was the
beginning of a new era in war photography. For the first time, media’s coverage
of the war was regulated, and surprisingly the powerful western media that had
set global standards of free speech, acquiesced.
|
Rita Leistner |
In a deeply insightful review (published
in Literary Review of Canada, March 2013) of Michael Maclear’s Guerrilla Nation: My War In and Out of
Vietnam, Rita Leistner, internationally renowned photojournalist and an
author, says, “Humans have always used the most recent technology available to
document war – the history of every war has a parallel story of its emerging,
dominant technologies. The Crimean War was the first war to be photographed;
the Iraq war was the first to be defined by digital cameras and same-day
transmission of media by internet and satellite; the Arab Spring changed the game
entirely when civilians documented the uprising from within using their own
smartphones; today, the World Wide Web is rapidly replacing newspapers and
television altogether.”
Rita Leistner was one of the participants
at an engaging discussion on Art and War organized as part of the Spur Festival
– a festival of politics, art and ideas – last week in Toronto by
Helen Walsh and her team from Literary Review of Canada and Diaspora Dialogues.
|
James Wellford |
Michael Kamber was the other
photojournalist, and James Wellford, Newsweek’s
photo editor, was the moderator. The
discussion was “not just the practicalities and ethics of capturing images in
the midst of conflict but also the stories that emerge from it.” When
intelligence is mixed with experience and a shared perspective, it results in a
scintillating exchange of ideas that is at once enthralling and disturbing
because of what is said, and also for what is implied.
Rita and Michael are amazing raconteurs,
and James a minimalist moderator who infrequently prodded the panelists to
gently guide the discussion into a different dimension (and being a New Yorker couldn't help himself from using the f word at least once during the
discussion). Disturbing though it may seem, both the photojournalists agreed
that there is a deep aesthetic involved in the depiction of carnage; “people
expect to see visually arresting and clinically composed photographs.” Both
also agreed that extreme mastery over what was essentially a mechanical craft
was essential for success.
|
Michael Kamber |
The discussion was interspersed
with photo slides of Michael’s and Rita’s works (mostly in Iraq, but also in
other parts of the Middle East and in north and West Africa). Both extensively
covered the Iraq invasion and captured the horrors of the war in their own
individualistic (and artistic) ways. Nearly a year before the Abu Gharib
torture photographs were published, Rita had documented photographic evidence
of torture, but couldn’t find any takers for her work. It was only after Associated
Press exposed the Abu Gharib torture was she able to get her work widely
published. Similarly, Michael also found a lot of his work censored by the US
military.
And yet, rather surprisingly,
both were not totally opposed to embedded journalism. “Without that (protection
offered by being embedded) you couldn’t possibly last till the first afternoon,”
Michael said rather impatiently to a question about the ethics of embedded
journalism from a member of the audience.
Both reacted differently to the
extreme physical and emotional stress they encountered on assignment. “I wanted
to shoot everything, without really thinking about what I’d use. You realize
that you’re in a part of history that’s soon going to pass,” Michael said, and
confessed, “I was terrified the whole time. My hands were shaking when I took
the photographs.” (of a soldier who was cut into half from waist when he
stepped on a hidden explosive).
Similarly, Rita also confessed to
emotional trauma but insisted on returning to the war harbouring the hope that
just by capturing the carnage, you believe that somehow you can stop it in some
way; that brutality could be stopped or scaled back after the photographs were published.
Both also agreed to absolute necessity of protecting the context of the
photographs and rights of the subjects of their photographs.
Michael’s photographs from
Liberia and Rita’s photographs from the asylum in Sadr city (a Shia suburb of
Baghdad) were the images that conveyed – without the necessity of words – the true
meaning of war and art.
The video recording of the debate:
No comments:
Post a Comment