In the book "On Looking At Photographs"-David Hurn/Bill Jay ,I find the following quote really interesting:
" This is a true story. A photographer was asleep next to his wife. The bedside telephone rang. He switched on the lamp, listened to the voice on the other end of the line, then asked the caller to hold on and placed the receiver on the table. He left the bedroom and returned with his camera. After taking an exposure reading, setting the controls and focusing on his wife, he woke her up and told her the call was for her. He photographed her changes of expression and distress as she was told by the caller that her mother had just died.
Does this incident reflect an admirable commitment on the part of the photographer to record every aspect of life and not only its happier moments? Are we, as viewers of photographs, made more aware of shared emotions, and therefore become increasingly humane by participating in the wife’s grief? Or: is this a reflection of gross insensitivity on the part of the photographer who was uncaringly intruding on his wife’s grief merely to take a picture? Does such a picture force us to participate in an act of unfeeling voyeurism? Are there some aspects of life which are too personal to be photographed?"
Gosh - that oversteps the mark in my opinion! The worst (and best?) thing i've ever done that gets even close to that was at my sister's wedding. My granny was too ill to attend, so I got her to phone me up and leave a message on my answer machine and I then recorded it to an MP3. I played the message over speakers at the appropriate place in the speeches. I had my camera ready for both my Mum and my sister's reactions. Both were choked, but happy at the thought. Now my grandmother is no longer with us - I think we all look back on those photos with a cosy feeling. I'm not sure photographing my mother at my grandmothers funeral / hospital bed or otherwise is something I would want to remember or want anyone else to see. These are private and precious moments and painful even in one's own minid let alone in black and white in front of you!
I bet those photographs packed a punch, but no matter how artistic and poignant those photo's would be, I personally would'nt want to see someone else's pain in that way.
That, to me, is about as cold, selfish and uncompassionate as it gets. It shows a total lack of respect for his own wife's grief and privacy. I can't imagine my husband "setting up" that shot...and for whose benefit? A flagrant personal foul!
The most shocking thing happened to a friend of mine. She and her sister were attending to her mother's dead corpse to ensure that it would leave the rest of the family, who would be seeing her, with good memories. Her mum always wore make up and even applied varnish to her nails just before becoming unconscious. Presentation was obviously very important to her. She always had bright lipstick on and her appearance meant that some knew her as 'the Duchess'. Whilst being treated in hospital her nail varnish was removed, so now, my friend and her sister were making sure that there mum would out in the style she had been used to and were making her up with own colours. It was tough to do but her mum would have wanted that and it hid some of the bruising. At the end suddenly, without any warning the son-in-law, a person her mum had at best tolerated rather than held any affection for, appeared with a huge camera and flash. My friend remonstrated but her sister insisted that their mum would have wanted this. Physical force would have been needed to remove the brother-in-law, who despite my friends distress, carried on papparazzi-like. She departed rather than argue. Hours later after the funeral, the pictures were shared round at the family gathering. My friend knew her mother would have loathed it and her own distress had been completely overridden.
This was crossing the line, totally disrespectful and was painful enough - What you describe is beyond the pail. I expect that you think so too. It amazes me that people do these things.
@sparkle I think what you did is rather lovely and clearly well intended.
If someone did that to me, they would have definitely crossed my line and would have to deal with the consequences....what this guy did, and to his wife...I wasn't there, so have no idea, so can't really say. What kind of relationship do they have? Is this a common thing they do as a couple?.....Maybe it works both ways and she takes pics of HIM under extreme stress. Different strokes for different folks. Let's hope it was all discussed and laid out before he started ... otherwise I think he's landed himself in the divorce courts.
That's incredibly insensitive! He should have been there supporting her.
I thought it was going to be like the joke...
MORAL DILEMMA
This test will only take one minute and only has one question, but it's
a very important one.
By giving an honest answer, you will discover where you stand morally.
The test features an unlikely, completely fictional situation in which
you will have to make a decision.
Remember that your answer needs to be honest, yet spontaneous.
Please scroll down slowly and give due consideration to each line.
THE SITUATION:
You are in Queensland , Brisbane to be specific.
There is chaos all around you caused by a cyclone, with severe flooding.
This is a flood of biblical proportions.
You are a photo-journalist working for a major newspaper, and you're
caught in the middle of this epic disaster.
The situation is nearly hopeless. You're trying to shoot career-making
photos.
There are houses and people swirling around you, some disappearing into
the water.
Nature is unleashing all of its destructive fury.
THE TEST:
Suddenly, you see a man in the water.
He is fighting for his life, trying not to be taken down with the
debris. You move closer... Somehow, the man looks familiar...
You suddenly realize who it is..
It's Kevin Rudd! [That's Australia's old prime minister]
You notice that the raging waters are about to take him under forever.
You have two options:
1. You can save his life; or
2. You can shoot a dramatic Pulitzer Prize winning photo, documenting
the death of one of the country's most powerful men!
THE QUESTION:
Here's the question, and please give an honest answer...
Would you select high contrast colour film, or would you go with the
classic simplicity of black and white?
@carebear Hahahaha,that`s a good one! It reminds me of a less funny and not photography-related joke
"An example of serious moral dillemma: seeing your brand new car hanging on the side of a cliff....with your mother in-law inside!"... :)
I know that my good lady would have wanted to know what the f**k I was doing and told me in no uncertain terms to put the effing camera away! And probably given me a damned good beating to boot.
Totally agree with everyone said here, insensitive and overstepping the mark. (I did get a giggle from Care bears joke but that is a joke and this is a real situation).
I woulda sent him to the dog house for sure. And then maybe to the court house for a divorce!
Even as photojournalists, we know not to capture certain moments in times of grief. It's insensitive and inhumane. And these are strangers we're being considerate of. I can't imagine how a husband could do this to his wife at a moment if dispair.
Instinct says that he was insensitive to his wife's grief by recording it - I think that the author perhaps misses a point when he asks whether such a picture forces US (ie the audience) to become voyeurs intruding on a moment of personal grief, more important is that in this moment he was acting as a photographer and voyeur and, one can only assume, not as a husband. Rather than emotionally involving himself and supporting his wife and grieving with her, he put himself behind a viewfinder - an act many photographers find to have an emotionally distancing effect.
A few years ago I saw an exhibition where the photographer documented her mother's journey through terminal cancer. It was quite controversial, and equally confronting, but was done with the mother's consent and blessing and in a way that honoured her. It was incredibly beautifully done. But whilst this process had a sense of love, of inclusion and respect about it, the situation described above has the sense of coldness, of disregard for, and lack of respect for the humanity of the one grieving. Of course, we don't know the dynamic of the relationship, but by the way it was described it sounds like a cold act and not one of love.
I think we aren't given the benefit of context with this example - and so I really cannot judge. While I feel it can certainly be interpreted as insensitive and unfeeling, we simply don't have all the information!
An example: My best friend and her husband are professional photojournalists, and they frequently document deeply personal stories for their work - and often in their own and friends' personal lives, as well.
One example is a couple, their friends, who her husband photographed over the course of some time for a project. The couple had been trying to conceive a child through any and all means medical - there were intensely difficult shots to view in that series, as attempt after attempt failed, but the images were all made within the scope of an agreed-upon documentation of the process and experience, painful though the couple knew it might be to them in the moment.
The same best friend documented her own father's process of dying, her family's caretaking of him in his final weeks, and his death. Of course, the photographers may be (and often are) crying behind the viewfinder him or herself as they record such moments! My point is, there are so very many professional photographers like my friends, whose livelihood and interest in photography goes well beyond only making appealing pictures, mastering bokeh, and documenting the happy joys of daily life.
So for consideration: Perhaps the mother had been sick and the death expected, or the woman and mother had a very complex relationship that was being documented for a project, or the moment had been previously agreed upon as 'photograph-able' for some purpose we do not know about from this quote.
A woman married to a photographer who WOULD do this would most certainly know the extent of his dedication - I can't imagine it wasn't planned, approved, or at least expected.
way over the line, seems like he loved his camera and photo's more than he did his wife. He should have just been with her to hold and console her===what a fullblown JERK he is.
for most people (as shown here) it would be crossing the line, but everyone is different. Without knowing the intimacies of the two (maybe she likes to be his constant subject..or is fed up with him constantly clicking their life away) it is up in the air.
There are plenty of highly emotional photos of people receiving shocking news, that would be photo journalism. This don't mean that the photographer is 'unfeeling', they are doing what they do, capturing a moment. Maybe it's 'hiding behind the lens' or it could be how they cope with things. So many variables.
I think that was overstepping for sure, since she was his wife. It's his job as the husband to be the support system in times like those, not to take a photo of her grief as if he isn't even a part of it. We don't know their relationship though. This may be something the two of them share-taking stark photos of their lives, good or bad. It may be something she would appreciate being captured. (I don't believe that, but I figured I'd play devils advocate.)
I had a similar situation where I didn't know what to do, but in the end I was hired as their photographer so I had to take the photos. I think the groom still dislikes me for it, but there's not much I can do.
A couple that booked us for a wedding had to move their date up significantly because the groom's mother had terminal cancer and was expected to pass on at any time. So their beautiful outside spring wedding turned into an outside winter wedding. SO cold. But that's beside the point.
His mother was there, she looked so ill it was hard in my human nature to look at her and introduce myself. But she knew it was her time and the things she said to us about the photos she wanted still stick with me. The groom hardly spoke to her, I'm not sure if it was because of his grief, but I certainly didn't expect the Mother/Son dance to be as emotional as it was because of his distance toward her.
When the dance came, he started out just as stiff as he'd been all evening, so there I was (the detail photographer) getting as close as it was respectful and taking the zoomed in shots. Then suddenly, he became overwhelmed with emotion and hugged his mother so fiercely and tried so hard to hold back his tears that he began sort of gasping for breath. He was burying his face in her shoulder, I think trying to hide from me. I did not know what to do. I was crying...everyone in the room was. They were all silent, and here I was, feeling like such a voyeur. Like the damn paparazzi or something. I had to make a decision- do I respect this moment, though he never told me to go away- or do I take these photos in hopes that he may want to see them again someday.
It was a split second decision, one I still struggle with, but I chose to take the photos. I don't even know if they were good or in focus, I was crying so hard.
When it was all said and done his wife asked us to remove those photos from the web hosting site so that no other family members could see, but she wanted a copy of them herself, so I can only assume that she appreciated them.
We just did a wedding this weekend where both of them were in attendance and the wife ended up talking to me quite a bit, but the husband...not a word. Avoided eye contact even.
I feel bad, but then I feel like I did the right thing too. Not sure if I crossed the line. Hopefully he'll look back at those photos one day and appreciate them.
I would have to agree with the others who've mentioned the context of the situation - while it's not of too much relevance to my overall opinion, it probably does make a difference in this case. Assuming she's a fairly tolerant wife and he's generally a loving, empathetic husband, then this is an outrageous thing to do to someone. However, it could be that she's the type of person that'd want this documented (for what ever reason; it's beyond me) - surely he knows his wife. Generally speaking though, I would say shooting such a personal thing is going too far (without their consent... unless it's a good overwhelming, as opposed to bad overwhelming)
i think he got a great shot, as twisted as that sounds. i would hope i would do the same thing. with the drowning, high speed black and white would be my choice.
i know i am in the minority in my opinion here, but getting a shot like that with that much emotion doesn't come around very often, so grab it. i have shot something similar, a mother and father standing on a road, at the scene of the accident their son was in, they had gotten a call and rushed there. i snapped a shot of the two of them as the crew pulled out their kid. the only thing that upset me was that it was film i had developed myself, and was new to developing film, and did not turn out the greatest. i would do something like that again in a heartbeat. its simple, people die. others cry. that makes for a lot of emotion and expression, and great shots. and yes, i am fully ware i am cold hearted, but to get good shots sometimes you have to go a bit farther out on the edge of morality.
On this, I have two stories to share. My friend/mentor/first boss in my career as a photographer once won a Citizenship Award in Wilmington, NC. At the time, which I think was around the late 1990's, he was the photo editor at the local newspaper. He was shooting a piece on dog attacks in a neighborhood when he saw a police officer getting attacked by two dogs.
My friend shot an amazing photo of the police officer on the ground, the dog's teeth sunk into his forearm, pulling the officer across the ground. However, the very moment after he shot that photo, he put his camera aside and ran over to save the police officer's life and chase off the dog.
For many months now I have had a project stuck in my head. I have tried a couple of times to get this photo shoot off the ground, but I keep running into problems. I want to shoot a project called A Day in a Mortician's Life.
It is exactly like it sounds. I want to spend a day shooting a mortician performing his or her job in preparing a body for an open casket funeral. As you can imagine, there are many difficulties. How do I ask a family who has just lost a loved one if I can photograph their dead body being prepared for a funeral? How do I shoot those photos in a tasteful manner? It is very, very delicate and I have not been able to find a way to do it yet.
Photography is a very, very subjective art. Some people can look at a 3D puzzle for hours and never see the photo beneath, while others glance at it and see it immediately. Photography is much the same: some people would greatly appreciate the value of a photographer shooting photos of his wife's reaction to the news of her mother's death, while others just simply won't get it.
I have always believed, and always will believe, that anything a photographer does is acceptable as long as it does not bring harm to the subject we photograph. We aren't always gonna shoot puppies and rainbows; sometimes, we're gonna shoot gang violence and destruction of property.
At first sight, it seems an insensitive thing to do - if that were me, I wouldn't want to be photographed while receiving such news, it's a very emotional and intimate moment, and I would feel like my privacy has been severely infringed.
However, isn't that what professional photographers/journalists do on a regular basis, when covering events, such as funerals, wars, violence, etc...? Often, people get photographed in situations where they are grieving, shocked and frightened. They are documented by strangers, in most cases unwantedly and unwillingly so.
If his wife were to be photographed by a stranger while receiving this sad news, it would surely be considered less outrageous. But, since it's her husband, the person closest to her, I can imagine the line is crossed, as he should choose for compassion rather than composition, like Amy said.
We don't know the context, of course...I for one would wish not to be photographed during such a moment by a person close to me, knowing I need my privacy. Another option would be that his wife would be so immersed in grief, that at that moment, she wouldn't pay attention/couldn't care less about being photographed or not. How would react she afterwards, being confronted with the shots...? It depends very much on what kind of understanding/relationship they have and how they define mutual respect.
"We aren't always gonna shoot puppies and rainbows; sometimes, we're gonna shoot gang violence and destruction of property."
That is true...
"Does such a picture force us to participate in an act of unfeeling voyeurism?"
There often is a delicate/vague border between (unfeeling) voyeurism and shared emotions/grief.
Sometimes I watch photos of atrocities or grief, photographed by journalists, and partly feel like an intruder, wanting to turn away my eyes from the page, yet I can't help staring and feeling like a participator, wondering about the impact of the grief, being deeply touched by it.
That is horrible. Definitely crossing the line. Strangely though, I remember feeling violated when I saw that my cousin was taking a picture of me as I stood at my mother's coffin before it was lowered into the ground, but now I kind of want to see that picture. (I never asked her about it.)
With the information given, I would have to say he crossed the line - a husbands #1 job and responsibility is to be there for his wife in times of distress, and he detached himself from the situation by standing behind his camera.
Also, there is the fact of the person on the other end of the line; they (most likely another grieving family member) have been given the task of delivering the news to his wife, and he essentially puts them on hold for what, 5 minutes, while he retrieves and sets up his camera? What if during that time, the wife awoke to find her husband not in bed, and saw the phone off the hook? Now she's getting the news and is completely alone.
There is the possibility that this type of arrangement is common and/or accepted in their marriage, but I would find that rather unlikely.
The bottom line is, at the time when he was most needed to don his 'Husband' hat and be a source of comfort and consolation, he choose instead to detach from the situation, don his 'Photographer' hat, and be an observer.
A line from the musical "Rent" comes to mind: "You pretend to create and observe, when you really detach from feeling alive"
For me, it's not the fact that he photographed her during this difficult time, but that he wasn't there by her side, holding her hand or hugging her, while she took in the bad news.
I think that some times we can be so absorbed in the capturing of the moment that we aren't present in the moment, and sometimes it is more important - for us or others - to be present in the moment.
I remember taking a picture of my dad when he told us he was dying, but I think my reasoning was more to do with a complete lack of photos of him, he deleted it later on when I was asleep, consequently I have none of him, only the old family albums in a box somewhere...
I probably wouldn't take that photo now but I was 16 and appropriacy wasn't at the forefront of my mind at the time...
Don't really know enough about he nor she and the general MO of their relationship to call it. Sure if she were a "normal" everyday she then I'd say he overstepped the line, but I doubt a he of everyday "normal" behaviour would suddenly do such an extreme and out of character thing. So, the mere fact he did it, suggests a more... aware, perhaps, aspect to their relationship than with most.
Personally I'm torn, but erring on the side of slapping he upside the head, were I in the position of she. I'd not be in the position of he though, it's definitely over the line for me personally.
@niara
Nathalie has expressed my thoughts on this, so I don't have to comment.
However, if I was the photographer doing that to my partner..........I'll put it
quite subtly.......the rest of my 365 project would consist of badly lit macro
shots of my prostate gland. ;0)
This is definitely a very personal event, and more details would change the feeling about this. The relationship aside, these photos show the rawest emotions you can probably get from a human. That rawness can make many people very sensitive and outraged. I would be very hesitant to capture a moment like this, but could appreciate the value of the shot. Tough decision. We've all seen these emotions in shots in museums.
My question would be, switch husband and wife. What would you say if it was the wife snapping a picture of the husband?
@jeancarl Even though women are reputed to be more empathetic, I really don't think that men have a monopoly on insensitivity. But it's an interesting point that we feel more sympathetic to the photographer's aims if the photographer is a woman, as we assume women to be more sensitive.
I've been thinking about this some more, and a photojournalism example springs to mind - that of the renowned WWII photographer whose name escapes me, who retired from war correspondence after walking into one of the Nazi concentration camps, and the first thing he did was start shooting. Everyone else was standing there, stunned and horrified at the sights in front of them, yet his photographer brain automatically switched on. His comment was that at that point he knew that the photographic impulse (for want of a better term) had overridden his basic humanity, his ability to simply feel.
There have been other examples of professional photojournalists who have felt torn by conflicting needs - to bear witness and capture a moment that, immortalised on camera, may serve to galvanise a cause, or to put down the camera and help in a more immediate and personal way. There's a book called 'The Tao of Photography', in which it is suggested that there are times where photographers should make a conscious decision to put down the camera and simply experience a moment.
(Not sure how much this is relevant to the discussion or simply musings on my part).
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
This was crossing the line, totally disrespectful and was painful enough - What you describe is beyond the pail. I expect that you think so too. It amazes me that people do these things.
@sparkle I think what you did is rather lovely and clearly well intended.
I thought it was going to be like the joke...
MORAL DILEMMA
This test will only take one minute and only has one question, but it's
a very important one.
By giving an honest answer, you will discover where you stand morally.
The test features an unlikely, completely fictional situation in which
you will have to make a decision.
Remember that your answer needs to be honest, yet spontaneous.
Please scroll down slowly and give due consideration to each line.
THE SITUATION:
You are in Queensland , Brisbane to be specific.
There is chaos all around you caused by a cyclone, with severe flooding.
This is a flood of biblical proportions.
You are a photo-journalist working for a major newspaper, and you're
caught in the middle of this epic disaster.
The situation is nearly hopeless. You're trying to shoot career-making
photos.
There are houses and people swirling around you, some disappearing into
the water.
Nature is unleashing all of its destructive fury.
THE TEST:
Suddenly, you see a man in the water.
He is fighting for his life, trying not to be taken down with the
debris. You move closer... Somehow, the man looks familiar...
You suddenly realize who it is..
It's Kevin Rudd! [That's Australia's old prime minister]
You notice that the raging waters are about to take him under forever.
You have two options:
1. You can save his life; or
2. You can shoot a dramatic Pulitzer Prize winning photo, documenting
the death of one of the country's most powerful men!
THE QUESTION:
Here's the question, and please give an honest answer...
Would you select high contrast colour film, or would you go with the
classic simplicity of black and white?
"An example of serious moral dillemma: seeing your brand new car hanging on the side of a cliff....with your mother in-law inside!"... :)
Even as photojournalists, we know not to capture certain moments in times of grief. It's insensitive and inhumane. And these are strangers we're being considerate of. I can't imagine how a husband could do this to his wife at a moment if dispair.
A few years ago I saw an exhibition where the photographer documented her mother's journey through terminal cancer. It was quite controversial, and equally confronting, but was done with the mother's consent and blessing and in a way that honoured her. It was incredibly beautifully done. But whilst this process had a sense of love, of inclusion and respect about it, the situation described above has the sense of coldness, of disregard for, and lack of respect for the humanity of the one grieving. Of course, we don't know the dynamic of the relationship, but by the way it was described it sounds like a cold act and not one of love.
An example: My best friend and her husband are professional photojournalists, and they frequently document deeply personal stories for their work - and often in their own and friends' personal lives, as well.
One example is a couple, their friends, who her husband photographed over the course of some time for a project. The couple had been trying to conceive a child through any and all means medical - there were intensely difficult shots to view in that series, as attempt after attempt failed, but the images were all made within the scope of an agreed-upon documentation of the process and experience, painful though the couple knew it might be to them in the moment.
The same best friend documented her own father's process of dying, her family's caretaking of him in his final weeks, and his death. Of course, the photographers may be (and often are) crying behind the viewfinder him or herself as they record such moments! My point is, there are so very many professional photographers like my friends, whose livelihood and interest in photography goes well beyond only making appealing pictures, mastering bokeh, and documenting the happy joys of daily life.
So for consideration: Perhaps the mother had been sick and the death expected, or the woman and mother had a very complex relationship that was being documented for a project, or the moment had been previously agreed upon as 'photograph-able' for some purpose we do not know about from this quote.
A woman married to a photographer who WOULD do this would most certainly know the extent of his dedication - I can't imagine it wasn't planned, approved, or at least expected.
There are plenty of highly emotional photos of people receiving shocking news, that would be photo journalism. This don't mean that the photographer is 'unfeeling', they are doing what they do, capturing a moment. Maybe it's 'hiding behind the lens' or it could be how they cope with things. So many variables.
A couple that booked us for a wedding had to move their date up significantly because the groom's mother had terminal cancer and was expected to pass on at any time. So their beautiful outside spring wedding turned into an outside winter wedding. SO cold. But that's beside the point.
His mother was there, she looked so ill it was hard in my human nature to look at her and introduce myself. But she knew it was her time and the things she said to us about the photos she wanted still stick with me. The groom hardly spoke to her, I'm not sure if it was because of his grief, but I certainly didn't expect the Mother/Son dance to be as emotional as it was because of his distance toward her.
When the dance came, he started out just as stiff as he'd been all evening, so there I was (the detail photographer) getting as close as it was respectful and taking the zoomed in shots. Then suddenly, he became overwhelmed with emotion and hugged his mother so fiercely and tried so hard to hold back his tears that he began sort of gasping for breath. He was burying his face in her shoulder, I think trying to hide from me. I did not know what to do. I was crying...everyone in the room was. They were all silent, and here I was, feeling like such a voyeur. Like the damn paparazzi or something. I had to make a decision- do I respect this moment, though he never told me to go away- or do I take these photos in hopes that he may want to see them again someday.
It was a split second decision, one I still struggle with, but I chose to take the photos. I don't even know if they were good or in focus, I was crying so hard.
When it was all said and done his wife asked us to remove those photos from the web hosting site so that no other family members could see, but she wanted a copy of them herself, so I can only assume that she appreciated them.
We just did a wedding this weekend where both of them were in attendance and the wife ended up talking to me quite a bit, but the husband...not a word. Avoided eye contact even.
I feel bad, but then I feel like I did the right thing too. Not sure if I crossed the line. Hopefully he'll look back at those photos one day and appreciate them.
i know i am in the minority in my opinion here, but getting a shot like that with that much emotion doesn't come around very often, so grab it. i have shot something similar, a mother and father standing on a road, at the scene of the accident their son was in, they had gotten a call and rushed there. i snapped a shot of the two of them as the crew pulled out their kid. the only thing that upset me was that it was film i had developed myself, and was new to developing film, and did not turn out the greatest. i would do something like that again in a heartbeat. its simple, people die. others cry. that makes for a lot of emotion and expression, and great shots. and yes, i am fully ware i am cold hearted, but to get good shots sometimes you have to go a bit farther out on the edge of morality.
My friend shot an amazing photo of the police officer on the ground, the dog's teeth sunk into his forearm, pulling the officer across the ground. However, the very moment after he shot that photo, he put his camera aside and ran over to save the police officer's life and chase off the dog.
For many months now I have had a project stuck in my head. I have tried a couple of times to get this photo shoot off the ground, but I keep running into problems. I want to shoot a project called A Day in a Mortician's Life.
It is exactly like it sounds. I want to spend a day shooting a mortician performing his or her job in preparing a body for an open casket funeral. As you can imagine, there are many difficulties. How do I ask a family who has just lost a loved one if I can photograph their dead body being prepared for a funeral? How do I shoot those photos in a tasteful manner? It is very, very delicate and I have not been able to find a way to do it yet.
Photography is a very, very subjective art. Some people can look at a 3D puzzle for hours and never see the photo beneath, while others glance at it and see it immediately. Photography is much the same: some people would greatly appreciate the value of a photographer shooting photos of his wife's reaction to the news of her mother's death, while others just simply won't get it.
I have always believed, and always will believe, that anything a photographer does is acceptable as long as it does not bring harm to the subject we photograph. We aren't always gonna shoot puppies and rainbows; sometimes, we're gonna shoot gang violence and destruction of property.
However, isn't that what professional photographers/journalists do on a regular basis, when covering events, such as funerals, wars, violence, etc...? Often, people get photographed in situations where they are grieving, shocked and frightened. They are documented by strangers, in most cases unwantedly and unwillingly so.
If his wife were to be photographed by a stranger while receiving this sad news, it would surely be considered less outrageous. But, since it's her husband, the person closest to her, I can imagine the line is crossed, as he should choose for compassion rather than composition, like Amy said.
We don't know the context, of course...I for one would wish not to be photographed during such a moment by a person close to me, knowing I need my privacy. Another option would be that his wife would be so immersed in grief, that at that moment, she wouldn't pay attention/couldn't care less about being photographed or not. How would react she afterwards, being confronted with the shots...? It depends very much on what kind of understanding/relationship they have and how they define mutual respect.
"We aren't always gonna shoot puppies and rainbows; sometimes, we're gonna shoot gang violence and destruction of property."
That is true...
"Does such a picture force us to participate in an act of unfeeling voyeurism?"
There often is a delicate/vague border between (unfeeling) voyeurism and shared emotions/grief.
Sometimes I watch photos of atrocities or grief, photographed by journalists, and partly feel like an intruder, wanting to turn away my eyes from the page, yet I can't help staring and feeling like a participator, wondering about the impact of the grief, being deeply touched by it.
Also, there is the fact of the person on the other end of the line; they (most likely another grieving family member) have been given the task of delivering the news to his wife, and he essentially puts them on hold for what, 5 minutes, while he retrieves and sets up his camera? What if during that time, the wife awoke to find her husband not in bed, and saw the phone off the hook? Now she's getting the news and is completely alone.
There is the possibility that this type of arrangement is common and/or accepted in their marriage, but I would find that rather unlikely.
The bottom line is, at the time when he was most needed to don his 'Husband' hat and be a source of comfort and consolation, he choose instead to detach from the situation, don his 'Photographer' hat, and be an observer.
A line from the musical "Rent" comes to mind: "You pretend to create and observe, when you really detach from feeling alive"
I think that some times we can be so absorbed in the capturing of the moment that we aren't present in the moment, and sometimes it is more important - for us or others - to be present in the moment.
I probably wouldn't take that photo now but I was 16 and appropriacy wasn't at the forefront of my mind at the time...
Personally I'm torn, but erring on the side of slapping he upside the head, were I in the position of she. I'd not be in the position of he though, it's definitely over the line for me personally.
Nathalie has expressed my thoughts on this, so I don't have to comment.
However, if I was the photographer doing that to my partner..........I'll put it
quite subtly.......the rest of my 365 project would consist of badly lit macro
shots of my prostate gland. ;0)
My question would be, switch husband and wife. What would you say if it was the wife snapping a picture of the husband?
I've been thinking about this some more, and a photojournalism example springs to mind - that of the renowned WWII photographer whose name escapes me, who retired from war correspondence after walking into one of the Nazi concentration camps, and the first thing he did was start shooting. Everyone else was standing there, stunned and horrified at the sights in front of them, yet his photographer brain automatically switched on. His comment was that at that point he knew that the photographic impulse (for want of a better term) had overridden his basic humanity, his ability to simply feel.
There have been other examples of professional photojournalists who have felt torn by conflicting needs - to bear witness and capture a moment that, immortalised on camera, may serve to galvanise a cause, or to put down the camera and help in a more immediate and personal way. There's a book called 'The Tao of Photography', in which it is suggested that there are times where photographers should make a conscious decision to put down the camera and simply experience a moment.
(Not sure how much this is relevant to the discussion or simply musings on my part).