Then & Now

While flipping channels on the 52 inch television I was sitting in front of out here in the 'burbs last night I came across a documentary on iconic photographs and their creators (The Knowledge Network; The Genius of Photography). The photographs and photographers discussed were/are of the photojournalism variety; Robert Capa, Henri Cartier-Bresson, W. Eugene Smith, etc. Photographers who captured the essence of the world in front of them, photographers whose images recorded the life and times of their era. We've seen the images time and again, perhaps not always knowing who the photographer was behind them. Incredible images revealing other peoples and their cultures, the dejection, despair, pain and hope reflected in the faces of those directly and indirectly affected by the horrors of war, the brutality and beauty of humanity. Iconic images of those times.

While the program continued I began to wonder about this era, our era. What images would emerge as the defining images of the time? Which photographers are now recording images that will become the depiction of our society's reality, the history for the future? James Nachtwey's images popped to mind, as well as the work of Sebastiao Salgado.

My thought process began to ramble and skew a bit... What images that are of incredible sociological importance will never receive the viewership they deserve due to governmental/major corporation-influenced media censorship? This topic was touched upon in the documentary. One instance; images created by photographers in Nagasaki directly after the bomb fell were not released until years after the event, as if the Japanese government hoped to erase the event from their history. A second instance; photographer Joel Meyerowitz commented on an instance at ground zero soon after the WTC disaster. He pulled out his camera to record the aftermath and was immediately accosted by a police officer spewing, "NO PHOTOGRAPHY ALLOWED!".  Without photo documentation, is there history?

'Photographs never lie.' In this day and age of photo manipulation, can this statement stand today? Essentially, through the various forms of computer manipulation, every photo published is a twist of the reality that existed in front of the particular camera that recorded the image, a bastardization of that image's truth, if you will? Photojournalists shooting today would maintain that they capture the events as they unfold, no manipulation and for the most part I'd believe that. Who's to say what happens to the image once it's transferred to whatever publication has chosen to publish it? I guess trust in any of this comes down to individual choice. I think the ability to trust entirely in the complete and utter truth in any photograph died with the demise of Polaroid.

I'm thankful for the photographers and others who put themselves in harm's way in the name of telling the story. Imagine for a minute storming the beach in Normandy with the troops during D-Day as Capa did. This, by the way, is something that has been regulated out of existence due to media censorship. Photographers no longer shoot 'during' such events, only 'after' (as stated in the documentary I was watching). I'm sure I don't have the constitution to record events and history as these individuals do. Kudos to them all.

Photos speak volumes, always have. Always will. I can't wait to see which images emerge as those that will define this era.

A little something current; World Press Awards images. Not for the faint of heart. View link at your discretion.