I want to step out of the gate and say that I absolutely do NOT believe that there is such a thing as objective reality. I do not. All reality is sent through filters of what we believe and what we expect as well as our particular agenda. Period.
Yesterday, I read a post that caused me to think about this (again): Documenting the face of America by Mark Hobson
I don’t really like to talk about politics and such and in no way am I making Ad Hominem attacks on this author. His piece was well written and he argued his point of view well. As a matter of fact, he has a follow up piece that is just as well written and thoughtful: Just thinking out loud (again). I suggest that you read both and form your own opinions.
Propaganda:
Propaganda, as defined by the dictionary, is chiefly derogatory information, esp. of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view. Some call it truth. Some call it an inconvenient truth or what have you. (my emphasis)
When I go out with my camera, it is certainly easy for me to deliver my point of view about anything, depending on how I ‘filter’ my photos, or what point I’m trying to drive home. A year or more ago when I was in Texas, I took some nice photos of the landscape. I walked through my friend’s neighborhood and looked for photo opportunities. There were a couple of dry creek beds filled with trash, discarded items, and a toilet. I had a few of choices:
1. I could photograph the trash and show how terrible that we as humans are and how much we need to clean up our act, etc.
2. I could photograph the beautiful landscape, most of it man-made through landscaping efforts and the addition of a pond, and show the beauty that I saw.
3. I could juxtapose the two and provide either a sense of the beauty and how we trashed it or perhaps it would come across as the beauty endures despite our efforts to trash it. It’s all in how you look at it.
It is the same with any political, cultural, personal position that I may hold. As a photographer, I can go out and show how bad things or perhaps how good things are, just by where I point my camera, when I click the shutter, and by what I perceive. I’ve said this before, turn to Fox News, one story, turn to CNN, same story, different spin. Spln left. Spin right. Where’s the middle?
In Mark’s story, he told of a health care reform advocate who said:
It was absolutely stunning. When I walked through the fairground gates, I saw hundreds of people lined up, in the rain. It was raining that day. Lined up, waiting to get care, in animal stalls. Animal stalls.
–Wendell Potter
And even though Mark says that he has been trying to find pictures (but having no luck) …:
I have been trying to find pictures (but having no luck) of what has come to be known as “healthcare expeditions” – large-scale free healthcare “events” held around the US of A where tens of thousands of Americans without access to healthcare (provided by volunteers) stand in lines for hours on end (bringing lunch and folding chairs is recommended), sometimes overnight, to receive one sort of healthcare or another.
he jumps right on in with his ‘beliefs’ and states them as fact, saying that this IS happening in America, even though he has not personally seen these events.
Honestly, I do not know what the truth is and am not trying to discover that truth in this post. Instead, I’m looking at it from the perspective of a photographer who might want more concrete information before participating in an assignment, for example.
On the RAM (Remote Area Medical) website I saw a picture of lots of people standing around in a fairground like area, but that is what I’d expect to find at a fair. The picture doesn’t necessarily support the assertion of what they say is going on. Could this be a normal day at the fair? Could this be a small town whose hospital just burned down or is undergoing repairs? There’s nothing here to indicate that there is any type of medical treatment going on. Get closer. Give me more detail. Prove it to me with your images!
If anyone has been involved in participating in debate, you know how you can spend days or weeks gathering information, statistics, and ‘facts’ for your side of the story. You may even come across facts that argue against your side, but those are conveniently left aside because they don’t support the cause, or your viewpoint. Also, I find it funny how magazines are getting so self-righteous about photo manipulation and ‘truth’ in photography, yet, they seem to do little about the writing the accompanies the photo, some of it heavily biased and not reporting all of the facts, or even enough of them to let someone form an alternate opinion. I’ve seen lots of pieces that are little more than editorial comments, not news.
I do believe that photography can be a great conduit for change. Just look at the work that the FSA Photographers did during the great depression. They caused powerful changes to happen and, without those images, things probably would have changed at a much slower pace, but things do continue to change, regardless. They told stories that some people didn’t want to hear, other stories that people needed to hear. They were a force for positive change. They didn’t seem to be so much politically motivated, more socially motivated.
Would I like to see us divert billions of dollars from military expenditures to health care? Certainly! Then, I’d feel that my tax dollars are spent wisely on help, not on fear.
Would I like to be a participant in making that happen by using my camera and/or my words? Absolutely, but only so far as I would be documenting the facts of the matter, not merely making photos to imply something. That seems disingenuous.
I’m quite careful these days about what I consider truth because I know about those filters that we all have. Most things that we call truth are really nothing more than points of view and opinion.
If such a movement were started, I’d be happy to participate for the greater good! I’d love to be part of a movement that I could really sink my teeth into and use my camera as a tool for change … however, I don’t want to be involved in politics!
Related Posts :
Last conversation of the evening. A couple interesting things about writing a blog for a nu ...
Goldenrod: Click image for more Sunday morning I went out to the other side of the neighbor ...
Wow! A full 60% of my last few posts, 3/5, have included my photo. Narcissism? Inflated ego? Nah ...
11 Responses to “Photography, politics, and propaganda.”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Paul
I agree about the “objective reality” statement, however I do believe in “objective curiosity” which allows you to adjust your view based on logic and knowledge. The best journalist’s have this, explorer’s have this, an open mind has this, the spin doctors have an agenda. Reality and truth are both relative to where you are standing, the ability to move and change that view of the world or our place is what keeps us from becoming one of the spin statues. Objective curiosity helps to see the world in a new way and is what creates art out of chaos.
Objective Curiosity is exploring both sides of something and finding why they both have the “truth”. Not that hard if you really want truth not beliefs. (It also requires the ability to be wrong about preconceptions.)
Well written!
however, I’m not quite sure what you mean by “I absolutely do NOT believe that there is such a thing as objective reality”. I do think there is one underlying reality – call it Tao or whatever – but I agree that we can’t understand it properly and thus we have widely different understandings (filters, as you said).
On the other hand, I don’t think all things are relative. Although often it is good to have a “second opinion” about the topic being reported, sometimes it seems that the reporters are afraid of stating the facts and try to hide behind a multitude of badly argued opinions. Politics, in other words.
This is, again, well written, Paul. I visit your site because of the images but also for the words you share with us. I will read Hobson’s stuff, mostly because I need to.
True, most so called facts are nothing but point of views, so also this line.
Thoughtful post, Paul, and, by the way, a wonderful image. We must have somewhat similar “tastes” because I would have snapped this one in an instant.
I would, however, very, very gently suggest that just by virtue of how you use your camera and the fact that you obviously give serious thought to social issues, you are already “political”. Politics need not be a dirty word. It doesn’t have to connnote sleaze and scandal (except, maybe, in the governor’s mansion in South Carolina!). The word “politic” comes from a Greek word that simply meant “citizen”.
So you can, I think, be political without being “involved” in politics.
@Ray: Very good point, Ray. I like that, objective curiosity.
@Juha: I do believe in Tao, or the natural way of things. What I’m talking about is more from a human point of view. When things happen, they are merely events. We, from our point of view, tend to think that things ‘should’ be a certain way; we place judgment upon such things and label them as good, bad, or innocuous, when in fact they are just events, having no particular meaning in the grand scheme of things. Based on our opinions on how we think that life should be, we form groups, coalitions, committees, actions, etc to change life to be in our way of thinking. Always, there is someone on the other side who thinks differently. For example, should everyone on the planet have democracy just because we ‘like it’ and believe that is the way that it ‘should’ be. The people on the other side, say a Theocracy, believe that we are wrong, evil, and should live in a Theocracy? Who is right? How many “isms” are there: Communism, Socialism, Fascism, etc. Something for everyone. All points of view.
@Paul: Certainly I was referring to the commonplace understanding of sleaze, scandal, and self-serving attitudes that seems to be, from my point of view, endemic in politics.
@Paul M: Agree completely!
@Paul L: I’m not sure. Is “sleaze, scandal and self-serving attitude” really endemic in politics? Or is that just another bias, served by a culture of news and media where every scandal sells ten times better than the work of legions of honest politicans?
@Thomas: Great point! I stand corrected! There are some good politicians, unfortunately, we only hear about the bad!
Never forget the media is in the business of selling advertising ‘News’ that keeps you coming back for ‘the rest of the story’ sells advertising. The more eyes on, the more money, that is why you only hear about the bad or one side. Sensational, disasters, controversy and symptoms sell, a solution ends all this and then they have to create a new problem to sell.
I think the point you made with your story about visiting your friend in Texas is the key one. If a group of photographers tackle this project and they have differing points of view, they will be able to “prove” many different versions of the truth. Our beliefs and values shape the images we make. We don’t even have to get into all the examples of staged photographs that we have learned about.
The problem with photography now is that people, many of those in the general populace, are realising that photos are, more often than not, either staged or edited radically to create certain “truths” that in reality only exist in the belief system of those “creating” the photos.
Taking a photograph is a political act. Displaying that photo is a political act. Commenting about the photo is a political act. Presence is a political act that changes the status quo.