photography

Feb 18, 2006 17:13

Just going over some photos. There are a few photographers I rather like, one of them being James Nachtwey. I suppose, one could call him a war photographer. Certainly he has been in a great number of the modern conflicts that have occured in recent times. The problem is so many modern conflicts and brushfire wars have been little more than slaughter and ethnic massacre.

The photography of war is always a difficult thing. Without turning this into an essay, how does one photograph the worst things that a human can do, make it engaging, and yet also empty it of any vicarious or pornographic thrill? How much more so when the subject becomes utter atrocity?

I like James Nachtwey because I find each of his pictures tells a story. While they often contain horror, the horror remains on a human scale. It is impossible to express genocide or tribal extermination on the scale in which they occur and still maintain the human tragedy that is at its core. He never strikes me as trying to give 'the big picture'. For that, I have text and articles and words. He illustrates conflicts. He illustrates the unspeakable.






-Rwanda




-Afghanistan




-Sudan




-Sudan




-Sudan (The man is receiving rehydration salts from an aid worker)




-Sudan

Previous post Next post
Up