Respond to the following quote:
"I was appalled at what they were doing. I was appalled at what I was doing. But then people started talking about those pictures...then I felt that maybe my actions hadn't been at all bad. Being a witness to something this horrible wasn't necessarily such a bad thing to do. " Kevin Carter
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think what Kevin Carter is trying to portray with his quote is that he believes his actions during the situation were unethical. He does not believe what he did was right and he thinks he should not have taken those pictures. However, as people started to witness the despair in his photography, they started to witness the despair themselves. As this happened, Kevin realized how much of an impact those photographs had on portraying the grief in the situation. It also made him feel better about his career, his photography, and weakened the guilt inside his heart.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Iktider's response to the quote by Kevin Carter. There are photographers who are responsible for capturing events and people in a time of distress. It may seem unethical in some situations where he may seem like a bystander who is unwilling to help. However, there are times where pictures are words thousand words and capture a moment that affects those to view it. For example, the picture of the starving child portrays poverty of many countries and hardships that children have to endure in such situations. It can send a message to others to try to promote fundraisers to help starving children in need. Being a witness to such an event can also give him the reason to do his job.
ReplyDeleteI loke the line, "he may seem like a bystander." Great connection to our previous lessons.
DeleteI would have to also agree with Iktider. At first Kevin Carter thought he was being a bystander but taking the pictures and not taking action. Only to find out that him taking the pictures was the action. He realized that he by himself couldn't take action. His pictures got a message out to society that whatever he captured pictures of was going on and that help is needed.
ReplyDeleteKevin Carter is a man out in the field taking pictures of the world around him to show the rest of humanity what goes on. It's only natural that he'd see disturbing things because, well, humans can and have done disturbing things themselves. Whatever it is he's seeing he's APPALLED--he is simply aghast, dismayed, and stricken with fear. When he says, "I was appalled at what I was doing," I imagine this guy in his mid twenties, his mouth agape, slowly raising his Nikon camera to peer through and take a picture of whatever ghastly scene is playing out before him. He must have felt so disgusted by himself having the audacity to stand there and take pictures instead of doing something. Although, Carter then said, "But then people started talking about those pictures...then I felt that maybe my actions hadn't been at all bad." He's right. In a way he had actually done something by taking those pictures.
ReplyDeletePhotojournalism is just like regular journalism, the only difference being photographs speaking instead of descriptions of an event creating images in a person's mind. As Carter said, being a witness isn't such a bad thing because you can attest to horrors you've seen and be able to exercise empathy and compassion to another suffering creature. By Carter taking those pictures he's preserving moments in time and sending a subtle, but powerful, message to the people who view them.
Great argument about photojournalism being the same as journalism. Society isn't as critical of journalists as they seem to be of photojournalists. There is something so unearthing about seeing an image of human pain as oppossed to simply reading about it.
DeleteI think that Kevin Carter's quote makes a lot of sense. In my own way that I agree with him because sometimes when you're powerless to do anything all you can do is maybe take a picture even though it seems appalling because you could probably be doing something more helpful to whatever the situation is. But then he realizes, sometimes taking a picture is enough because when it gets around people start realizing there is an issue that needs to be dressed and people might actually try to make a difference, and even if they don't they'll be more aware of it.
ReplyDeleteYou are right, the photo can be seen as the action.
DeleteI agree with Maha's response to this quote by Kevin carter.That sometimes is enough just take a picture because there you are sending a message to anyone who has the photo and will leave a impact on them. When people started to realize the inhuman events that's is happening now, people are going to take action.Since Kevin carter had such influence on his photography, he has realize what his photos are capable of doing
ReplyDeleteI do agree with what Iktider said. At first Kevin Carter had no idea of the meaning and impact behind what he was doing. At first he just thought that he was being a bystander because he was just standing their taking pictures. Instead, he was infact taking action by letting the people know what was going on by his using his pictures as a form of communication.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Iktider's response in which he states that at the moment he felt unethical taking those pictures because they clearly expressed pain and suffering, emotions that others see but do not act upon. This might have brought him guilt because while his pictures portrayed an array of fustrating emotions, at the end of the day those people were still suffering and his work were still only pictures. However, once he found out what his pictures had done and that was gaining a response from the public he no longer felt that his actions were unethical or immoral because he was now doing something to help. Carter, with his pictures was spreading awareness, sharing with the world that there is harships and misfortune greater than we think but we just arent exposed to it. If with one picture Carter can stir up emotions of many and impact people who were clueless to the distress and helplessness of others than he must feel good about himself. He's opening the minds of many.
ReplyDeleteI think this quote by Kevin Carter is trying to suggest the duality of photojournalism, as well as his inner conflicts about his actions as a photojournalist. Obviously, he feels some form of guilt due to the use of the words "appalled" about what he was doing. Also, he thinks that he was immoral for witnessing tragic incidents, and not doing anything or not being able to do anything at all. However, he also realizes that when people started to notice and talk about his pictures, it had added an effect of awareness to its viewers. This result made him think that him taking photos wasn't maybe a bad decision at all. I would gladly say that this quote by him is very pragmatic because if I was placed in his situation and profession, I would feel the same as he does. I think even if you extend outside of photojournalism and venture into the law and medical fields, you will realize that professionals will relate to the conflicted feelings that Kevin Carter has. It is what makes us human and 3D beings that way.
ReplyDeleteAlong with some of my other peers I as well agree with Iktider's response to the quote by Kevin Carter. In the beginning, when Kevin reflected on the pictures he took he felt a sense of guilt and was distraught. He began to question his actions. He believed that they were unethical because he thought he was beginning to take the role of a bystander. However, he later realized that by taking the photos it was a form of action. He was responsible in capturing events and people in a time of struggle. The photos he took could be used to bring awareness to the society and encourage others who are more fortunate to help. Taking photos was a positive action because a message was delivered. As they say, a photo is worth a thousand words. It can demonstrate reality sometimes better than it can be said.
ReplyDeleteKevin Carter is trying to illustrate that being a bystander isn't the best thing to do but at the same time taking pictures of it and letting the world knows the problem might be an ideal deeds. In that case I would agree with Iktider. Like he said whatever Kevin did wasn't fair at all but taking those pictures were at least better than being doing nothing at all. For an example those photography from Africa we noticed in class. They have been suffering a terrible life without food, clothes and treatment. Just because someone took those pictures now we are paying attention to Africa and trying to help them out. So, I believe taking those pictures weren't a immoral things to do.
ReplyDeleteI was not here for class, so I will base my information on everyone else's posts.
ReplyDeleteI really like Chandanie's post and agree with her statement. She even described that photojournalism is just another form of journalism and that it is the job of the individual to take these disturbing photos. Much of what we know about modern history can just be explained with pictures. Prior to the United States' intervention in World War 2, we were not fully aware of the Holocaust or the casualties of war. It is because of photojournalism that we are able understand what goes on beyond our borders. However, there are always certain situations when it is not morally permissible. Recently there have been cases in which people are either falling or being pushed into the NYC subway rail tracks. No one does anything, but they still have time to take pictures. That is when we realize how appalling human nature can be. When your actions can't make a difference but your photos can, that is when photojournalism is justified.
Great connection to the impact of the pictures from the Holocaust.
DeleteI interpret this quote as everyone else does. Carter thought he was being the generic bystander by taking pictures and doing nothing. Most would think this is the case. Why take pictures when you could take actions right? Wrong! By taking pictures, carter was actually exposing the truths and injustices that have been going on. This exposure allows other people to know of these things, which also give them enough reason and influence to act on it. So if carter hadn't taken pictures, he would've been one of the only people acting, whereas now, people know about what is going on. That is what he means by "not doing a bad thing afterall." Because he was shooting, yes, but also acting.
ReplyDeleteTo reiterate what my classmates have said, Carter felt that what he did as a profession was not ethical and he felt disgusted with his actions. As time lapsed he eventually came to the conclusion that what he was doing might not be something that should people should be completely fine with, but exposing controversial photos to public assists in conditioning our understanding that the world isn't as peaceful and perfect as some people make it seem.
ReplyDeleteI agree with George and everyone else in their interpretation of the quote. He was abhorred by the actions or in his perspective, the lack-thereof that he seems to take. He feels as though he is being too passive and making no discernible impact to change the dismay in the world. He was stricken with guilt for what he has done. His stream of consciousness changes as he realizes that although his role in society may not be the most glamorous or ethically inclined, but it is nonetheless one that is needed as it allows for the exposure of such atrocity to be spread to a large audience.
ReplyDelete