Photography and/as Ethics

While reading Regarding the Pain of Others by Susan Sontag, I cannot shake the feeling that although she contradicts her old writings' truthfulness, that it is done out of hope that the previous writings are not true rather than belief that they are not.  Rather, I think she makes a weak argument for her change of ideas and so I am not totally convinced.

Bearing in mind that I only received three chapters of the book (chapters seven, eight and nine) these chapters would appear to be the ones in which she address her old thoughts presented in On Photography.  It is in this previous book that the theme of "hyper-saturation," in regards to the massive amount of images seen on a day to day basis, is fleshed out through the understanding that the hyper-saturation is what, according to her, caused people not to care about images of horror.  In other words, we had seen so much horror, that we had become neutral to it.
It is in her rethinking of this idea that makes up what becomes the meat of Regarding the Pain of Others.  Sontag, rather than dismissing the gluttony of images, begins to think directly about how and when we see images of war and horror, specifically beginning with photographs that are presented to use through the television news.  Here, just looking at the function of television, Sontag draws out characteristics such as its instability of attention (channels can be turned) and its being made for entertainment.  This recognition of entertainment value makes her realize that the news must continually "stimulate" the viewer in such a way that things remain interesting.  In this way, according to others' views, not Sontag's, the news causes war to become a spectacle in which people can distance themselves so far from the reality that they believe that there is no real suffering in the world.  According to Sontag, this belief only covers a  "small, educated population living in the rich part of the world..."This is a vast generalization to her, because she understands, as many of us do, that there are millions of television viewers who do not have the "luxury" of forgoing reality.

In chapter eight, she goes on to discuss what she believes a photograph can and cannot do.  For Sontag, a photograph cannot give us the historical information on the suffering it ensnares, which is logical, for we cannot learn more than what is pictured in an image, it cannot "repair our ignorance."  What a photograph can do however is invite.  Invite us, the viewer, to pay attention, reflect and learn about what is happening in our world, and for me, it is this invitation that would possibly lead someone to doing something about the suffering.
With that being said though, Sontag continues with her belief that the viewer is frustrated about the inability to actively fix the problems represented in these images, and that is why there is a debate around the meaning of viewing such images.  She writes "If we could do something about what the images show, we might not care as much about these issues." Which to me means we should stop debating about photographs and start figuring out how to help people, but perhaps, as Sontag later suggests, once I am removed from these images I will forget my indignation.

Deigned by Oliveiero Toscani 

Moving onto chapter nine, Sontag begins to question the reader about where images in need of a serious space of contemplation should be presented and wether or not it even exists.  There are so many places we see photographs these days:  art galleries, books, newspapers, the internet, television, ads, etc., and to make it more complicated, most photographs intermingle and avoid the categories we once gave them (art, journalism, advertising).  For instance, Sontag cites the use of a dead Croatian soldier's clothes as an ad for the Benetton clothing company.  Here, an image that could have only ever been photojournalism previously has become advertising, which once again raises issues of viewing images of horror, or post-horror for its' shock and entertainment value.
In the end, Sontag does not give us an answer as far as what a contemplative space might be in our contemporary society.  She does however say that art might have the best attempt thus far in invoking thoughtful discussion on photographs that include the pain of others.  Her example of this is Jeff Wall's Dead Troops Talk.

Once I moved through Sontag's work, I was able to dive into Arielle Azoulay's introduction to The Civil Contract of Photography.  In this, Azoulay outlines what she calls the "civic political space" that occurs in photography through the assumptions and actions of the photographer, the photographed subject and the spectator.  It is Azoulay's belief that through this civic space, citizenship is both returned (in a sense through the contract of photography) and demanded by those with a non or impaired civic status, which in her writings here is the Palestinians and women respectively.
It is interesting to note that photography does cross many boundaries such as class, nationality, etc. or rather, a photograph can be understood by almost any person regardless of background.  It is this idea for Azoulay that begins to allow photographs to move beyond the influence of the ruling power, or a political power that denies citizenship of some peoples.   This idea and the fact that for Azoulay, an image never belongs to one person because it's meaning can always be negotiated and renegotiated, means that no one entity can have power over, even the ruling power.
Azoulay and Sontag have very different ideas about what photography is capable of, specifically photography surrounding the horror and pain of others and the duty(Azoulay) or ability(Sontag) of the viewers' response.  As I wrote earlier, Sontag does not believe that a photograph has the ability to do anything more than "invite" a viewer into thinking about why and how this happened (that is, whatever is pictured in the photograph) and perhaps incite someone to learn more.  In the end, for Sontag, we are just frustrated viewers.  Azoulay takes a different stance.  She sees viewing images of pain and violence as part of our civic duty necessary for citizenship.  People that do have citizenship should then be using it as a tool for gaining citizenship for those without.  She asks that we take action and stand up for those who do not have the ability because they are not recognized by ruling powers.  It is, for her, our duty.

Gillian Laub, from Tesitmony

To bring some of Azoulay's ideas into context, the article on Gillian Laub's photographic series titled Testimony includes images of survivors on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which is what Azoulay's entire book focuses on.  In these portraits, Azoulay places importance on their identity, which she claims is given to us through their accessories and objects, how the theme of the "two sides" is developed, and how Laub photographs the people in such a way as to allow the viewer to first be lulled by the normalcy of the image and then struck by the distinction of it.  For example, Azoulay examines an image where a young man sits on some rocks with his girlfriend.  She claims that it is not until a moment later that you realize that the man is missing both of his legs from the knee down.   This delay in reaction is one element that makes Laub's photographs interesting.
For Azoulay though, what makes these photographs most interesting is that Laub asked each person to write down how the place in which they live is perceived, which for Azoulay negates the political context within which these images exist because they are presented to the viewer in a "nonmilitant civil language."
Although in the introduction Azoulay never makes claims about whether or not these her ideas could be applied to other photographs, I think the ideas would function really well for any other images of suffering.   When it comes to anything not dealing with pain and suffering the civil contract could still apply, just in a more generalized sense.  More than anything, at the basis of her argument she has outlined the three players in photography and how each functions, each assuming the others' existence and each one quite aware of its' role within the paradigm.


More photographs for musing upon as we ponder these ideas-War Photographers in Afghanistan