The Rwanda projects of Alfredo Jaar, in David Levi Strauss, Between the eyesThis essay is a fascinating look at photographs taken by Jaar immediately after the Rwanda genocide on 1994. I found reading the essay disturbing, but the way Jaar presents his photographs afterwards was what I found really interesting. He has managed to reduce the immensity of the genocide (which according to Strauss, we the public watched glued to our screens and newspapers but didn't react), to single people and the impact on them. He did this initially not showing his photographs, of which he took about 3000 during his time in Rwanda, but by describing them, or just trying to bring Rwanda as a place into our mindset. Then later on he has used single photographs with descriptions (lots of use of words by the sound of things), to really bring home the personal impact of the civil war. From reading 'Between the eyes', I am beginning to learn more about the difficulty of reporting such massive events in a compassionate way that will make the public think. With the onset of 24hour news in our lives we are being dulled to these tragic events, because we see them (internet/tv/newspapers) constantly. This makes it harder for reporters/photographers to make us empathise with the individuals on the ground. I think that the approach that Jaar took with his Rwanda work has been very effective, and I found just reading about it to be incredibly moving. I found a couple of Strauss's quotes key, in relation to war/social documentary photography:
“One terrible truth about photographs is that they can only ever show us
what happened, never what is happening or will happen. They are always about something that is
gone, and so are in league with death.” this is “the futility of a gaze that arrives too late”.
Pp 103.
Can you hear me? In David Levi Strauss, Between the eyesInteresting quote from article about modern life – connectivity and the place of art in the busy modern world.
'Artists cannot compete with the Pandaemonium on its own terms; they are outgunned and vastly undercapitalized. The only way to effectively subvert it is to change the rules of engagement, to engage the audience differently. The most basic questions about audience and communication have to be asked differently now than in the past, perhaps especially when it comes to images, but they still need to be asked. The question is no longer, Should there be a global mass-market consumer culture?, but Should there be
anything else? With all of the hype about interconnectivity, are we really more connected than before? What is the nature of that connection? Is the Internet the first and only transparent medium, or does its form determine its content? Is art a subcategory of mass-market consumer culture or something different from it? What is the difference between commercial messages and art? Does motivation affect the message essentially? Can you hear me?'
pp164
The highest degree of illusion, in David Levi Strauss, Between the eyesA discussion about the September 11 attacks – the most photographed event in history. Clearly planned and executed to maximise imaging – ie the delay between then two crashes seemed calculated to allow cameras to turn en mass towards the towers. An interesting observation... Some of the other trends Strauss observes are interesting too – regarding the treatment and reaction to images as opposed to reality. I'm not sure I agree with him totally about preferring images to reality, but certainly this idea in todays image saturated world is something to ponder upon.
pp182
This book is a fascinating if challenging (and sobering) read. I would recommended it to anyone interested in the use of images in a political environment.
