Am I a coward?

U

user237428934

User deletion pending
Local time
1:22 AM
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
2,670
Hello,

on saturday the football game germany - argentina was spoilt for many in my district. We have a small creek here feeding the river rhine. Normally this creek is 20-30cm high but because of heavy rain it swelled to 2,5m and caused heavy flooding. Luckily no person was harmed. You can watch a video from the news http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARm4fDWR-JQ. I am living 200 meters away and stayed dry.

Next day I went out to take some photos. A lot of people were working in their houses and gardens to clean up. Piles of ruined stuff were on the street, still mud everywhere. Looked at many sad faces and couldn't take one single photo. Taking a photos of someone (most of them unfamiliar) in a miserable situation seemed to be not very reasonable. Am i a coward?

Has anybody else been in a situation where you stopped taking photos and asked yourself later why you stopped?
 
Yes, I have. Sometimes the images get burned into your brain, so you do not need a camera and photograph to remember them. Forty years ago, a college kid decided to wipe his VW bug out across our front yard, killing himself in the process. No need for a camera to remember the scene. There have been other times. I did film a mid-air collision at an air race when I was 12, Super-8. It was instinct to yank the camera up and start filming.

There are people who earn a living recording images like this. "It's not your job", you can take the images that you want to take. Obviously, this was not the time for you to record the scene.

You are not a coward, you are a compassionate human being.
 
Last edited:
TV news would have NOTHING to show if the would not film and photograph people in their hard times. Many people "gladly" watch all the bad things that have happened to others on TV but would at the same time often feel offended when filmed or photographed when in troubles.

Just follow your instincts and try to be kind to others when photographing in "sensitive" areas.

Still - before taking out the camera one better should feel confident that he/she is doing the right thing. If you feel somehow semi-guilty while taking such images, you will be looking much more suspicious to others too.

So much for the theory ... (no personal experience yet)
 
we get bludgeoned with with so much bad stuff by the news media who are tripping over themselves to be the first to get it that I am pretty much desensitised to it all now. It's very rare I get moved by what I hear on the news these days. I just think the vultures had a good day today when I see whatever it is. 24/7 news is not a good thing.
It's different if it's in your own neighbourhood. You could have asked if they minded you taking photos for social documetary purposes if that's what your purpose really was but if it would have been for pure self interest then I think you made the right decision.
 
Last edited:
Living in places that are centers of disaster tourism, I am thankful that there are still people in the world who don't see misery and think, "Ooooh! Picture!"

And if you do decide to take pictures, I hope they're a real engagement with a human subject and not a drive-by voyeuristic lark.
 
I stopped taking pictures of a parade in NYC many years back when some scaffolding fell on a few dozen people helped (I was an EMT at the time). No, you are not a coward. It's harder to take pictures when you know the people who are suffering. Doctors learn how to isolate their feelings, some do it better than others, some too much.

B2
 
tom.w.bn said:
Taking a photos of someone (most of them unfamiliar) in a miserable situation seemed to be not very reasonable. Am i a coward?
Click to expand...

No, in my personal opinion, you're not a coward. You've been respectful.
I've always thought that, for me, wasn't fair taking photos of people in miserable condition as I'm not a PJ whose photos may help people to make their difficulties known in order to get a proper help (or reveal the lack of).
Just my 2cents,
ciao
 
Not a coward. If it doesn't feel right, trust your gut.
Schadenfruede would be the wrong reason to take pictures.
 
No, you are not a coward, but in the past many days the definition of coward has changed for me! There are photographers whom wish to photograph the oil spill in the Gulf but many officials have said no you cannot! These officials in my view are the cowards because they wont opt up & tell us how bad the problem really is.

When a disaster happens to a neighbor I don't even think of taking a photo, I just want to help anyway I can!
 
You should have taken the photos. It is not cowardice but compassion. Sometimes we must let go of the compassion for the greater need of the historical record.
 
As said above, you were not a coward, but rather a respectful individual who decided not to take advantage of other's grief.

Let's have a beer! :)
 
Steve Bellayr said:
You should have taken the photos. It is not cowardice but compassion. Sometimes we must let go of the compassion for the greater need of the historical record.
Click to expand...

Being "responsible" for keeping a historical record sounds strange. I feel more responsible for minimizing my carbon footprint.

The creek that caused this flooding was already mentioned by the romans because it destroyed a roman trade route along the river rhine several times. We know this because someone wrote it down several hundred years before. Did this person write it down with future generations in mind? I doubt that. It's only nice to know this, but not essential. I think it's not important to collect every trivia for future generations.
 
Nope, not a coward at all. You do have the access as a neighbor but you're also not working so you can take photos, but since you're local, there's definitely more opportunities for photography later on.

I encountered a similar question when I was in Lafitte, Louisiana a little more than a week ago. The town was almost a ghost town. It felt abandoned. Yes, it was hot out but there was no activity around the docks where all the shrimp boats were tied up. They should have been out in the bays, making money but the oil spill has curtailed this.
I found a bunch of locals at a restaurant (where I had the best shrimp po boy). A few were talking about the oil spill, one man had a BP protest shirt on. As everyone was eating lunch I was absolutely NOT going to interrupt anyone to get an interview about the spill which has turned the commnity upside-down. I also felt it was wrong to wait outside the restaurant like a vulture for the opportunity to get a statement. It's just rude.
Although I'm a "Yankee", much of my family is from the deep south and I grew up with those manners. I felt that hanging around the restaurant was just exploitative and so looked elsewhere for people to interview.
Am I a coward? No. I think it's common courtesy to not interrupt people around mealtime and especially when those people are in the midst of the biggest crisis in recent history.

Phil Forrest
 
It was a little bit tragic that day, that our wonderful Argentinean steak restaurant was devastated :( and at the same time they lost the football match :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top