Pulitzer Prize for Photography – Are You Mentally Able?

Posted on 31 May 2009 by D. Travis North

carter_photo.jpg The world famous photograph at right was taken by Kevin Carter, a South African photographer, during the Sudan Famine in 1993.  The shot is of a starving Sudanese child who was struggling to get to a food camp located roughly one kilometer away.  Collapsed and huddled to the ground, the child is stalked by a vulture anticipating its next meal.  The shot – originally posted in the New York Times on March 26, 1993 – earned Carter the Pulitzer Prize for Feature Photography.  Despite the fact that this heart breaking image can be credited for world-wide awareness of Africa’s plight, and that it may very well have earned much foreign support, many wrote into the times criticizing Carter for exploting the child’s suffering for personal gain.  His own internal struggles expanded to a level beyond his capacity and Carter commited suicide, not long after earning the award, with a garden hose piping exhaust into the passenger chamber of his car.

Photojournalists are constantly putting themselves in harm’s way, a widely known hazard of the profession.  Some of the most famous photojournalists walked across battlefields, stopped to click the shutter at guerrilla insurgents or even placed themselves in bombing zones or disease outbreaks.  But it’s the mental aspect that – to me – would be the most challenging aspect of the job.  Carter’s fate is certainly one of the most extreme cases.  But many photojournalists have their own inner struggles.

stanley_j_forman.jpg Stanley J. Forman won the prize in 1976 for the shot at right of a woman and child falling from a fire escape during a Boston fire.  The child survived, but the woman, Diana Bryant, was pronounced dead at the scene – unable to be saved by firefighters struggling to reach her in time.  Later, Forman describes hearing the horrifying sound Bryant’s body as it hit the pavement not far from where he stood.  Forman’s photo also had a great impact, earning a great deal of support for better safety regulation in Boston.  But I cannot imagine being at the scene of the incident, let alone documenting it with a camera.

edward-adams_saigon-execution.jpg In another example, Edward T. Adams earned the award in 1961 with this photo titled ‘Saigon Execution’.  I am not aware of any stories or thoughts from Adams concerning the shot.  It is believed that Adams was never in any personal danger, but documenting the incident would leave me with scars.

If you look back on all of Pulitzer Prize History, it is full of photos illustrating tragedy:  Like the 1947 winner, a photograph taken by Arnold Hardy of a woman jumping to her death from a hotel fire or Hoynh Cong Ut’s 1973 photograph of children (some naked) fleeing from Napalm.  In nearly every case, the photo is famous because of it’s impact on the world or because of the awareness each brought to the public.  But is such an end enough to help one sleep through the night?   Perhaps the senses can be dampened if the goal is to bring such awareness to the world.  But I can imagine the pain and tragedy that must be endured in order to get to that level of detached observation.

Photojournalism is something that I both admire and fear.  I fear the minds that can endure such pain.  Would I even be able to click the shutter?  I’m not so sure – but I would guess that I just don’t have the ability.  What about you?

Related Articles:

If you liked this post and would like to be notified of more like it, considering subscribing to Shutter Photo. E-mail and RSS options are available. Additionally, if you would like to see your work featured here, feel free to contribute to the Shutter Photo @ Flickr Group.

 
  • Side note, my wife and I were watching the pilot episode of "The Philanthropist" last night. I'm sure it's not entirely realistic, but I really get a strong idea of the conditions and environment that photojournalists might come across. Scary stuff.

    I'm definitely going to stick to landscapes, architecture and still life.
  • Don't know why I didn't think of it when I wrote this post, but Kevin Carter was the basis for one of the characters in the book "House of Leaves" (Mark Z. Danielewski - brother of musician, 'Poe'). It's an incredibly odd book that I couldn't even really begin to explain. But the character was struggling with his own emotions and had a few Freudian slips by saying "Delial". His wife assumed he was having an affair, but it turns out that Delial was (allegedly) the name of the girl in the vulture picture and (in the story) she was confirmed dead. The character wasn't necessarily suicidal in the book, but he certainly took a number of risks that weren't typical of his character.

    I guess my point is that you would either become numb or you'd have emotional problems like these. How those emotional problems might carry out would be difficult to be determined. I know I wouldn't be suicidal, but I might be a little crazy, at least.
  • Lisa - part of the story of the little girl in the Sudan is that the news media was told (in general) not to make direct contact with any of the suffering due to a concern for spread of disease - the spread of outside diseases to already stressed immune systems of those who were starving. So technically, there was little that Carter could have done without potentially causing some problems otherwise. But the great majority of outsiders won't understand the potential risk. The criticism I have after the fact would only continue to eat at me because even knowing the potential problems I might create by trying to help, I'd still be frustrated that I couldn't.

    And as I read everyone's responses, I can't help but to compare this to the old personality test scenario: You have just discovered the cure for all forms of cancer but have only been able to create enough for one dose. That dose could be sent for analysis to create more, but it would mean sacrificing the life of a child who is very close to you who is dying of cancer. Would you be able to sacrifice the child for the sake of all humanity?

    Every time I have come across that scenario, I struggle.

    DC - I agree with you. I'm glad that photojournalism is not a major aspect of my work.

    Kevin - You raise another question in my mind. Say I were a survivor in the plane crash you mentioned. How would I feel if I saw a photographer wandering around the wreckage? Even if I had help, I can't help but to think I'd be a little frustrated.
  • I think that the flip-side of your great essay, is for what purpose, and for whom is the photojournalist chronicling and shooting the story for?

    So in essence, the associated "fear" may be overcome with the other half of the component--to let the world know what's going on in the world.

    I really don't think one can be separated from the other. And you made another great observation--many journalists including photojournalists get killed doing their work every year.

    Was it worth it? Personally, I think that the photojournalist's role in the world, if not compromised by politics or propaganda, is just as important as the news itself.
  • This is something that I have thought about many times. Would I work as the photographer or offer my support in any way possible.

    I think in many of these instances the photographer has been a bystander, not really connected to the tragedy and in many ways unable to do anything about it. As a photographer I think that under many circumstances the best we can do is document what is unfolding in front of us and share this tragedy or vision with others. This is one of the powers of journalism. If no one knew about starvation in Africa would anyone care?

    A scenario that haunts me as a photographer relates to if I were to become part of a tragedy, for instance an airplane crash. How would I react if I was a survivor and others around me required help? I certainly hope that I would be there for the people that need me and not for my own fame. Hopefully I'll never have to find out.

    <abbr>Kevin’s last blog post..Travelling on the Internet</abbr>
  • Fear and admiration are what drive people. Can you conquer a fear? Your post is extremely thought provoking. In the case of you being able to help the person, like in the case of the boy, I wouldn't snap a picture, but would do everything in I could, even carry the boy to the nearest food center, to get him help.

    On the other hand, in the case of not being able to help, I would snap the picture, or at least I pretty sure that's what I would do. I haven't faced such a situation, so I can't be sure.

    In all ways, I hope I'm never faced with that type of situation.

    <abbr>LisaNewton’s last blog post..The State of the State of California’s Funding for the Arts</abbr>
  • I would be absolutely unable to stand behind my camera in such a situation. I'm not saying that I'm a great humanitarian or anything, just that my camera isn't *that* high of a priority, in such a place and time. Plus, I would be totally unable to deal with things like that... and it sounds like the photojournalists had some pretty serious internal conflicts as well. I suppose that it's good that I'm not a photojournalist.

    <abbr>dc’s last blog post..Fiddleheads</abbr>
blog comments powered by Disqus

Photos From the SP @ Flickr Pool

See all photos

  • RANDOM POSTS

    • Sign of the Times
    • Ice Creeping
    • 5 Elements of Composition in Photography
    • Most Popular Photography Hacks of 2009 (via Lifehacker)
    • Calling All New Years Project Websites