Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/05/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>>> > In those 'primitive' cultures which resist being photographed because > the image captures a piece of the subject's soul, there is an argument > worth hearing, even though it is far too late to apply in most of the > world. >>> I nearly wrote something about this is my previous post, but decided not to. However, since you bring it up... I'd take the case of islamic culture in particular which is very camera shy. You may well say that it's their choice in the end, whether to go along with the frenzied snapping of the rest of the world. But I would disagree. I feel that anything that is inevitable is also good (a tempting proposition straight from the devil's laptop) and in the case of communication by visual images, the real problem isn't so much whether snapping gets your soul or whatever, but what you're missing out on, as an entire culture, by banning this. In the case of the islamic world, I think, what they're missing out on is communicating with the rest of us on equal terms. This particular culture is the target of any number of misconceptions and false representations in the west, and it would be to their advantage, I believe, to _show us_ what their society is actually like. However they prefer to reserve photography for formal occasions and fomal modes, and in doing so, remain in the shadows. This is a shame. No doubt someone will say that it's up to any individual whether to submit to being photographed or not. But that isn't the point here, where an entire culture is against visual representation. It's really pretty futile hiding your head in the sand; visual images are king and if you refuse to play the game you get left out in the cold. There's also a problem with literacy - visual literacy. Check out some egyptian soap operas or Bombay movies to see what I mean by this. It's like, nowadays, not being able to read or write. So I feel that no matter how slick the talk of souls and so on sounds, there's no advantage for anyone in banning photography - you are effectively setting up a wall around your culture, and that's something no-one can _afford_ to do nowadays. As for the camera being a kind of psychological condom, I personally _engage_ with the world through photography, and I feel many photographers do that. rob.