Re: [Leica] Faas, Horst, and Betrayal

[Donal Philby <donalphilby@earthlink.net>]

Marc James Small wrote:
> 
> Well, I for one, feel a bit aggrieved at the job done by Western
> photo-journalists in Viet-Nam.  The US, for God's sake, was putting men IN
> HARM'S WAY and the photo-journalists, by undermining their efforts, stabbed
> them rather dramatically in the back.  It wasn't journalism:  it was trash.
> 
> The same shots could have been made in either World War or in Korea, but,
> thank heavens, weren't.
> 
> Clearly, the North Viet-Namese shooters did a finer job of describing what
> was going on that did the Western.

Marc,

We can probably open a big barrel of poisonous snakes here, but VietNam
is considered one of the first wars covered honestly, not like a PR
agency would do it.  Granted, I love a lot of the heroic stuff out of
WWII and Korea.  But look at the difference in David Douglas Duncan's
work from both Korea and VietNam.  Photographers in WWII (my father was
one of them (Guadalcanal, Iwo Jima) and we've talked about this) were
expected to do the PR approach.  ALL the media was mostly doing PR.  

It was a different time and a different war--one that most could believe
in because our future was indeed at stake.  By not the fartherest
stretch of the imagination (from my extensive studies of Southeast Asian
and Vietnamese history) could the same be said for Vietnam.

What PJs did in VietNam was show the consequences of political action in
Washington. It forced politicians and voters to take responsibility for
what they were doing.   

There were pictures of great heroism, and ironic tragedy, and tragic
comedy.  And virtually all that the press showed of the ineptitude of
the running of the war has proven, in the fullness of time, to be mostly
accurate.  It was a war that tore this country apart and made us look
inside.  We have sledgehammered our way into many countries--Guatemala
and El Salvador--for example, with "gunboat" diplomacy, and the press
treated it as the righteousness of our destiny.  I guess you could call
that supporting the troops.  But Vietnam is where we came face to face
with who we are and what we were doing, and it wasn't pretty.  

My reading of history is that the journalists and protesters were,
indeed, the most concerned about the military: they wanted them home and
safe.  The politicians, in contrast,  were willing to sacrifice tens of
thousands for dubious goals.

And Leicas were there, recording history, that we can look back and know
what happened, and how it felt, and perhaps learn a lesson or two.

And if you think this is simply the rambling of a pacifist,  you could
not be further wrong.

We live in a democracy that is only as strong and healthy as the
population is informed. The gradual diminishing of solid, hardhitting
journalism since VietNam has put the US in peril.  We have a population
so besotted with Hollywood fantasy, with wanting to believe that
everything is wonderful, that the powers that be are given free reign to
manage things for their own self interest.

Leica, fortunately, never made a rose colored filter for their cameras. 
And we still have a few photojournalists showing us what we need to see
to make informed decisions.

Donal Philby
San Diego