A Question of Reality or Timing

         "I have tried to include events on a single negative, but the results were hopeless. Every-thing was on such a vast scale. Figures were scattered - the atmosphere was dense with haze and smoke - shells would not burst when required - yet all the elements of a picture were there could they but be brought together and condensed... on developing my plate, there was disappointment! All I found was a record of a few figures advancing from the trenches - and a background of haze. Nothing could have been more unlike a battle" (53).

          This is an entry from Frank Hurley's diary, he "played a considerable role" as a World War II photographer. This passage really stuck to me as I was reading the Bernd Huppauf article and came to mind again in class as we were looking at the image of the children in front of a tank. I looked around and found the above image which I believe must be pretty close to what it was that Hurley saw (though this is the Korean War version). It's true what he says, this is probably not what people imagine when they think of war. And as I read his diary entry, a part of me agreed with his justification for wanting to "montage" images together to create a more "realistic" depiction of war. It's true that the images that are staged or constructed are not organic but that is not to say that they are any less "real" when it comes to what can "realistically" happen in war during battle. Spectacular scenes like those that Hurley wanted to photograph more than likely do occur; the problem is that more often than not there is no one around to capture them.

          Perhaps this (photo on the right) is something more like what Hurley was hoping to capture. Here is a grand scene with explosions caused by shells bursting "when required" and an unobstructed view of a possible hero fighting with his unit. So even though there is clearly a greater desire to capture this second image there is no question that both are real depictions of war. Both of these images are in fact documentations of war, one grander than the other but both likely to occur. So the question is not a question of reality, constructed or not, but more of a question of timing. Being in the right place at the right time seems to be the motto of photographers. I guess what is so bad about the idea of staging or constructing images is the question of credit. Should a photographer gain credit or recognition for an image that he did not capture organically? Should an individual that creates such an image be credited as a photographer? Or should an image that has been constructed even be recognized as a photograph? (Something to think about and something I think about as an artist.)

- Patty Ledezma