Photographs are a great way of documentation, because it is a picture of something that was happening in the past. In this article it talks about photographer Edward Curtis who took pictures of native americans, but instead of showing exactly what was happening then he would stage his photos, and then go on to edit it them to make them look more dramatic. Then we would go off and sell them for $3000-$4000 he didn’t care about the native americans he only cared about that money and the fame. He ignored everyday realities that these people faced, his images were very selective, they didn’t show the issues of modernization or poverty, he even ignored everyday joy and wouldn’t show pictures of his subjects smiling. I think what he did was disgraceful he didn’t care about these people he just wanted to make a quick buck, what he did was objectify these people and made them look a certain way, and people were attracted to these images and created lasting stereotypes.
However the article also talked about another photographer who was native Richard Throssel, he took photos from the inside and actually showed what these people were actually like. He cared for his people he didn’t do it for money, he also staged photos but he did it for the health and safety of his people he wanted to stop the spread of disease. I believe what he did was good because if we didn’t have his photos today all we would have is Curtis’ photos which he made and wasn’t a really depiction of what was going on at the time. But even though Curtis’ pictures were staged I think it is good we have them because it is history after all and I’m sure if you had family members back then you would love to see any pictures you could of them.
No comments:
Post a Comment