Pulitzer Prize winning photograph in Sudan by Kevin Carter.
http://ansblog.com/2009/12/saddest-picture-of-the-century-vulture-waiting-child-to-die/
" you obviously haven't seen the pictures of me alone at my high school prom "hahaha
" so the dude took the picture then drove away? damn him!! i hate when those journalists do that. they take pics of people on the verge of death or likewise, display it to the world then do nothing to actually help the people and they were just looking for a good story. "they actually do a lot to help those children just by taking the pictures....think how many people worldwide see pictures like that and are moved enough to send money and clothes to those countries
Photographer killed himself? Good. Jackhole should have helped the poor kid. If you can take a photo, you can give a kid a sandwich,.
I'm gonna throw this back at people another way:
Instead of blaming the guy who took the picture for not doing anything, why not examine the world we live in for a good long minute. Not to be preachy or self-righteous, but he's not responsible for the child's state of being. The world walked away from that kid a long time before the photographer did...
" I'm gonna throw this back at people another way: Instead of blaming the guy who took the picture for not doing anything, why not examine the world we live in for a good long minute. Not to be preachy or self-righteous, but he's not responsible for the child's state of being. The world walked away from that kid a long time before the photographer did... "And that justifies him letting the child die? Riiiiiiight....
" He committed suicide because he realized he could have saved the child. Clearly. "I read about this last month. He won some prestigious award and then...People found out he spent like over an hour setting up the right angle for the shot.
" @InnerVenom123: I'm not saying that that justifies his actions. But can you honestly say that in that situation you'd be able to act? It's easy to think that we could do something different, and I commend people for seeing the wrongness in this whole scenario, but it's a difficult situation. I'm sure the photographer feels terrible about leaving that child, but that shit is happening right now. Just because you see it happening and have someone to blame, that makes it worse? You can point the finger in any direction without knowing the full story. "This isn't some case of knowing the full story. He wasn't walking along some trail and just happened to see a random starving child. He obviously had to set up an angle for that. Which meant he left that child, whether dieing or dead there to be eaten by a god damn vulture. Maybe the kid was in shock. Maybe he was too late to be saved. Hell if I know. But the decent thing - and the thing people seem to forget to do - is help.
Everyone should consider the fact that this picture was taken in Sudan during a famine. There were literally hundreds of people starving to death all around this photographer. It's not like it was just the one kid. That is just the most poignant picture, which gained the most attention because of the strong feelings it evokes.
" @InnerVenom123: I'm not saying that that justifies his actions. But can you honestly say that in that situation you'd be able to act? It's easy to think that we could do something different, and I commend people for seeing the wrongness in this whole scenario, but it's a difficult situation. I'm sure the photographer feels terrible about leaving that child, but that shit is happening right now. Just because you see it happening and have someone to blame, that makes it worse? You can point the finger in any direction without knowing the full story. "exactly...because everyone who's commented on this thread gives money to every homeless person they pass and has 6 "adopted" children from those tv commercials and always donate to charities....man there was tons of sarcasm in there
" @LightBright said:Not to mention the s.o.b exploited the kid's death to win a freaking Pulitzer. I'm not a humanitarian, but I don't pretend to be. The hypocrites who sit there and complain about the atrocities that go on are the same wankers who take these photos." @InnerVenom123: I'm not saying that that justifies his actions. But can you honestly say that in that situation you'd be able to act? It's easy to think that we could do something different, and I commend people for seeing the wrongness in this whole scenario, but it's a difficult situation. I'm sure the photographer feels terrible about leaving that child, but that shit is happening right now. Just because you see it happening and have someone to blame, that makes it worse? You can point the finger in any direction without knowing the full story. "This isn't some case of knowing the full story. He wasn't walking along some trail and just happened to see a random starving child. He obviously had to set up an angle for that. Which meant he left that child, whether dieing or dead there to be eaten by a god damn vulture. Maybe the kid was in shock. Maybe he was too late to be saved. Hell if I know. But the decent thing - and the thing people seem to forget to do - is help. "
" @Lance Uppercut: I totally understand wanting to help people out, but there's an certain amount of tragedy people can deal with. I know that if I saw someone dead or dying that I would probably freak the hell out before I even tried to think about helping in any way. It all figures into how comfortable you are in a situation, in the most basic sense of the term. I'm a certified lifeguard and almost always get uncomfortable at the prospect of having the save someone. Just because you can act, doesn't me you can always find the strength to do so.And y'know, that's fine. But once again, he was comfortable enough to set up the damn angle. And then walk away. I mean, was someone else there that I wasn't aware of? It's not like people were rushing in by the droves. It was one man that looked at this kid like a piece of meat to throw to the dogs for a prize. Okay. Maybe he made people aware of the situation. From that perspective, he could have made a massive media spectacle out of it by saving the kid. And y'know, actually be a hero.
"
This is the point that so many people miss entirely. If he had saved the kid, it would be a picture of a different dying kid anyway. The point is that everyone was dying of hunger, and nothing was being done about it. One photographer doesn't shoulder the responsibility of rehabilitating an entire country. He shoulders the responsibility of showing people these unfortunate events, and the fact that no one is helping. The fact that he didn't help probably contributed to his death. The other thousands of people dying around him probably made some contributions as well."At least he has folks thinking about this kind of stuff, and showing them that these things are happening around the world. "
" @FadeToBlackBolt: Unfortunately, photographers are voyeurs. They observe life rather then stepping in to it. Which got that kid killed. "I don't think that's a totally fair statement. If his inaction caused that child's death, then what about the hundreds of other kids that died before while he wasn't there? He alters one life, saves one kid, great. But now you're looking that this picture and actually thinking about it and the kid and you actually have an emotional response to it. The photographer completed his task. He got you to think. Whether he had an ulterior motive or not, it doesn't matter. The fact that he's a photographer doesn't mean he can't step into life. Anyone could help any other human being right now, but we're all just being voyeurs at this point.
" @Lance Uppercut said:He didn't get me to think about anything. If I needed a photo to alert me to the troubles in Africa, then damn, I'm out of touch with the world." @FadeToBlackBolt: Unfortunately, photographers are voyeurs. They observe life rather then stepping in to it. Which got that kid killed. "I don't think that's a totally fair statement. If his inaction caused that child's death, then what about the hundreds of other kids that died before while he wasn't there? He alters one life, saves one kid, great. But now you're looking that this picture and actually thinking about it and the kid and you actually have an emotional response to it. The photographer completed his task. He got you to think. Whether he had an ulterior motive or not, it doesn't matter. The fact that he's a photographer doesn't mean he can't step into life. Anyone could help any other human being right now, but we're all just being voyeurs at this point. "
" @Korg: I was three. Please, try to lecture me based on my age. "That's more or less my point, actually. You have grown up in an environment that was influenced by this picture. You are aware of troubles in Africa thanks to the efforts of people like this guy.
" @Lance Uppercut said:My point isn't based on starving children in Africa (yes, I know where Sudan is). He saw a helpless human being out starving alone. Whether it had been in Africa, or Europe, or the Middle East, or in your back yard, it really doesn't matter. He snapped a photo, went back to civilization, and won an award for being a douche bag. What circumstance did he have to not help? Was the vulture going to pounce on him?" @Korg: That would have been valid, had this really been about starving children in Africa. What the hell makes the kid in Africa any different? "Sudan is in Africa... What are you talking about? "
Concerning the moral quandaries of Mr. Carter, everyone, please shut the fuck up. Judging a deeply disturbed man why he didn't transport a most likely terminally malnutritioned girl after taking a photo (and after not only chasing away the vulture hounding her, but watching her for some time afterwards) is an impossible and futile task.
The circumstance was a famine. Everyone was starving to death. This child was not alone by any stretch of the imagination. There were people dying of starvation in every direction. Are you also pissed at the UN workers who ran a food center a kilometer away, instead of ten feet from where one particular child was dying?"He saw a helpless human being out starving alone. Whether it had been in Africa, or Europe, or the Middle East, or in your back yard, it really doesn't matter. He snapped a photo, went back to civilization, and won an award for being a douche bag. What circumstance did he have to not help? Was the vulture going to pounce on him? "
" @difficlus said:by the time help arrives the kid is probably already dead...come on im talking about on the very verge of death. i've heard of it happen that photographers do that...@LightBright said:" so the dude took the picture then drove away? damn him!! i hate when those journalists do that. they take pics of people on the verge of death or likewise, display it to the world then do nothing to actually help the people and they were just looking for a good story. "they actually do a lot to help those children just by taking the pictures....think how many people worldwide see pictures like that and are moved enough to send money and clothes to those countries "
" I'm gonna throw this back at people another way: Instead of blaming the guy who took the picture for not doing anything, why not examine the world we live in for a good long minute. Not to be preachy or self-righteous, but he's not responsible for the child's state of being. The world walked away from that kid a long time before the photographer did... "true but it doesn't mean he should have left the kid there, life is cruel but we should all strive to make a difference in someones life.@Metatron_Da_Don said:
" @InnerVenom123 said:wow...interesting" He committed suicide because he realized he could have saved the child. Clearly. "I read about this last month. He won some prestigious award and then...People found out he spent like over an hour setting up the right angle for the shot.
He became an outcast when people found this out. and so he took his own life. I think his friend died too so all that pressure built up and he couldnt take it.
Suicide is never the answer. "
" @Lance Uppercut said:in sudan not all of africa. i'm from nigeria and lived in south africa for 7 years before coming to jamaica and africa is not a country people! its a continent. most people aren't even aware of this." If I needed a photo to alert me to the troubles in Africa, then damn, I'm out of touch with the world. "This happened in 1994. How aware were you of events in Africa at that time? "
" @Lance Uppercut said:No. The UN workers didn't think to snap a photo and win a Pulitzer. Carter did.The circumstance was a famine. Everyone was starving to death. This child was not alone by any stretch of the imagination. There were people dying of starvation in every direction. Are you also pissed at the UN workers who ran a food center a kilometer away, instead of ten feet from where one particular child was dying? ""He saw a helpless human being out starving alone. Whether it had been in Africa, or Europe, or the Middle East, or in your back yard, it really doesn't matter. He snapped a photo, went back to civilization, and won an award for being a douche bag. What circumstance did he have to not help? Was the vulture going to pounce on him? "
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment