2005 Pulitzer prizes in photography

[peter_n]

The Associated Press won the prize for breaking news photography with a series of pics of bloody urban combat in Iraq.

Deanne Fitzmaurice of the San Francisco Chronicle won the feature photography prize for her series of an Iraqi boy who was nearly killed by an explosion in his homeland. He came to America to receive medical treatment but more than that he made friends and eventually, a new life.

Breaking news photography

Feature photography

 

[wlewisiii]

Thank you for posting these links. I'd been wondering about the photography winners. The Fitzmaurice feature is increadable work.

William

 

[peter_n]

Just a heads-up that there is an hour-long program on Boston NPR station WBUR on the story of this boy and photographer Deanne Fitzmaurice at 11:00am Eastern Standard Time today. (EST is GMT -5 hrs.)

You can hear the program by clicking on the link below and clicking on the "Listen Live" button in the top left corner of WBUR's home page:

WBUR Boston

 

[hoot]

The Deanne Fitzmaurice photos are incredibly sensitive. It must have been difficult to become a tolerated fly on the wall in these conditions. I find that the hospital photos have the most impact, both graphically and content-wise; the later ones in the series are rather bland by comparison.

 

[jan normandale]

I have a hard time looking at these photographs, so I find the fact that these photos of a war are what wins an award disturbing. Iraqi people in pain and Pulitzer judges drinking coffee and juice while deliberating over photographs. Very cold. Something just seems wrong with this picture.

I have no suggestion about what would be appropriate but I have a hard time with this type of photography the same way I have a hard time of photos of poor people taken by photographers with a camera that is worth half a years pay for the subjects. I think we need to develop a moral code about the context of photos of subjects who are in hardship or duress.

Jan

 

[DougK]

I agree that these are difficult photos to look at. Speaking as a former soldier/medic, if any of these photos can remind people and our leaders of what a horrible, horrible enterprise war truly is and just maybe cause them to try a little harder to avoid a future conflict, then they are indeed worth a Pulitzer to me.

 

[RML]

I have a hard time looking at these photographs, so I find the fact that these photos of a war are what wins an award disturbing. Iraqi people in pain and Pulitzer judges drinking coffee and juice while deliberating over photographs. Very cold. Something just seems wrong with this picture.

I have no suggestion about what would be appropriate but I have a hard time with this type of photography the same way I have a hard time of photos of poor people taken by photographers with a camera that is worth half a years pay for the subjects. I think we need to develop a moral code about the context of photos of subjects who are in hardship or duress.

Jan

Jan, though I can relate to your emotions I think the Deanne Fitzmaurice photos make up for any lack of moral conduct by anyone associated with these awards. IMO this series is of a kind that deserves worldwide attention, and these Pullitzer prices are an excellent board for the attention. However, a similar series could have been shot just around the corner involving homeless people, asylum seekers or a single mom down on her luck. Every person has a story of his/her own, some more gripping than others and some that are better suited to be captured on film than others. What is important IMO is that a series about a common boy and his experiences have been awarded and not some series on (for instance) the trials and tribulations of a presidential candidate. I'm waiting for a series similar to the Deanne Fitzmaurice photos on an average GI and how he/she/they cope with his experience during and after his tour in Iraq (or Afghanistan, or any other hot spot in the world in past 25 years or so, from say the Lebanon on to now). As dkirchge said, war is a horrible experience and the suits in charge need to be reminded of the horror of war as much as possible.

 

[hoot]

Jan, though I personally prefer HCB-style photos that show the unbearable lightness of being (to steal a good title), I think that, despite your absolutely valid criticism of the discrepancy between the photos' protagonists on one hand, and their authors and viewers on the other, it's very important to show - and award the showing of - other people's pain. Precisely because they are so difficult to view, I think photos like these can make more people dare to blame the sinister political machinations which, directly or indirectly, have caused this pain.

By the way, Susan Sontag's last book (she died in December) is a pretty interesting take on this very subject.

 

[Todd.Hanz]

Why do the images of war, pain, homeless people and the downtrodden always seem to get top billing with the P.U. Litzer group? Why not the struggles of everyday man, they could have sent a photographer to watch me bust my knuckles fixing my lawnmower today, or the tears I shed when I payed the bill for replacement parts.
Truth is, we want blood, tears, more blood, anger, pain, anything that makes us "feel".

I think the story of the young boy is a positive one, the first few images tell of his pain while the rest speak of his resilience in the face of adversity, something we should applaude.

Todd

 

[jan normandale]

Maybe I should clarify a bit. First I am not afraid of these images, I have seen them all my life, in newspapers, television, movie clips, documentaries, journals, books you name it. What I find disturbing is the way that the prize is awarded. We know these photos depict horrible trauma, yet we are consumers of these images. I'm not advocating a 'Pollyanna' world view.

I understand the need to 'show the horror of war' and show 'the resiliency and triumph of the human spirit' but at some point, like learning multiplication tables, we know this subject cold. So do we just look and award prizes for this, while judges commodify images and revenues are earned from horrible suffering? My dilemma is not having a good answer. I just know it feels all wrong. I guess I'm saying I cannot support this. My view will not change things, but I feel better when someone takes these shots and the revenues are awarded to worthy recipients like widows or orphans funds or hospital funding. That makes it a little easier for me.

Guys, I realize this is my problem, I'm stopping.

Jan

BTW Deanne Fitzmaurice is a fine photographer

 

[RayPA]

Guys, I realize this is my problem, I'm stopping.

Jan

It's not just your problem. I know exactly where you're coming from on this. I too have issues with awarding prizes for photographs. The whole award process is celebratory, congratulatory, etc. It feels wrong.

To judge a photograph is to analyze why it works, its composition, etc., that whole process has a tendency to objectify the subject. You're not alone on this. 🙂

 

[hoot]

No, Jan; I'm glad you're voicing this concern. It's an interesting subject to debate.

"at some point, like learning multiplication tables, we know this subject cold"

What you say makes sense, but personally, that hasn't happened to me yet. Maybe the problem is that when photos become too perfect, too beautiful, people stop looking through them and begin to look at them.

I don't feel eloquent enough to argue this point further at the moment, but might come back to this later.

 

[mac_wt]

I find the pictures of the young boy very disturbing. They tell some kind of fairy-tale version of this war. Young boy suffers, overcomes hardships, is reunited with his family and they live happy ever after. I don't think the story ends with the last happy pictures and I also don't think this story is representative of what happens to the victims of this war. Just my 2 eurocents.

Wim

 

[Roman]

"

What you say makes sense, but personally, that hasn't happened to me yet. Maybe the problem is that when photos become too perfect, too beautiful, people stop looking through them and begin to look at them.

Not sure about that - I think, precisely what makes pictures by eg. Sebastiao Salgado or James Nachtwey (two of my favorite photographers) work so extremely well in touching you deeply inside and making you think about the conditions some people have to live under, is the perfectionist way they were made and printed. If you take just another quick color shot of some people living in poverty or war, the images is just gonna pass by your eyes and is not going to be remembered - we see too many of those everyday in newspapers and magazines, anyway, and most of us are too numbed by this constant exposure to really care about what's shown any longer.
Pictures by Salgado, Nachtwey, and a few more (W. Eugene Smith comes to mind as a canonized example) on the other hand make you stop and look at them due to their aesthetic and artistic qualities - and once you stop and look at them closely, you are much more prone to also reflect on what's shown in them, precisely because the photographers used all their artistry to convey the emotions, conditions and fates of the depicted.

Roman

 

[stet]

speaking of Salgado, did you catch this link, posted in CVUG?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/salgado/story/0,15021,1478365,00.html

 

[Roman]

Yep, I have seen that one - not bad, but on the other hand not as unique as his usual work.

Roman

 

[aizan]

those whale pics might as well be stock photos, or printed in national geographic. 🙄

what's most disappointing about the pulitzer prize to ap is how typical they are. same old thing, and not more of a worthwhile message than it ever was. sadly, it's in no way going to make politicians avoid war more strongly.

 

[DougK]

Aizan, sadly I think you're right about the politicians but one can always hope.

On a side note, the Salgado whale photos are very well done technically with great composition but they seem a little sterile for some reason, maybe it's just me. I do like the black-and-white approach, though, since you don't usually see this subject other than in color. That said, I'd hang 'em on my wall in a heartbeat.

Anybody have any links to his other work? I have to confess I've never heard of him before and I'd love to see more.

 

[hoot]

"sadly, it's in no way going to make politicians avoid war more strongly."

Well, politicians have to be elected by regular people like you and me... if you and I are touched by photos of this kind, we will probably be less likely to elect politicians who have proven that they don't give a rodent's posterior about avoiding war.

 

[hoot]

Pictures by Salgado [et. al.] [...] make you stop and look at them due to their aesthetic and artistic qualities - and once you stop and look at them closely, you are much more prone to also reflect on what's shown in them, precisely because the photographers used all their artistry to convey the emotions, conditions and fates of the depicted.

That's well said, and does make a lot of sense, though I haven't yet seen any evidence of it. Neither, however, have I seen any evidence against it. It might be interesting to make an experiment by showing people badly-executed snapshots of people suffering, then contrasting these with excellently-executed ones by Salgado etc., and noting how strongly they react to each kind. Of course, doing just that might confirm Jan's criticism of the "coffee and juice" attitude he defined above.

I guess it all boils down to: are photos an integral part of the "war" against suffering, or do they just constitute artistic masturbation that avoids the problem by turning it into a bunch of pretty pictures? Photos showing a lot of empathy in addition to their perfect composition make me lean towards the first outlook, but if composition begins to gain vast predominance over the empathy component, I think the resulting photos may well be more numbing - and ultimately destructive - than sloppy snapshots of the same subject. Of course, I'm saying all of this without the faintest shred of evidence, either, so please take it with a big chunky grain of salt.