Picture copyright: Arko Datta for Reuters
(pic courtesy: http://www.indiauncut.com/)
Photographers have no control over what their work can become. How it would connect with the viewers? Whether it would convey exactly what the photographer intended for the viewer? I remember a chat with Arko Datta, who shot the picture of the Gujarat tailor, Qutubuddin Ansari virtually begging for life with folded hands and tears in his eyes during the 2002 Gujarat riots. He said his personal favourite was another picture taken and filed the same day. He said he would have been more happy if that particular picture would have got the acclaim the tailor's picture received.
Arko also had no control on the shadow of that photograph on Ansari and his life in the hostile aftermath of the Gujarat riots. It was printed and reprinted hundreds of times by newspapers and magazines to go with articles on Gujarat riots and the picture became virtually the single defining image of the Gujarat riots. But Ansari had a tough time and was forced evenually move from Gujarat to West Bengal in an attempt to shake off the influence of that image and its shadow on his life.
3 comments:
My partner and I really enjoyed reading this blog post, I was just itching to know do you trade featured posts? I am always trying to find someone to make trades with and merely thought I would ask.
Hi. Thanks for your comments. How do you trade featured posts? I have no idea.
True.
Most of the times, we take cameras as shields, or an eyeware, which tones down the harshness of the event.
Remembered Kevin Carter's World Press Photo Award winning picture (1994) and the trauma he went through afterwords, which eventually made him end his life.
Post a Comment