From: Christina Z. Anderson (zphoto@montana.net)
Date: 09/21/02-08:54:59 AM Z
OH, Marco...
Your comments are so nicely written, below, and I appreciate your
opinion.
I have to add my own experience here. I was doing a nude project for
one of my final senior theses a few years back, and I made the offhand
comment when going thru the contact sheets with the three faculty that even
tho I had gotten *signed model releases* from all my subjects, that if at a
later date any of them asked me not to use his/her images, I would not
display them. I did not tell the models that specifically, but that is my
personal "code of ethics". (let me explain this further that I think this
was said in relation to the one guy who had a bit of a woody in an image.
The image was really hilarious in the juxtaposition of his expression and
his woody, but I took the pic over to his house and showed it to him and
asked if he would be bothered if I used it in my project. His comment:
"Oh, no; that happens all the time..." But I felt much better).
Well, that offhand comment started a war between 2 of the faculty who
began shouting at each other. One said, "You give your models far too much
power" and the other condemed this teacher, saying, "THIS is EXACTLY what is
wrong with photography today, who do you think you are, God", etc. etc. etc.
It was quite ugly. In fact, it was a major rift in the department.
But my bottom line is I cannot feel good about myself if I exploit
another person against their wishes. If they do not verbalize their wishes,
then so be it. I cannot second guess. The problem is, of course, that
let's say one of those images made me millions (like I shot Marilyn Monroe
with cellulite); would I truly be able to stand by my code of ethics when
she comes to me and says she doesn't want her (normal, female) tushy
displayed like that? (from the dead, I presume). I hope that I would,
because character, and the fact that I have no choice but to exist inside my
body and live with myself, you know?, is more important to me. But more
hopefully, I won't ever have to be faced with that decision on such a large
scale. The old biblical adage I love is, God, don't make me so rich that I
forget you and so poor that I steal and profane your name.
Wow, I've talked about, in one email, religion, sex, money, and power.
I'll get down now off my Polyanna soapbox.
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marco Milazzo" <mmilazz1@elp.rr.com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 6:29 AM
Subject: Ethical issues - hit "delete" key if they bother you
> Warning: ethical issues ahead. Hit "Delete" key if they bother you.
>
> A few days ago, I raised a simple question on this list - "A question we
> should all ask ourselves. . .," about the fairness of street photography
to
> people who don't want to be photographed. My question was jumped on by
one
> person who threw a few illogical assertions at it, said I was trying to
> impose my morality on others, called me "pious" and "sanctimonious," and
> said if I didn't want to exploit people, no one was holding a gun to my
> head, etc. I didn't deserve that treatment, and my question didn't
deserve
> it either.
>
> I wasn't proposing this as a doctrine, and apologize if I gave that
> impression. I was simply trying to raise, and possibly discuss an issue
that
> seems consequential to me: Is it fair to use people for our purpose when
> they may not want to be used? I've done street photography, but one day
I
> decided "I don't like having my picture taken without permission -- maybe
I
> shouldn't do it to other people." (Yes, I know that some people like it,
but
> many don't. Yes, I know it's been done from the beginning, but that
doesn't
> change the question).
>
> This isn't a legal issue. It's perfectly legal to take street pictures,
and
> it's not a MORAL issue so please don't accuse me of inflicting my morality
> on others. It's an ETHICAL issue, which means it's voluntary. It's
> literally "A question we should all ask ourselves."
>
> Why ask ethical questions on a photo list? First, because some of us want
> to be good people as well as good photographers. That doesn't make us
> plaster saints. Between "bucaneer" and "choir-boy," there is a territory
> called "Decent Human Being." This is the mark I'm aiming at.
>
> But I also raise it because we deal with ethics everyday. Questions
ranging
> from plagiarism to disposal of spent chemicals are about ethics. To ask
> these questions isn't being pious or sanctimonious, it's simply about
> respecting the same rights and wishes we want for ourselves.
>
> This may be a new issue for this list, but that doesn't mean it doesn't
> belong here. I also recognize that it's not an issue everyone will care
> about. But why go out of your way to kill it at birth by stigmatizing it
> (and me) as ridiculous? If questions of ethics or fairness to people
bother
> you, then please hit your "delete" key. Some people may want to discuss
> it - difficult to do when it has been mislabeled as pious and
sanctimonious
> and slam-dunked into the trashcan.
>
> I think of this as a discussion list. If it's a debate list instead, then
> please say so, and I'll go away because I don't want to "debate" anything.
> Discussion is a cooperative endeavor like mountain climbing, not a
> competitive sport like Sumo wrestling. My idea of discourse is a Socratic
> dialogue where both "sides" refine each other's ideas and help each other
> arrive at a correct position. That's what I'm trying to do.
>
> Marco Milazzo
> (Sorry for the delay in responding. I've been busy.)
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 10/01/02-03:47:09 PM Z CST