'Through the Lens Essay\r'

'Does a portraying Really Tell A Thousand quarrel? According to John Berger, photographs from August 6th, 1945, be â€Å"images of hell. ” (316) T wear was the sidereal day the US dropped an atomic bomb on lacquer, cleanup position countless innocent civilians and severely burning others. In his essay, â€Å"Hiroshima,” Berger faces the paper that our culture has â€Å"aban wear uponed” the â€Å" purpose of evil. ” (320) unmeasured images foregatherm to be the solo thing left-hand(a) of that day, and from Berger’s perspective, the true meaning of that evet has been hidden, even though the facts are nonoperational in text records.The concept of horrific pictures being taken plays an important federal agency in Berger’s thoughts ab break Hiroshima, because those pictures are what ab initio sparked his interest. However, the idea of sharing of graphing pictures is called into question by Susan Sontag in her essay, â€Å"Regardi ng the incommode of Others,” who floors forbidden that fight photography should feel some form of censorship because of the effect it whitethorn hurt on victims or families who take away broken their loved ones. While Berger doesn’t visualisem to bear on graphic photography, it seems that from is point of view, pictures such(prenominal) as these stumble a reality of what otherwise might clean become another page in our story books. â€Å"These paintings [by survivors] were headn on Japanese television. Is it conceivable that the BBC would show these pictures on Channel One at a beak hour? ” (319) He straighten outs a strong point that the Statesn television would never show those pictures with come on â€Å" write to ‘political’ and ‘military’ realities” (319) because it was our outlandish that caused such destruction. Sontag roughly reinforces this idea by saying that â€Å"the camera brings the dish close- fitting, too close,” (259) and at the ame time contradicts it by implying that struggle pictures sometimes provide inaccurate discipline because of new age technology. Cameras and computers today have the competency to enhance the main focus, what the photographer wants you to flavor at, and spot out other details which whitethorn motley a picture whole. â€Å"The real thing may not be fearsome enough, and in that locationfore needfully to be enhanced; or reenacted to a greater extent convincingly. ” (259) This brings out a good point, although cameras used in 1945 wouldn’t have that kind of technology, alone they can still be edited today.That being said, a picture can be inaccurate in more ways than one. While the Hiroshima pictures are heartbreaking to look at, Berger fails to address the fact that not all war pictures tell the full story, along with what may have happened before and after the picture was taken, and some may be taken completely ou t of context. Sontag brings in this idea by talking to the highest degree a famous picture of a South Vietnamese General shooting a Vietcong suspect, which turned out to be staged. This idea calls Berger’s argument into question, because it is secret which pictures are â€Å"real” and which are mainly for ublicity purposes. We don’t know what happened before, after, or even what’s going on outside the frame on a picture just by look at it. Only the photographer and the people put at that moment know the whole truth. Although Sontag brings in some point that were missed by Berger, Sontag reinforces Berger’s speculation that US television and newspapers only show what the goernment wants the public to see, and nothing more. She adds that the military promoted â€Å"images that illustrated America’s absolute military superiority over its enemy. ” (260) in the Gulf War in 1991.This idea in truth brings the true motives of our nation out, which is really what Berger’s entire argument is based off of. He tries to make the US look wish bullies, sidesplitting innocent people to scare their government so that we look like a strong country that defeats the bad guys and protects its citizens. â€Å"It was not a miscalculation, an error, or the run of a situation deteriorating so rapidly that it gets out of hand. ” (319) This quote proves that, from Berger’s perspective, the US purposely caused such an event, which was preplanned , not a defense mechanism.While Sontag doesn’t mark an opinion about why the US only shows pictures that make ourgovernment look good, she does mention that â€Å"the use of cameras at the front for nonmilitary purposes have become some(prenominal) stricter as war has become an activity prosecuted with increasingly exact optical devices for tracking the enemy. ” (260) This would explain why we don’t see many pictures of the war going on right now, even though it’s been going on for many days already. Berger aims his focus on Hiroshima alone, while Sontag looks at the spectacular picture of war photography in itself.Sontag would assumingly train with Berger about the issue of Hiroshima, how horrifying it was and how those pictures play such a big role. At the same time, I think this would further promote her idea that war photography is sometimes too harsh, even though without seeing those pictures, one might not be able to imagine such horror. However, Sontag might not agree with Berger when he says â€Å"the memory of these events should be continually before our eyes. ” (320) A lot of pictures should be continually before our eyes, and unfortunately Hiroshima is only an example of events hat would be forgotten without visual aids to inspire us. He himself is an example, not interested in the book on his desk until he opened it and was reminded of such an event. just now like Sontag says, â€Å"to displa y the dead, after all, is what the enemy does. ” (259) In many third world countries, people see death and sickness all the time. Civilians in places like Iraq and Afghanistan plausibly see death more than anyone, and we, the enemy, are the ones showing it to them. For us, war pictures hit too close to home, especially for amilies that have loved ones overseas armed combat for our country, but what about people that have to spectator pump it firsthand? They don’t always have a choice. Berger, who is British, calls his friend from America, the one he dialog about in the beginning, â€Å"innocent,” saying that she looks at a â€Å"nuclear holocaust without considering its reality. ” (321) But in a way, many Americans do that. We could â€Å"google” many kinds of pictures, graphic or not, whenever we feel like it, but do we really think about what it would be like to be there?This is the problem with Sontag’s idea about war photos not being shown; without them, many Americans would probably be even more naive than they already are. If I told you a bomb was dropped on Japan and many people were killed and burned, you would probably feel sympathy, but you would probably go on with your day, as would a lot of people. But seeing pictures, children burned, dead bodies, that would make it more real, and that’s why Berger says we should unceasingly see things like that. Unfortunately, that can’t be publicly shown, especially on television, where verything has to be â€Å"family oriented. ” There’s a downside to both arguments: we can’t constantly be reminded of such horrible things like Hiroshima, but we also can’t be completely out of the loop. War photography is a contentious topic, but it’s one that will about likely always be part of life. As long as there’s wars, there will be people trying to attain the events and realities of it. Works Cited Berger, John †Å"Hiroshima” Fields of Reading, 2010, Bedford/ St. Martin’s Sontag, Susan â€Å"Regarding the Pain of Others” Fields of Reading, 2010, Bedford/ St. Martin’s\r\n'