On 'Heartwarming' Photographs (2)

"This photograph has done something terrible and cruel to Jeffrey Hillman. He has been held up to totally unhelpful, mean-minded scrutiny. What an unhelpful, unenlightening picture this turned out to be. Obviously, some may suspect a more calculating aspect to the whole affair – did the picture really just happen to emerge with its flattering light on the New York police department? But that aside, assuming it really is a chance record of a moment of sudden kindness, its viral career demonstrates the fragility of truth and the stupidity of crowds.

Everyone likes this picture, it goes round the world in seconds, it becomes a cosy heartwarming cult for a day. Then the questions start and the warm glow hardens into a remorseless searchlight on an individual who clearly does not need this massive public attention. Hillman is right to wonder what he is getting from all this, as some other viral image displaces a moment too complex, after all, for the illusory warmth of a picture one shares while sipping an eggnog latte in a warm coffee shop."

So says Jonathan Jones at The Guardian. Jeffrey Hillman, of course, is the shoeless, "homeless" vet who become an emblem for the recent feel good about NYC campaign. I was skeptical of the heartwarming photo op at the time and said so here. Mr. Hillman, as The New York Times reports,  turns out to be non-compliant with the heartwarming tale. So much the worse for the tale tellers and for the poor people who will bear the brunt of their disappointment and resentment.

On 'Heartwarming' Photographs

I came across this story, about an officer from the NYPD who bought a homeless man a pair of warm boots,  in The New York Times yesterday. Before I go on, let's be clear: the officer did a generous thing. He did a generous thing that many folks, and not just denizens of NYC, would not have done. He deserves the public praise he's received. I myself am just glad he was not reprimanded for leaving his post on an anti-terrorism patrol in Times Square in order to buy boots for the fellow.

The story in The Times and related notoriety (e.g., gazillions of 'likes' and 'shares' on the NYPD facebook page) was prompted by the picture I've lifted above, snapped by a woman from Arizona visiting NYC. So, here is my problem. First, more or less random acts of kindness are, by definition, random. They will not systematically address the difficulties of the poor in America. Second, the picture has elicited lots of 'heartwarming' response. Screw that. Heartwarming is just people feeling good vicariously about themselves. It will not induce anyone to actually do anything about poverty - like stop electing right wingers whose first instinct is to blame the (unidentified) homeless guy for being out on the freezing streets barefoot on his being a 'taker' or a 'moocher.'

A Clearly Divided CIty

I am not sure why, but I have not seen this image before this evening. Generally I think of New York as little more than an advertising circular much like the ones that appear unsolicited in our rural mail box. But I have to say that this cover image - taken from a helicopter at 5000 feet the night after the recent storm - by Iwan Baan is pretty remarkable. Here are some reflections from the photographer:

“It was the only way to show that New York was two cities, almost . . . One was almost like a third world country where everything was becoming scarce. Everything was complicated. And then another was a completely vibrant, alive New York.

What really struck me, if you look at the image on the left, you see the Goldman Sachs building and new World Trade Center. These two buildings are brightly lit. And then the rest of New York looks literally kind of powerless. In a way, it shows also what’s wrong with the country in this moment.”

 And, of course, Baan's image only captures Manhattan, leaving out the  darkness and devastation in the other boroughs.;

OWS & the Democratic Party

Yesterday in The Guardian Barbara Ehrenreich criticized elites in the Democratic party, including President Obama, of selling the OWS movement down the river. When I first read her piece I thought it was on point. Turns out, however, that her criticism was too understated by half. If the biggest problem were that Obama and other Democratic elites have been silent regarding the Occupy movement things might be better. After all, we now know (reported, for instance, by AP here and Mother Jones here) that the evictions in Portland, Oakland, Atlanta, NYC and so forth are part of a concerted and coordinated strategy by - predominantly Democratic - elected officials to dismantle the movement. Of course they seem to have acted with the full connivance of Obama's Department of Homeland Security, but that has not been definitively established. The local concerns about public health and safety are - regardless of the DHS angle - all just so much bullshit.

Michael Bloomberg concluded his rationalization for attacking the OWS folks in NYC with this statement: "“Protestors have had two months to occupy the park with tents and sleeping bags. Now they will have to occupy the space with the power of their arguments." The problem? Bloomberg has not argued with anyone. He sent out the armed (and, in the event, pretty brutal) NYPD. Just as the other mayors have done. That said, it is important to recognize that (as reported here at Democracy Now!) some local officials have in fact resigned in response to the heavy-handed response by the various mayors.

The image above captures the real problem for government officials - including our Democrats. It is a screen shot of this map from The Guardian, showing the location of various Occupy outposts world-wide.

Front Stoop Politics in Brooklyn

I have posted here a number of times about the anonymous artist JR and his work. In The New York Times today there is a story about a current project of his in Park Slope, Brooklyn celebrating local shop keepers in the face of what passes for economic development.* I am not so convinced that the imagery transcends class - it seems that the pressures on the shopkeepers reflect deep class divisions, with the less well off pressured by larger economic forces working to the benefit of the better off. And I am not sure that the project will mitigate the displacement caused by the development project in the neighborhood.

But I am impressed by the way the project brings voices and faces into public, indeed by the way that seemingly private concerns are re-framed as a public matter. And in that sense, while the project is not in itself directly political, it may afford some basis on which people in this neighborhood might, in the words of C. Wright Mills, more successfully translate their "personal troubles" into "public issues."** In fact, as the report in The Times makes clear, the images and the people installing them seem to have actually established public space, however fleeting, in which people can interact in new ways. And that is political to the core.
__________
* The actual execution here seems to be by Inside Out. The images here are lifted from this post by Emily Nonko.
** In that sense the images here bring to mind those that I note in this post.

Marketing Paranoia and Suspicion

Graphic © fulana

I often wonder 'Where Do These Things Come From Anyway?'. These things include various witty slogans that seem idiotic but, for many, simply irresistible. In The New York Times today this story about "If You See Something, Say Something" the anti-terrorism mantra that has been popping up all over. You can see an example here and another here of how this fine advice gets incorporated into in public policy. The implementation is why I side with the skeptics and why I wish advertising execs would restrain their impulse to do something. Allen Kay! Stick to peddling shoes or usury and leave the rest of us alone!

Count me among the skeptics like Bill Dobbs who is quoted in the The Times report. Beyond the baleful political consequences there is the plea for common sense. Ask yourself: 'If I were standing near a vehicle that began smoking would I need a sign with a pithy slogan to prompt me to contact the local authorities? Or, on the other hand, am I actually a sensible adult?'

South Bronx, 1979

Boston Road near Charlotte Street, (1979).
Photograph © David Gonzalez.

Today The New York Times is running this slide show and accompanying story by David Gonzalez recalling his time teaching photography in and photographing around the South Bronx neighborhood where he'd grown up and to which he has now, decades later, returned with his family to live. In the course of the voice over for the slide show, Gonzalez mentions that he'd been working with the terrific organization En Foco. The point is that you see what you look for.

Photographing in NYC

The NYC Mayor’s Office on Film, Theater, and Broadcasting created mayhem last summer when it promulgated restrictive rules governing photographers/filmmakers shooting on the streets of the city. Here is an AP story on the new rules that were publicly announced today.

The Destruction of Lower Manhattan, 1967

327,329 & 331 Washington Street © Danny Lyon

Read and West Street © Danny Lyon

258 Washington Street © Danny Lyon

"The pictures presented here were all made on the west side
of Lower Manhattan, on or near the site of the WTC. They are
presented here out of love for the city. They are also presented
out of respect for the practice of photography, and the warning
that now especially, in these perilous times, photographers must
exhibit integrity in the use and control of their work."
~ Danny Lyon

Things to see in NYC

Soldiers from Attack Co.1-12 Cavalry 1st Cavalry Division
take a break from the scorching Iraqi sun during a patrol
in the Tahrir District of Baqubah in May 2007,
Photograph © Lucian Read / Atlas Press, 2007

I recently mentioned the exhibition "Arte No Es Vida" at El Museo del Barrio which is showing though June 1st. But I've just seen notices of two other shows that I'd like to see too.

Drawing for Peace, (Video still, 2006) © Aaron Hughes

The first, from which I've lifted the images above, is "Testimony to War: Art from the Battlegrounds of Iraq" at the School of Visual Arts through March 8th.

The second is William Kentridge "Seeing Double" at the Marian Goodman Gallery which unfortunately for me runs only through february 16th. Idon't plan on getting to NYC until early March. That said, Kentridge is a truly inspiring artist - go if you can.