For those who didn't know me when I was younger, this is me as a child. With the whole debate on whether photographs are a "irresistible form of mental pollution" (Sontag), both sides have valid arguments. It all depends on how you use it. For example, the photo above is used to document and preserve my image as a child. Therefor, one may argue that photographs and pictures bring a sense of truth and documentation that are important. However, the photo above is not me. All I did was search up "asian child" on google images and selected the first image of a boy. Those against photographs would then argue that images are deceitful. Yes, I agree. Pictures can be misleading, especially with photoshop readily available (but at a whopping $120+ a year). However, isn't life also deceitful? Whether it's news stories, magazines, or even friends and family, everyone and everything lie. That poptart you had for breakfast wasn't actually a poptart. It was a Toaster Tart.
Also, without photographs, I wouldn't be able keep my self esteem up every day.
Without photographs, cops wouldn't know who to look for when catching criminals. Therefore if you argue that photographs are bad, then you support crime.
Also without photos, this would never be possible.
I really liked your beginning, Andrew; it made me question the importance of photographs and made me read the rest of the piece differently.
ReplyDeleteI really like your consistently insightful blogposts. That photo-crime logic was really something.
ReplyDeleteAndrew, this is wild.
ReplyDelete