Alfredo Jarr is currently showing at the South London gallery, he is a Chilean artist working in New York.
I went to see his show on Saturday and became interested in his work titled 'The sound of Silence'; this work deals with the ever debated issue of documentary photography and it's seemingly necessary relationship with suffering.
The film looks at the Pulitzer prize winning image by Kevin Carter of a famine victim overlooked by a vulture (see right).
The film is a poignant view into the history of the photographer; his background and experience of fighting, how, and why he came to be a photojournalist. However most interestingly to me it dealt with the criticism Kevin Carter felt as a result of selling his photograph;
"The man adjusting his lens to take just the right frame of her suffering might just as well be a predator, another vulture on the scene."1
The public wanted to know why he did not intervene and help the child. Perhaps this criticism was a factor that led to his suicide shortly after receiving the Pulitzer prize for this image.
I was thinking about when "designing for the other 90%", and designers insistence to design to raise awareness, and the implications this has. As Jaar would seemingly argue (from the slant of his film) Carter may not have saved the girl he was photographing, however by raising awareness of the situation maybe this can or has had a more felt effect.
I went to see his show on Saturday and became interested in his work titled 'The sound of Silence'; this work deals with the ever debated issue of documentary photography and it's seemingly necessary relationship with suffering.
The film looks at the Pulitzer prize winning image by Kevin Carter of a famine victim overlooked by a vulture (see right).
The film is a poignant view into the history of the photographer; his background and experience of fighting, how, and why he came to be a photojournalist. However most interestingly to me it dealt with the criticism Kevin Carter felt as a result of selling his photograph;
"The man adjusting his lens to take just the right frame of her suffering might just as well be a predator, another vulture on the scene."1
The public wanted to know why he did not intervene and help the child. Perhaps this criticism was a factor that led to his suicide shortly after receiving the Pulitzer prize for this image.
I was thinking about when "designing for the other 90%", and designers insistence to design to raise awareness, and the implications this has. As Jaar would seemingly argue (from the slant of his film) Carter may not have saved the girl he was photographing, however by raising awareness of the situation maybe this can or has had a more felt effect.
I was trying to work out, if a room full of us talking about designing for the other 90% was hypocritical, and whether or not this highlighted the problems of a global design; the title, design for the other 90% suggests (by using a statistic) you do not know these people, what they want, how they suffer, and so on.
In which case, the only thing we can really do is raise awareness? Can we even do that? Carter had grown up in South Africa and had fought twice- he had experienced war, seen murder, and starving children, maybe he was 'qualified' as a true social commentator on an issue that was unfolding around him.
I feel this is a difficult subject, obviously any attempts to raise awareness of current political issues are important, and as artists/designers we are social commentators, but i would also like to think one has a little more potential to shape futures rather than simply telling people what is going on, especially when we don't even know.
'The Sound of Silence' is showing until 6th April 2008: http://www.southlondongallery.org/
1 http://www.thisisyesterday.com/ints/KCarter.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.