Subject: [Leica] Nachtwey in war photographer

[James Michael Lennon <jim@JMLENNON.COM>]

I had the opportunity to meet and speak with James Nachtwey for about 
30 minutes a few years ago. My impression of him was very different 
than the impression Dante Stella got from the film. I haven't seen 
the film, so I can't compare my in-person reaction to what I would 
have from the film.

Mr. Nachtwey impressed me as a very sincere and empathetic individual 
who works for an incredibly low day-rate (especially considering the 
conditions). He gave freely of his time to me. And as I observed him 
during the day, it appeared to me that he gave his time freely to 
anyone who approached him.

Mr. Nachtwey was in town to give a lecture and slide show. After 
having seen that presentation, I must say that his book Inferno, as 
extensive as it is, merely skims the surface of what he has 
photographed.


Original Message.

>Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 09:26:12 -0500
>From: Dante Stella <dante@umich.edu>
>Subject: [Leica] Nachtwey in war photographer
>Message-ID: <0075F25D-0AB9-11D7-B1D1-003065D6E648@umich.edu>
>References:
>
>He doesn't use a Leica, but he is the best living war photographer.
>
>If you can't get this movie in DVD, I can synopsize it in seven points,
>having suffered through it the other night at the theater.  Nachtwey is
>my favorite contemporary photographer in print (Salgado pales by
>comparison), but my short statement is that if this poorly-produced
>film comes on TV, great, but I wouldn't go crazy trying to find it or
>rent it.  As for the details...
>
>1.  The narrative is exactly the same as found in the new book on eight
>war photographers ("Under Fire?"); in fact, most of the situations
>pictured in that book correspond exactly to the scenes in the movie.
>
>2.  Twenty minutes (cumulatively) of Nachtwey wandering around in
>brightly-colored civilian clothes (a polartec pullover, jeans and
>little backpack most of the time), oblivious to his own safety and
>arguably oblivious to norms of politeness.
>
>3.  One and a half hours of a microcamera shot over the right top plate
>of Nachtwey's EOS (not Leica).   Nachtwey's finger going up and down
>and occasionally turns a thumbwheel.  This would have been great for
>five minutes, but it is b-o-r-i-n-g.
>
>4.  Photo editor of Stern gushing over Nachtwey's emotionless pursuit
>of photography.  Nice interior shots of Stern's hellhole Hamburg
>offices.
>
>5.  Nachtwey's former German mistress gushing about how he excited such
>passion in her.  I would have to guess that Al Gore and Mr. Rogers
>would also be on her top-10 list.  She uses the word "library of
>suffering" to describe his experiences.
>
>6.  Christine Amanpour and some British journalist incoherently gushing
>about Nachtwey.
>
>7.  The making of Nachtwey's gallery show, in which the two main scenes
>are (a) his browbeating his printer and (b) a vignette of his mutual
>admiration society with his best friend.
>
>Despite this, I learned a couple of things.
>
>1.  I now have no interest in meeting James Nachtwey.  He is about as
>unstimulating a conversationalist and unemotional person as I have
>seen.  In fact, he seems to be shell-shocked.
>
>2.  Nachtwey describes his pictures as being possible because "people
>trust me because I am giving them a voice."  You can draw your own
>conclusions, but after watching his techniques,  I think his pictures
>are possible because people are so distracted by what is going on that
>they cannot react to him, not that they trust him or want a voice. 
>This suggests to me that half of war photography is getting over the
>fear of being blown to bits; the subject matter is just being there.
>
>3.  Some photographrs are better explored through their work and not
>through their own exegesis.
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html