Images of War
Mar. 31st, 2003 11:08 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ambitious_wenchIt's been said that of all wars fought, this one is the most widely and intensely reported. Images appear in newspapers with a clarity of detail never achieved before. I saw a picture on the front page of the Providence Journal of a dead Iraqi soldier, and I could pick out the design on the material of his head wrapping. I could see his face, and if I'd known him in life, I could probably have recognised and possitively ID'd his corpse from that picture. It was shot from a low angle, and you could see the archtypal American G.I.Joe walking away, rifle on his shoulder. The shape of the helmet, the jacket, the boots, all spoke of U.S. Army or Marines.
Below the picture was a note from the editor stating that while the image might offend, the editorial staff chose it after long and careful deliberation because it presented a view of war that was important.
I am of the mind that images of the civilian casualties should be displayed. We need to see and be horrified by the impact of war on living, breathing bodies. Hell, the radical "Pro-life"(sic) contingent does it*. However, our culture of violence may have de-sensitised us to the point that real images of the effect of violence will have no impact.
(* Usually using photos of spontaneous abortions, too, I might add, not pictures of aborted fetuses. )
So perhaps we should resort to word pictures, and let the mind's eye see the horror of war. The following link has no photographic images, but if you consider the word's source (light+writing), the words themselves are photographic in that they shed a glaring light on the tragedy and horror of war. Thanks to Art Black for the following link:
Marines Fire on Civilains at the Bridge of Death
Edie
Dona Nobis Pacem
(Give Us Peace)
Below the picture was a note from the editor stating that while the image might offend, the editorial staff chose it after long and careful deliberation because it presented a view of war that was important.
I am of the mind that images of the civilian casualties should be displayed. We need to see and be horrified by the impact of war on living, breathing bodies. Hell, the radical "Pro-life"(sic) contingent does it*. However, our culture of violence may have de-sensitised us to the point that real images of the effect of violence will have no impact.
(* Usually using photos of spontaneous abortions, too, I might add, not pictures of aborted fetuses. )
So perhaps we should resort to word pictures, and let the mind's eye see the horror of war. The following link has no photographic images, but if you consider the word's source (light+writing), the words themselves are photographic in that they shed a glaring light on the tragedy and horror of war. Thanks to Art Black for the following link:
Marines Fire on Civilains at the Bridge of Death
Edie
Dona Nobis Pacem
(Give Us Peace)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Oh...
Date: 2003-03-31 09:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-03-31 03:22 pm (UTC)I wouldn't mind showing the innocent victims. Of course, that's because I'm one of those pro-life people who thinks it's important to show the innocent victims of pro-choice (sic) murderers.
no subject
Date: 2003-03-31 11:02 pm (UTC)