Regarding the Pain of Others

In Chapter 2, Sontag writes, “The photographer's intentions do not determine the meaning of a photograph, which will have its own career, blown by the whims and loyalties of the diverse communities that have use for it” (39). Are there war photographers whose work has survived the manipulation of the nation-states it has served? What accounts for our admiration of their photography? Is it the iconic imagery itself? Is it stories that were attached to it? Is it the political contexts in which it was shown, or the media platforms for its reception? Is it the course of life (or death) of the photographers? Trace some key works to make a case.

How is it that the same photograph of misery and suffering, even one taken in the battle zone of a war, can serve diverse purposes in the hands of various “users”? Does the photograph mean something different to a war widow, the enemy, a military press officer, a magazine editor, and a museum curator? Why? Give examples.

Why was the Vietnam War a turning point in the use of images taken by photojournalists? How does Sontag consider the nature of the war itself and the American sentiment toward it, the avenues for dispersal of the images, the sheer number and proliferation of them, the use of color photography, and the photojournalists themselves as factors that made a difference in this war coverage, compared to that of previous eras?

Are the tasks of photography and art entirely separate? Can attributes of beauty be beneficial to the impact of war photography? How does Sontag show that some photographs of catastrophe are considered too aesthetic to be heartfelt? How does she show that others are more compelling and admirable precisely due to the artistic imagination of the photographer?

Consider photographs of the American Civil War and the Spanish-American War. Even regarding iconic images “captured” by Fenton and Brady and commissioned by Teddy Roosevelt, is the role of the camera strictly to bear witness? Since then, is the photograph reliable as irrefutable evidence of an event? Are we to trust the control of images by our own regimes?

Why does Sontag dwell on and return to the work of Francisco Goya? What do his etchings have to do with the capacities and uses of photography? What is their particular power in addressing the misery of battle? Goya’s work concerning Napoleon in Europe might be considered long ago and far away; is it relevant to photography today? Does Sontag see his legacy in the work of American photographers?

What does narration have to do with photography? Can a picture suffice to tell a story? Can even a series of photographs, alone, reveal the situation at-hand? Do words enhance or detract from the power of images? Can we assume that captions attached to images of suffering tell us more about what we are viewing? Discuss three separate cases Sontag shows us for the use of verbal captions, and whether they serve to narrate, to identify the subjects, or to comment on the events in the images.

In what ways is memory selective? Is it possessive? Does it comfort, distort, or solicit action? How does Sontag show that it can serve each of us differently? How does she regard “collective memory” as opposed to individual memory?