urban ku # 110 ~ exactly

Foggy morning wiith fence, wire and telephone pole • click to embiggenIn an email, Chuck Avery wrote; "That was an interesting exchange about a traditionalist versus activist photographic approach to the ecological questions in front of us. I don't think anybody is fooling themselves thinking that they are going to change the world. But if we can all do our small part to raise consciousness and awareness, then maybe we have done our job."

Exactly.

PS I'm posting this on Thursday evening because on Friday have to go see Tiger Woods.

Comments

[Paul Maxim]

I really wasn't going to jump into this again, but feel compelled to do so because I still believe you're very much missing the point. To say that if we all do "our small part to raise consciousness and awareness, then maybe we have done our job" is, in my mind, incredibly naive. Whether you're a photographer who makes "pretty pictures" or one who tries to depict the nasty, gritty side of human "progress", your effect on what's going on in the world will be pretty much the same. That is, you will essentially have no effect at all. To think otherwise is "exactly" incorrect.

Can individuals, or groups of individuals, affect public policy? Yes, but rarely on a national or global scale. Seneca Joe Stoddard's "effect" was essentially local. And I doubt he could do the same today. It's a much different world, even within the boundaries of the Adirondacks. Al Gore's recent "lantern show" is far more powerful and probably more persuasive, but last time I checked, I don't think any countries had changed environmental policy (certainly not the US). As proof, I offer George Bush's "Climate Forum" that is going on right now. The United States - as well as other developed countries - have flatly stated that their economies are more important than global warming. As Bill Clinton once said (in another context), "It's the economy, stupid". It's all about money. We can all paste pictures on the internet and on lamp posts and little will change as a result.

One of my favorite "off the wall" politicians is a guy named Kinky Friedman (he ran for governor of Texas in 2006, receiving a fair amount of media attention but not many votes). He stated that government today (both state and federal) is "of the money, by the money, and for the money". I think that sums it up pretty well. Doing the "right" thing has never been high on any politician's list, but for most it doesn't even show up today. It's a simple case of "show me the money".

The point, of course, is that if you can't turn environmental issues into "money" issues, then you're pretty much pissing into the wind.

I wish that I was wrong. I wish that by making "pretty" photographs that showed people what they were losing (by ignoring what's happening around them) they might have a change of heart and clamor for policy change. I would also gladly accept it if you were "right" and that people would respond to images that represented what the world was becoming. But neither, I fear, will happen. When their pocketbooks and / or their very survival are in imminent danger, people will react. More importantly, governments will react.

Enjoy your day at the "pretty as a picture" golf course.