Nick Ut 2018?

THIS PHOTO is going viral. It's by John Moore of Getty Images.

 

It's being talked about in terms of the Nick Ut image, Napalm Girl, taken on June 8, 1972, almost exactly 46 years ago.

 

Do you think it will become as iconic? More importantly, do you think it will affect us as much as Ut's photo has? Do you hope it does?

 

The main difference I notice is how much more subtle, if you can call horror subtle, the picture of horror of what's happening now is compared to the more dramatic and in-your-face depiction of the child in 1972. Yet, in a sense, maybe that subtlety will move us as much or more. Certainly the photo's ability to go viral will have a power that Ut's photo couldn't take advantage of in the same way.

 

How moving and horrifying are this little girl's tears as she stands under her mother being searched by American border guards? And, while excuses (mostly bad ones) can be made for border guards searching mothers fleeing from their home countries, no excuse can be made for what this photo represents, which is that such kids and even younger ones are now being torn from their parents and families and put into warehouse detention camps, similar to our shameful practice with Japanese Internment camps (photographed so eloquently by Dorothea Lange and others), where volunteers aren't allowed to touch even those who may need diapering. So, while the image may be a bit less traumatic than a naked screaming girl running, scorched by bombs, the association today's photo has is to something not very subtle at all, but rather a fantastic evil.

 

Is the picture helping whatever humanity is left in the U.S. come to grips with what our government is doing? Can a picture help effect change? Can it help mobilize a people (or at least a sizable portion of a people) horrified by the immorality, callousness, and wickedness of an administration committing atrocities in our* name?

 

You tell me?

 

[Though I use "our" in referring to Americans, I hope and know those from other countries will care as well, as fellow human beings, and talk about the power and potential of this photo.]

Do you think it will become as iconic? More importantly, do you think it will affect us as much as Ut's photo has? Do you hope it does?

 

no.

People who enter this country illegally are breaking the law, and risk the consequences. They chose to subject their children to the risks of their criminality. Any American who commits a crime potentially subjects their children to similar treatment. The adults have committed a crime, the children have not, and therefore are separated from their parents. The same thing was happening under the previous administration as evidenced by the recent viral photo of children behind chain link fence. Being upset and frightened is entirely different from being burned by napalm. Quite remarkable this never came up in the previous "scandall free" (ya sure!) administration. Put your axe away, Fred.

"Even though it has become one of the most memorable images of the twentieth century, President Nixon once doubted the authenticity of my photograph when he saw it in the papers on 12 June 1972.... The picture for me and unquestionably for many others could not have been more real. The photo was as authentic as the Vietnam War itself. The horror of the Vietnam War recorded by me did not have to be fixed. That terrified little girl is still alive today and has become an eloquent testimony to the authenticity of that photo. That moment thirty years ago will be one Kim Phúc and I will never forget. It has ultimately changed both our lives."

--Nick Ut

Fascinating how not much has changed. I can just hear Donald Trump echoing Nixon in wondering if the pic is faked. Except instead of just wondering, Trump would just declare the photo was faked and probably convince himself of that alternative fact.

Many children in the history of mankind including you and me have cried at one point whether because of benign or more malevolent reasons.

What that has to do with the price of beans, I don't know. This girl is not crying because she lost her lollipop.

Who knows in the next moment the child is smiling because someone gives her a lollipop.

Yes, clearly rainbows are about to bloom. [sarcasm icon]

Would the picture of the child smiling be less true

The child is not smiling. Why bring that nonexistent hypothetical up?

I guess that would depend on what you want to use the picture for and whether or not it is about what the picture depicts vs what it represents.

What I hope the picture does is wake people up to the reality of what our government is doing to kids, or at least reinforce that knowledge. Actually, it's not just my hope. It's already having an effect, going viral, and is all over the news in the U.S. It's not a matter of what the picture depicts vs. what it represents. It's obviously both. This is not an academic debate, much as that might be someone's default mindset. It's about real lives being torn to bits.

The two are not even remotely similar.

 

In Ut's photo the girl's village had been bombed, she had been burned by napalm. Nick Ut commandeered a vehicle and got her to a hospital; he saved her life.

 

More of the story can be found at the old Digital Journalist site:

Untitled Document

Here's an excerpt:

Nick Ut knew very well that the doctors would attend first those whose lives could most likely be saved, and put others, who were expected to die, aside for later treatment. It was a battlefield experience Nick Ut had often shared with soldiers and civilians alike.

 

He pleaded with the doctors and nurses to take care of Phan Thi Kim Phuc - and they did. Ut told them what he had seen on Route-1, what he had photographed and that he expected his pictures to be published everywhere.

 

Only when Kim Phuc was on the operating table did Nick Ut leave the hospital and head towards Saigon, to bring his film to the AP.

The two are not even remotely similar.

Not even remotely? That's definitive. Thanks.

It's about real lives being torn to bits.

Their parents chose to be criminals, the government and its agencies are simply enforcing the law. Don't like the law as it is? Convince some of your Lefty Pols to step up and do something besides "Resist", possibly even do what they were elected for and help change the law.

It effectively kills any useful debate

That's what I was trying to do. Kill debate. This is not about debate, for me.

In Ut's photo the girl's village had been bombed, she had been burned by napalm. Nick Ut commandeered a vehicle and got her to a hospital; he saved her life.

I want to acknowledge that Bill's post influenced me some as my thinking was already starting to evolve from my initial post. There are important differences in the two photos and the two photographers. There are, to me, less important differences in the two situations, even though there are clearly differences.

 

Ut's photo is more iconic and, to me, a better photo overall. It shows more and shows more context as well. It's a stronger composition. The comparisons I'd heard on the news had influenced me, probably a bit too much, and my emotions influenced me greatly. Because I hate what's going on so strongly and relate it to so many other horrific camp detentions through history, and feel so impotent to effect change except through protest which, as I said, I intend to do for whatever it's worth, I'm reacting quite emotionally here to the photo because of my feelings about the situation. My reaction to the photo is more about the situation than the photo. In a sense, that's fine with me, since I spent many of my earlier decades reacting more intellectually and academically. This feels better, even if I get things wrong from time to time and imbue a particular photo with more juice than it might actually have. Ut as a photographer was kind of incomparable in his willingness to get involved to the extent he did and I, again, thank Bill for making that point. I'll take a minor exception to the "not remotely similar" comment, since I think the photos are remotely similar in some important ways, though not really comparable in others.

 

As to comparing the horror of a village being bombed to the horror of a child being forced away from her parents and kept in a detention camp jail, I can't and won't do that, because it's unnecessary here for me to do. While there may be reason at times to compare the world's evil atrocities, and degree is often an important thing, at this hour, for me, the evil currently being perpetrated by my government has crossed a line that's in the same direction of other atrocities and that's where I'm at with it. I don't need to compare this to worse atrocities to help myself feel better about it.

Nick Ut's image speaks volumes in itself, John Moore's says nothing without written context. BillC got it right: not even remotely similar. The only indication that there is something more to it than a child crying is the fact that the man wears latex gloves.

John Moore's says nothing without written context

Dieter, I agree. But I think the photos are "remotely similar" because, WITH written context, they both seem to be able to wring some emotion out of an audience and provide a heartfelt witness to a grand wrongdoing. I've heard many people across the U.S. today, who already know what's going on and have come across the photo in the context of the news story (which is a very valid way to be introduced to a photo), say what a big impact it's had on them. Along with today's picture and the sound from one of the camps (also sound that has no context other than what's provided by the reporter who recorded it), several prominent Republicans, including a couple of congressmen in border districts, spoke out today. Whether the imagery and sound influenced them, I don't know, but that particular image and the sound recording released today are having a visceral effect on at least part of the population. It's fascinating and I'm grateful that such images and sound can add strongly to knowledge that we get through written reports. Such images can act as important punctuation marks which can have a lasting effect. Again, I've already recognized the major differences between Ut's photo and Moore's and maybe most photographers and some others will claim, in a kind of academic way that's not invalid by any means, that there's no remote similarity. I suspect many laypeople who are going more on gut will feel some level of similarity. At least I've heard several personal reports online and in the news today that bear that out. They're not necessarily thinking with their photo-critique hats on, just going with their gut.

I should add that I think "similarity" can be considered in terms of effect and connection to events as well as possible historical importance and not just in terms of what's contained in the actual images or how exactly they portray what they portray.

I am definitely not supporting the separation of children from their parents. I think its just wrong and yes inhumane. However to answer Fred's original question, I don't think this pic has the makings of the iconic image of the Nick Ut photo. It doesn't provide enough context for me. I mean we know what its about but the Nick Ut image was one of a couple of images I can think of that really changed American public opinion to being against that war. At least that's how I remember it. That, the execution of the VC officer and the Tet offensive in light of LBJ's assertion that we were "winning" were major turning points. I just don't think this image stands the test of time nor do I find as compelling. Just my take, but thanks for the post, its a good or at least timely topic.

No comparison to the Napalm girl pictures and I guess that the photographer who made the shot was not like Nick Ut who rushed to save the girl after Nick made the shot.

No comparison to the Napalm girl pictures and I guess that the photographer who made the shot was not like Nick Ut who rushed to save the girl after Nick made the shot.

I wouldn’t make judgments about Moore’s character. In this case, he can’t “save” the subject of his photo from our inhumane and immoral treatment of them. Had he the same opportunity as Ut, we don’t know how Moore would have acted. That’s not to take anything away from Ut’s courage and heroism. It’s to question your baseless assumption about Moore. At least he’s down there documenting the current abuse of children.

I don't think this pic has the makings of the iconic image of the Nick Ut photo.

You’re probably right, though only time will tell. In any case, though I did bring up the iconic aspect, because of my immediate emotional response to the situation and this photo and the recorded sound I heard today (I’m not able or really wanting to separate any of these from each other) the more important thing is what current effect seeing such images (even less than stellar ones), hearing such recordings, and reading the reports will have. There seems to be more of a groundswell picking up as people and politicians on both sides of the aisle, and even formerly pretty quiet First Ladies, learn more and reject the blatantly false narratives being put out there.

I can’t get past the sexual element of this photo. Sorry.

 

(consensual sex between adults)

At least he’s down there documenting the current abuse of children.

Children separated from the criminals who put them at risk of that separation. Abuse sounds more dramatic, but again, just more "Never Trump" drama. American children do not go to jail with criminal parents - they are housed in different facilities. In many cases with illegals, the children are almost certainly better fed. housed and given access to medical care. Don't like the laws at the root of the situation? Spare the histrionics and contact your Senator and Representative to push for Congressional action.

Welcome to Trumperica. What did you expect?

A few inconvenient facts.

//www.investors.com/politics/editorials/separating-families-illegal-immigrants-trump-immigration-zero-tolerance-asylum/

As I remember "give us your poor, your tired, your hungry, yearning to be free".r

As I remember "give us your poor, your tired, your hungry, yearning to be free".r

Lawful process is available, absolutely no issue there. Unregulated - Germany, France, Sweden, even the UK. Exploding crime, rapes, no go zones, etc.

People who enter this country illegally are breaking the law, and risk the consequences. They chose to subject their children to the risks of their criminality. Any American who commits a crime potentially subjects their children to similar treatment. The adults have committed a crime, the children have not, and therefore are separated from their parents. The same thing was happening under the previous administration as evidenced by the recent viral photo of children behind chain link fence. Being upset and frightened is entirely different from being burned by napalm. Quite remarkable this never came up in the previous "scandall free" (ya sure!) administration. Put your axe away, Fred.

I swore twenty years ago that I would not get political on this site. Asking for legal asylum is not a crime. In the worst case, crossing the border is a misdemeanor (unless repeated subsequent to deportation) This is not an excuse to break up families. There is no "Democrat Law" requiring this. I'm done. This is AMERICA, not North Korea (although the latter is ruled by an honorable guy). We don't do this. DONE

Their parents chose to be criminals, the government and its agencies are simply enforcing the law. Don't like the law as it is? Convince some of your Lefty Pols to step up and do something besides "Resist", possibly even do what they were elected for and help change the law.

ALL Democrats are in favor of a new law to protect these children. DT said he wouldn't sign it.

Lawful process is available, absolutely no issue there. Unregulated - Germany, France, Sweden, even the UK. Exploding crime, rapes, no go zones, etc.

Crime in Germany is at the lowest level in 28 years. FACT.