Reflections in the Wall III

I have seen the wall. I have watched men and women my parents age and older walk the wall looking for a family, friends and fellow soldiers lost forever. I watched them as they cried when they found their lost one, layed flowers at its foot, made charcoal rubbings of a name, or set there and reflect, my self wondering their thoughts. I always wanted to go and ask the "Can you tell me what it was like, what it really was like" but I refrain from the intrusion and observe. Setting there at the wall, looking over long list of names of brothers, fathers, comrads that have lost their lives for and against their own wills...the debate of who is right and wrong leaves and all I see is the loss of men and women that never had a chance to say goodbye to home and families and their last breathe was in a steamy jungle a thousand miles from home. That's what I feel and that is what this picture means to me.

i'm not telling the photo is bad... but, photo of the week ? It's seems a forced photo, not natural at all ! Excessive artificialism...

I thought it was a wonderful shot until I saw

Brian Kennedys pictures ! It is still ok but as an earlier comment... it´s too dull.

 

It depends on the purpose with the picture, but I think that Kennedys picture are more like a postcard with greetings. Josephs picture may be usefull in other aspects !

The purpose with Josephs picture is probably not to let it look like a postcard anyway.

 

Still liked Kennedys pix more !

 

:-) Patrik

Let's face it---everyone here (unless I missed one) knows what this is a picture of. I don't really think the photograph itself has inspired any meaningful response. More like: "Oh, yeah, the Wall--lemme tell you what I think about that."

There is absolutely nothing in this photograph that pertains to emotions or unanswered questions. There is no indication of war, and it is not even clear that this is a memorial. And what "unanswered questions" anyway? The long drawn-out saga of politics and funding of the Viet Nam Conflict, or the long drawn-out saga of politics and funding of the Wall? This picture does not tell a story any more than the standard newsphoto of a closeup of a distraught person with a trickle of blood running down his/her face that routinely accompanies a story of an earthquake/bombing/trainwreck/tornado/riot/etc.

Nice picture. The scene might make a good portrait: possibly a veteran, if you really wanted to go down that route (I wouldn't, but then i prefer to concentrate on aesthetics than "hidden" meaning).

I agree. This photo is average but pondering why it's 'photo of the week'?

Brian Kennedy's photo seemed to have more warmth and better ccomposition.

 

While I had some relatives who went to Vietnam, and have utmost respect for those who fought there or in any war, this pic does not bring out any emotion. Just a digi-pic warmed over with Photoshop.

Of the topic of the photo, which I think is quite nice, BTW, but this monument serves to memorialize thousands of lives that were ended before they should have been. Maya Lin, the designer of the memorial, states quite implicitly that she had no desire to glorify the campaign of Vietnam, which is why she chose to make the monument in the form of a "black gash" of polished bassalt in the green earth, and not a towering, glorifying monument.

 

Despite the intentions of our government, those who died were not the sons of senetors and corporate CEOs, but the sons of trailer parks and dairy farmers, inner-city neighborhoods and poor homesteads, who couldn't afford to go to college or draft dodge in Canada or recieve deferrments from friends in high places that they did not have.

 

All war is atrocious, and every life lost is a tragedy. These are the things that should be remembered.

Photo.net is the name of this site. It is where we (photo enthusiasts) come to show our work and maybe look for constructive criticism to help us become better photographers. We come here to show what weve done so excited to post our next shot and hear what others have to say about it. This particular photo I thought was very good. It is thought provoking and to many people, especially those directly impacted by this war, I am sure very emotional. Isnt that what its all about. Seeing a picture and having it move us in someway. Its too bad we couldnt have comments about the picture, whether it be technical comments or what the picture means to us. I think Mr. Vuksanovic's comments are unfortunate and have twisted the forum in a negative way. I think his comments and the ones that were provoked by him may have been better suited if this site were called politics.net not photo.net.

I know some come to photo.net to avoid any possibility of thinking about the world we live in except in the narrow scope of photographic technical utterances.

 

So why don't you open your mind a little bit? What a society of weak ninnies we've become that we can't stand a bit of political discussion where we didn't expect to see it? And this ignores the fact that on a photograph like this you should expect a political discussion, even on a site called "NoPoliticsHere.com."

 

Thank god M. Vuksanovic started it. Thank god M. Francey continued it. Thank god M. Kujundzic had something to add. Though they seem to misunderstand each other and quibble on syntactic differences, they each have something powerful to add: something that will make some difference in history. Others say only "I didn't like the aperture/DOF," which is fine and admirable but actually seems out-of-place on a photograph such as this!

 

Irene Adriano embodies the weak-natured spirit that hides from reality, seeking bland, safe havens where death and war don't intrude on daily life. What a mockery of everything the free world has fought for these decades to see such apathy for political injustices.

 

You can add to the discussion by talking about technical merits and tweaks, and you can add to the discussion by talking about the injustices of war, but you cannot add to the discussion by asking for the world to be a fairy-tale imitation of Mr. Roger's Neighborhood.

 

Read your history, people. Read your constitution and your history, and stop hiding from it. A downward slide isn't difficult to imagine, and it's very arguable that it's begun already. If photo.net isn't a good forum to take this kind of discussion to, then there isn't a forum to take it to. Give up your rights at the door, and see you in China.

 

I'm unfamiliar with the Vietnam Memorial (I've never been a memorial fan) -- if the names are right-justified, then the picture is normal. If the names are left-justified, then the picture is flipped.

 

That text is normally left-justified is what has people thinking it's flipped.

 

Aesthetically, I agree with the comments that the individuals on the right could be cropped out.

 

Otherwise, I don't have anything to add, technically.

I'm particularly pleased at the way the left panel shows the names clearly (well, not obscured by reflection) and the other panels show the reflections very nicely. The umbrellas in the reflection are a big part of what make this image for me.

Photoshop is a noun. ..and for everyone who thinks using Photoshop is cheating, doesn't the final image justify the means? It takes skill to use it, and a lot of skill to master it.

Hi, this will probably get lost with all the other comments here, but I just wanted to add my 2 cents. First, I like this image, but like a few have said, there's a lot going on. I would have preferred a more focused (simpler) composition (e.g., focusing on two center panels). Second, there's a very good video documentary about this memorial and Maya Lin, the designer, "Maya Lin: Strong clear vision" or something like that. It includes a portion on the rather nasty debates about the construction and design of the memorial that occured in the early 1980's when the design was awarded to Lin (then in college). Lin's life was even threatened. Many did not like the fact that it was "black", that it was in the ground, or that it didn't "glorify" the American involvment (another post mentioned "black gash", I don't think those are Lin's own words, rather a term that came up during the debates, but in effect, she wanted to "open the ground up" and make an interface between the living and the dead). Also, the design was purposely non-political and "quiet", although as many have said, it is one of the most powerful of the memorials in the US. I encourage those who have the motivation to check out this documentary, or perhaps read the (long) NGS multi-article feature that ran in the early 1980's (that covers the process, design, construction, debates, and, of course, the people of the memorial; NGS even wanted to print all the names in the issue!). Better yet, visit the memorial if you have the chance.

Nice picture. The left quarter distracts a little. The writing is a little too bright, so it pulls your eye away from the reflection. The image is not sharp, but I dont know what is normal from a digital camera. What I miss is the bite (a combination of contrast, sharpness and texture).

 

But overall a nice picture, not great.

 

 

Vuk Vuksanovic writes: "that the Vietnam War Memorial itself, as it has been designed, has practically nothing about it which conveys the nation's shame"

This leads me to doubt that you've actually seen the memorial in person. Designed by a young architect in her early 20's who won an open competition for the memorial's design, the names on the wall are written on rock on a "V" shaped wall that cuts into the ground on the National Mall, creating a symbolic scar on a piece of earth that we consider representative of our democracy. One arm of the "V" points directly to the Washington Memorial, the other straight at the Lincoln Memorial, linking this ill-considered fight to both the birth of our nation and it's struggle toward equality for all. These factors in the positioning of the memorial further heighten its sorrow because it effectively links lamentation for our dead to sadness at the degree to which our country fell morally in fighting the war. To me the memorial remains all about the deadly consequences of, as George McGovern said, "old men dreaming up wars for young men to die in".

I'm certain that somewhere in the first 5 rules of photography there is the statement that reads "a photograph should provoke thought and emotion". Wow! Joesph has certainly accomplished that, look at the above discussions. I think its a great picture of a very sad place for my generation.