This image of a black military helicopter in the air dropping something and a soldier running on a red/sandy ground came from the New York Times. Week in Review section on January 25, 2009. The image accompanied an article with a byline of “Obama’s War – Fearing Another Quagmire” and is about troops in Afghanistan.But the image could be set anywhere.
Typical media images are sharp and locate the contents to a specific place, people, country, or action. This image is blurry and yet we can still make out the contents. Because of its unspecificity, we don’t know which war, where it is taking place, yet we still get the gist; the image itself has become an icon.
When I first looked at this image, I was surprised that it was printed intentionally blurry. One doesn’t expect that in a newspaper Why did I notice it, I wondered. I realized it was precisely because it was blurry, it caught my eye. By this point in my life, I have seen dozens of images of helicopters and soldiers -in fact, I’ve become immune to them - and yet I wanted to read the article that accompanied this one. Why?
Typical images of war in the media are strong, hard-hitting, gut wrenching images of specific people, refugees, war torn towns and homes, destruction and fire. While informing us, these images have also made us become numb to the effects of war. Because it is not happening near us, or to anyone we know, these images have depersonalized war and its victims. Most of us don’t know what it feels like to be a victim of war. We are safe in the U.S. it seems for now, from our homes being bombed, our children taken away, death, and the destruction of our families and our livelihood.
The media inadvertently does a disservice in reporting about all the different wars in so many locations around the world, with the objective of informing us and engaging us to outrage. War images in media become synthesized as one “war” image in the viewer’s mind. These images become iconic, for we no longer have to think about their origin, specifics, and relevance. I wonder then, do iconic images still engage? Do specific destruction war images with pictures of victims engage ? If helicopter and soldiers are common and iconic, does the form of presentation of the image (ie, blurry and arty) engage? Did this image engage me as an artist first because it is beautiful, moody, and blurry?
As a final thought, I want to contrast the very powerful emotion that I still feel, looking at the image of the naked girl child running from the bomb blast during the Vietnam War. I’m sure most of you have seen this image at some point. This image, although specific, is also iconic, but it has retained its emotion and its significance as a reminder of that war, its effects and its folly.
by aparna
