Comments on: Lil' Bush

By: NO CAPTION NEEDED » "... the Shadow Knows"

Mon, 05 Nov 2007 14:41:59 +0000

[...] salience of this most recent rendition of Lil’ Bush is emphasized by contrasting it with a photograph of Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, which [...]

By: NO CAPTION NEEDED » Arms and the Man

Mon, 06 Aug 2007 12:47:46 +0000

[...] of the scene. Fidel is cut to heroic dimension, bold, direct, and resolute. Raul is like a Lil’ Bush, outmatched even by the lecturn blocking him off from Fidel, the audience in Camaguey, and the [...]

By: NO CAPTION NEEDED » Lil' Bush at Street Level

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:53:31 +0000

[...] has written about Lil’ Bush, referring to how the president is being photographed to emphasize a diminished stature; whether [...]

By: lucaites

Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:35:26 +0000

C. Holland: Good point. In one sense you are absolutely correct. My point was not to take either to task so much as to call attention to how various conventions of visual representation get used in different ways to maximize and minimize the subject. On the other hand, the WH is quite obviously an interested party. Their task is spin. And there is nothing wrong with that. At the same time, notice how their use of common conventions dictates a more or less positive outcome -- not a fair and balanced rendition of anything. And, of course, these are the conventions commonly used by photojournalists. On the other hand, photojournalism is supposed to operate with some sense of a commitment to balance and objectivity. Now I know that that is a myth of sorts. But it still imposes certain kinds of constraints. They still have to honor some sense of decorum in how they represent things, no less the president of the U.S., and the common way to do that is to rely on standard conventions for such representation. What is interesting here is how the photojournalist is more or less true to some of the conventions for representing the president, but also manages them in a way that is really rather critical. Hence there is something like a kind of critical agency operating within the practice of photojournalism. And from my perspective that is a good thing (regardless of the particular politics here) so long as the citizenry recognizes what it going on and is willing to talk about it. Where we get into trouble is when we assume that such images offer a "window on the world" sensibility that assumes the unfettered truth of the matter. In a sense, having both photographs puts us, as a polity, in a much strong position to understand the range of ways in which the world "could" be, or might be understood. If your interest is in authentic democracy that is a good thing.

By: c holland

Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:29:34 +0000

Should it be any surprise the the NYT wants to paint Bush in the worst possible light and the White house wants to present him in the best?

Comments (0) - Read and Add your own Comments