Stuff like this makes me very, very angry.
At the 2009 “Freiheit statt Angst” march in Berlin, police brutally beat down an apparently innocent man; indeed even pulling him back to be beaten up when he quietly walked away from what didn’t even look like a confrontation.
What totally galls me is that Uwe Schünemann (CDU), interior minister of Lower Saxony, has called on the populace to exhibit “civil courage” — the willingness to stand up, speak out, and intervene when injustice is seen — in response to the appalling murder of a 50-year-old man in Munich. In the same week, police beat up protesters who try to intervene when one person is picked on; the cyclist is not the only one to end up with a bloody nose.
There is no excusing it. The Policemen who did this, irrespective of any provocation, totally overstepped their authority. They all need to be arrested, put on trial for assault with bodily harm, and then left to rot in jail for a while, after receiving a dishonourable discharge and a court order never to return to Berlin.
Society cannot tolerate violence in its midst; not from a gang of youths, and certainly not from those who are paid with our taxes to protect us.
Fotografie: Sinnliche Weltbilder | ZEIT ONLINE
Fabulous.
I adore this style of documentary photography — less concerned with composition, and not concerned with “action” so much as capturing the vibe, the feel of a time and a place.
I miss seeing this kind of journalism, and as fart as I can tell, there’s no reason it can’t be done now. Something has changed.
Certain things piss me off.
One of those things is the threat posed to individual liberty by governments who arrogate to themselves the notion that they know what is best for me, what I am allowed to say, think and do, and what I am allowed to see.
This kind of threat is directed — intentionally or not — squarely at my personal sense of identity and integrity. It is an insult to my intelligence, and it is an affront to the very principles of liberal democracy which I believe in. I will not countenance this kind of threat. I do not consent to be governed in this way by anyone. And I will resist.
I am no patriot. I cannot be. I think patriotism in its primitive, flag-waving forms, is ridiculous at best, and more often genuinely dangerous. And patriotism that takes the form of dissent, while laudable in principle, is really no different, usually, than the judicious application of common sense.
I am a strong advocate of nonviolence. However I will use all legitimate, constitutionally permissible means to stop any government under which I happen to live from abusing its authority to obtain power to which it is not entitled.
And once I live under the government of the country of which I am a citizen, I will engage myself in politics. I think it the height of foolishness for people to sit on their asses, loudly belly-aching about how things are not how they’re meant to be, but refusing to do anything about it.
People who don’t speak out deserve everything they get. Fuck them.
Anyway, in this context, I have resolved to become a thorn in the side of those members of the German political caste who seem to feel that “security” and “saving the children” is more important than allowing the country to descend into a morass of ideological bankruptcy.
I am no radical leftist, nor am I right of centre. Perhaps Germany needs a new kind of radical: one who is entirely fed up with the various attempts from either side of the ideological horseshoe to hijack the country.
In October 2007, I wrote a photographic manifesto which was intended to rescue my photography from my own mental and creative stagnation. It was intended to be ‘valid’ for the period of one year, and so after its lapse what I should have done is re-think the manifesto. But thankfully I was too busy taking pictures and enjoying myself.
So today, in an idle moment, I wrote myself a new manifesto, which, rather than set up rules for me to conform to, are intended to reflect what my aesthetics currently are, and to remind me to try to be mindful of them.
I’ve abbreviated it to five points, but I anticipate that I’ll reduce it even further. It’s intended to be a “living document”, though the core principles should remain inviolate.
- Be honest
- Introduce no complexity
- No shortcuts
- No compromises
Point by point, some explanation:
1. Be honest
This is rather simple. Do not tamper with the semantic content of a photo. Using tone curve control to alter or emphasise different features of an image is OK; adding or removing something is not. It’s related to sense of journalistic integrity. It’s not intended to be a point of pride, but a point of principle.
2. Introduce no complexity
A subtle point which I grasp intuitively, but which I have difficulty articulating. If an image is simple, then it is simple; if it is complex, then it is complex. If I can portray something simply, then that is preferably to portraying it with complexity.
3. No shortcuts
If an image requires that I travel 1000km, then that is what I shall do. If an image requires that I learn an entirely new skill set, then that is what I shall do. I will always strive for 100% quality, and while I recognise that no photo is “perfect”, that is nevertheless what I shall strive for.
4. No compromises
I would rather say no to a lucrative assignment than compromise my integrity, my honour, my principles.
Simple, really.
My grandfather would have turned 100 today.
Opapa, as I called him, and I did not see eye to eye on a number of things. He was an unrepentant apologist for the Third Reich, remained anti-Russian and anti-Semitic to his dying day.
It’s not for me to do, but I forgive him for it.
He felt that my university studies – I read Philosophy – were a waste of time, and expressed his wish that I become a banker. I can’t think of something I’d less rather be than a banker. All in all, he maintained very high standards for his family, which of course very few family members met.
Nevertheless, I respected him for a few vital things.
Firstly, he had his principles, and he stood by them. While I might have disagreed with large swathes of those principles, I must accept that he did his duty, putting his life on the line repeatedly, in pursuit of his principles. It’s a subtle distinction: I disapprove of the cause he fought for in the strongest possible terms, yet I respect his complete sense of duty towards his chosen cause.
So here’s my contribution: I will attempt to emulate him in terms of devotion to my chosen causes. And I will regard any capitulation to the enemy (in my case, ignorance and oppression) as completely abhorrent. I will fight to the end.
He instilled in me a sense of the importance of family. I have no other roots than family, so I am grateful for giving me at least those.
And this did I inherit, for better or for worse: I am not answerable to any higher authority than my own honour.
The Embargo was concocted by an acquaintance at the Blitzkrieg Metal Bar in Windhoek, Namibia.
- 1 part Kleiner Keiler
- 1 part Peppermint Liqueur
- 1 dash (enough to add the vile aroma) of Stroh overproof rum
It’s OK to issue a diplomatic protest.
freiepresse.de – Koalitionen stehen nicht auf dem Wahlzettel:
(Gast208): Wieso schränkt die SPD die einfachsten Grundrechte durch die (wirkungslose) Internet-Zensur des Zugangserschwerungsgesetztes ein? Für mich verstößt die SPD damit gegen das Grundgesetz!
Thomas Jurk: Hallo lieber ‘Pirat’. Wenn wir gegen das Grundgesetz verstossen, weil wir Pädophilen unmöglich machen kinderpornografische Bilder aus dem Internet herunterzuladen, dann nehme ich das in Kauf. Ich persönlich hoffe darauf, dass wir das Problem lindern, wenn wir den Kunden von Kinderpornografie das Leben schwerer machen. Wenn deshalb irgendwo auf der Welt nur ein Kind nicht zu pornogrfischen Bildern mißbraucht wird, hat sich das gelohnt.
Ich glaube, es hackt.
Herr Jurk, immerhin Witschaftsminister von Sachsen, ich Bitte Sie, sich Ihre Bemerkung – und sei sie “nur” in einem Internet-chat – sorgfältig durchzulesen. Dann erwarte ich von Ihnen, was jeder deutsche Staatsbürger von Ihnen erwarten darf:
- Daß Sie sich schämen;
- Daß Sie Ihren sofortigen Rücktritt ankündigen.
Bemerkungen wie die Ihre, Herr Jurk, sind einer mit erwachsenen Demokratie kategorisch, absolut inkompatibel. Mit Ihren “ja, zur Rettung der Kinder” Floskeln, mit denen Sie sich schmücken, machen Sie es nicht besser.
Vielleicht muß man es Ihnen ganz genau erklären:
Abgeordnete, egal zu welcher Partei sie gehören, und egal, zu welchem Zweck (und sei dieser noch so edel), haben nicht gegen das Grundgesetz zu verstoßen. “Normalbürger” dürfen das schließlich auch nicht.
Also tun sie bitte, was ich Ihnen vorgeschlagen habe: Um Verzeihung flehen, und dann zurücktreten. Am besten in ein Kloster.
Was nützt es mir, wenn Ihr Sohn meine Freiheit in Afghanistan verteidigt, wenn Sie höchstpersönlich diese Freiheit mißachten? Eine weniger wohlwollende Interpretation Ihrer Bemerkung könnte sich mit dem Wort “Verrat” zufriedengeben.
Mit meiner Wählerstimme kann die SPD nicht mehr rechnen. Nehmen Sie Trost: nicht nur wegen Ihnen.
(Via Jensscholz.com.)
I’ve had an idea, which I articulated to a friend yesterday over coffee. It’s a bit risqé, and it’s still work in progress until I find a way to do it, but I have an idea for gritty documentary-style photography of conflict situations.
BBC NEWS | Entertainment | Chinese hack film festival site:
“Hey, we’re an independent arts organisation and it’s our programme!”
Well, yeah.
See, this is where censorship, or any kind of State attempts to control information, leads, and this is where State sovereignty (a ridiculous concept in any case) ends.
Chinese officials who do not care to see a documentary, the contents of which bother them, in a country in which the access to information is not tightly controlled are welcome not to attend. Frankly, political pressure to whitewash an issue which no first-rank politician seems to have the moral fibre to address forthrightly is unseemly at best, and offensive in any case.
One day, politicians must be confronted with this simple fact: In this age, information about any subject can and will get out. No state has the wherewithal to silence their people completely.
A corollary of this: violent suppression of any form of dissent, irrespective of whether it is justified, by state authorities *will* be reported on, and no amount of ignoring it, propaganda or information control will change that.
Likewise, public opinion generally finds itself on the side of protestors, rather than an oppressive state. No amount of wordplay will change that.
In particular in liberal democracies, the populace is on the by and large wise to propaganda, and this is where, sadly, oppressive régimes do their people the most damage. In keeping their people uninformed, they are holding them back; and that breeds resentment.
And resentment cannot be suppressed. Especially not by putting pressure on a foreign film festival. The organisers are quite right in telling the Chinese government to get stuffed.
