The Falling Man

Jim Chinn said:

I am a Catholic, but I find it hard to really categorize jumping as suicide in the strictest sense of the word in this case. Faced with certain death from flames or falling the outcome is the same. As the writer alluded, perhaps it was one last act of defiance or the chance to choose ones final fate.

Click to expand...

Exactly the same argument as adduced by my wife, whose mother was Catholic and who considered the same religion. Which is more suicidal: staying in a burning, collapsing building, or jumping?

I don't think a sane Catholic would have much difficulty in dismissing the very idea of this being suicide.

Coping with death for living is a strugle that has been around for centuries , Scott ( "theflyingcamera") brought up an incident from 2007 years ago that still keeps people talking today.
Living are looking for reasons of why death happens and what causes it , reasoning like : he/she smoked, he/she was overweght, he/she did not take care of themselfs or even better it was an accident ... All of htose things are something living have to tell themselves in oder to continue with the everyday monotony...

Religion is a blancket that supposed to make you sleep at night.

I see people everyday that spend a lot of their life infront of computers or whatching/discussing TV's programing while life around is sliping by , they escape realaty

There is no other spicies on this planet that is aware of their own outcome(Death) other then humans , we live with it everyday , every moment of our life reminds us that we are closer ...

Photograph stops the moment , but once taken seem surrial , because the momment is gone for ever , it's past not present

PHOTOGRAPHER
becomes a tool that reacts visualy to the surroundings.
Beeng AWARE is something one lives with and copes with , people that are not PHOTOGRAPHERS find it unfathemed that someone could possibly think of triping a shutter where infact the shutteris triping without a moment of hesitation , there is not even a slight second thought ... PHOTOGRAPHER IS TRAINED TO REACT FIRST AND THEN THINK NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND...

If one thought long and hard about anything ...nothing ever would get done...

People viewing/discussing photographs are the once to understand not the one that took it ...

BUT,

I lost family to Nazi's in World War Two , but people like Steven Spielberg keep's on reminding me of that with "Schindler's list" and I am very greatful that he does ... I watched it only after three years it

A peorson so far removed from realaty as to call " Faling Man" a "Piece of
shit" is someone that thinks that haven exist's and they will never have to make a choice of how they die , it will be made for them ...

Releogion is dead and it died long time ago wake up people we have short time here , so get off the chair you sitting on and go photograph , LIVE IT

Just my two cents ... you are intitle to yours'

Regards ,
ILYA

Jim Chinn said:

I am a Catholic, but I find it hard to really categorize jumping as suicide in the strictest sense of the word in this case. Faced with certain death from flames or falling the outcome is the same. As the writer alluded, perhaps it was one last act of defiance or the chance to choose ones final fate.

Click to expand...

Many people would surely feel the same, Catholic or not, but some (who at one point were identified as immediate relatives) obviously did not feel that way (this is something I have read about before, not only in the article posted). In the article, wasn't the 'act of defiance' the writer's interpretation, not the families' - or some of the families'?.

If I can clarify, my intention was not to make any sort of categorical statement (and certainly such views would not reflect my own feelings) but to suggest a point of view that was obviously very real.

I think my point is - this is a very complex picture, and issue. Our supposed need for it, and to interpret it in a particular light, and the various interpretations it has received, is not the same as the actuality of what was taking place at that moment.

"I think my point is - this is a very complex picture, and issue. Our supposed need for it, and to interpret it in a particular light, and the various interpretations it has received, is different from the actuality of what was taking place at that moment." Cate

Cate, thanks for this clarification. It seems to be a good rendering of the whole thread. The act itself is difficult, at best, to comprehend. The overtones of subjective interpretation are what we humans tend to do in most situations with facts. The bias of political, religious, sociological, relative or absolute thought are but legs on the snake. tim

catem said:

I think my point is - this is a very complex picture, and issue. Our supposed need for it, and to interpret it in a particular light, and the various interpretations it has received, is not the same as the actuality of what was taking place at that moment.

Click to expand...

Dear Cate,

No question: you must be right. But unless we discuss it, analyze it, pick it to pieces, pick our reaction to pieces, pick the world to pieces, we might as well just forget about it.

Cheers,

Roger

jstraw said:

I'm not sure though, that I understand the purpose of 'you don't know...you weren't there...' statements.

It's important to remember that there are things one cannot know if they're too intimately associated with an event. This is why fathers of murdered children don't sit on their killers' juries. It's also why it surely must be painful and frustration for those that watched the bodies fall, discuss the politics of that day.

Click to expand...

Everyone is different. At least in my case it's partly frustration with people saying they understand what I went through, and to an extent, am still going through. They can imagine, but they don't actually feel the pain, or the same heartache, or have the same nightmares.

Your second point is right on the money. One thing many people forget is that people outside the downtown Manhattan area knew a LOT more about what was actually going on, even if that was still very little. When the first tower went down, I lost vision for 30-45 minutes until the cloud dissipated enough to see. When 1 WTC came down we lost radio and television reception (most of the local antennas were on the tower), cell phones (systems overwhelmed by the amount of calls), landline phones (Verizon building immediately north of the WTC contained the main switching gear for downtown), and data (same reason). All mass transtit was shut down (most New Yorkers don't drive to work, and many like myself don't even own a car).

We had NO idea what was going on. Were more planes coming? Rumors swirled. Other buildings uptown were hit. Or had bombs or bomb threats. D.C. was hit. Chicago. L.A. At that point, anything seemed possible. Threats of rioting were unfounded, but I listened to people break in the windows at a restaurant to get out of the cloud after the restaurant locked their doors. It was almost 5 pm before I heard anything "real". And another hour before I was able to talk to my family.

As for the politics, I'm guessing you and I are probably a lot more similar than I may sound on posts this past week, but again, different experiences, different complexities, etc. Please understand, my arguments are not an attempt to silence anyone, but rather to give people a better understanding of why some may be arguing with them. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. All I ask is that people be open-minded enough to consider changing their view points when exposed to new information, and to realize that there is almost never a "right" answer because there is almost never a "truth". People who knew me 15-20 years ago would be very surprised by my opinions/politics now.

When I first started rock climbing I was lent a book of essays, letters, and magazine articles about the subject. One of the letters was to the parents of a climber who had fallen to his death. The writer was their sons climbing partner, and to understand what it's like to fall from a great height he interviewed people who had done just that, but had survived.

What he found was that it isn't the way Hollywood would have you believe, but after the initial shock of falling people became enveloped in quiet light or vivid colours, and weren't aware of their surroundings...some even heard soothing music. I believe none of them felt themselves hitting the ground.

A friend of mine told me his experience of dumping his canoe in a set of rapids and how he fought for as long as he could, but eventually gave up. He said, in the end, it was a beautiful, peacefully serene experience and was surprised when he woke up on a sand bar.

It's comforting for me to know that these peoples very last moments weren't filled with horror, but of an elegant form of shock. The moments before making the choice to jump is a different story, and would be beyond horrific.

Murray

ilya1963 said:

There is no other species on this planet that is aware of their own outcome (Death) other than humans...

Click to expand...

...it has occasionally been argued that the opposite is true: all creatures know the certainty of their deaths, it is only humans who think they can get out of it.

ilya1963 said:

PHOTOGRAPHER IS TRAINED TO REACT FIRST AND THEN THINK NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND...

Click to expand...

Absolutely right. It took me a long time to come to this from my own experience, where the reaction MUST be to get the shot. The only exception would be if there's a clear choice between getting the shot and actually being a directly physical agent of aid (say, pulling someone from a fire, or acting, as Natchwey has famously done, to intervene in hopes to prevent a crowd from murdering a helpless man).

Is it delusional to think that photographs can help the world, one tiny click at a time? Maybe. But without the conviction that it could be true, I'd have a lot harder time believing that all this effort and heavy lifting was worthwhile.

Good post, Ilya.

"...it has occasionally been argued that the opposite is true: all creatures know the certainty of their deaths, it is only humans who think they can get out of it."- bjorke




"Is it delusional to think that photographs can help the world, one tiny click at a time? Maybe. But without the conviction that it could be true, I'd have a lot harder time believing that all this effort and heavy lifting was worthwhile."-
bjorke


You know, I don't think that what you said above even crosses your mind after awhile , there is just this deep inner need to be fulfilled by making a photogrpah that feels right , what exactly that means I could not put in words , but there is that momment that you just look at it and say "YEAH" that's it , it works ...

We are all individuals with baggage and what feels right for one may not for the other , but there are this photographs that cross any boundries , those peices are masterpeices, documantary , landscape, nudes , etc.. don't matter!

"Falling man" - to me is just incredible image it has to belong to people not be hidden and brushed off

To me, it represents realaty of all of our everyday life- WE have no idea where we ahve been and where we are going and yet the viewer knows the beginning and the outcome

VERY , VERY POWERFUL STUFF

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR POSTING THE LINK ...

ILYA

There was a very interesting documentary on this subject last night on CBC's "The Passionate Eye". The film maker spent a great deal of time trying to identify the person in the series of Falling man photos. The families who had very religious backgrounds were initially very unwilling to cooperate with the story for fear that it might positively ID their loved one, thereby condeming him to hell because of the belief that jumping was surely suicide.

thebanana said:

The families who had very religious backgrounds were initially very unwilling to cooperate with the story for fear that it might positively ID their loved one, thereby condeming him to hell because of the belief that jumping was surely suicide.

Click to expand...

They must worship an evil deity then. A deity that would prefer its followers to roast to death rather than let them choose a mercifully quick end.

I suspect many religious prohibitions over matters of dying and reproduction stem from the fact that the big three "western" religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) all sprang from cultures in an extremely harsh environment, where every able-bodied person was needed desperately to provide for the community, and to further the long-term survival of the community through child-bearing. If you look back through many of the old-testament prohibitions of specific behaviors, they have health and/or resource-related origins. No pork? Pigs are carriers of trichinosis, and they're also very uneconomical in a desert region - they require more acreage per animal to raise than goats or sheep, and they're more destructive to that acreage. No suicide? if someone young or even middle-aged offs themselves, they've just abandoned their family unit and deprived them of another set of working hands to provide food, income and manual labor. No masturbation? Spilling that seed on the ground when it could be going to produce more children is wasteful, especially when you have an infant mortality rate of 25%. Same with the prohibitions on homosexuality. I still don't get where the no shellfish, no meat-and-dairy, and the no-mixed-fabrics ones come from though. I thought someone once told me the shellfish one is because supposedly the animal lives in its own feces, like pigs do. So that one would fit the health thing too. But the no-meat-with-dairy thing? And the no cotton-wool or cotton-poly blends??? Those make no sense at all.

Roger Hicks said:

Dear Cate,

No question: you must be right. But unless we discuss it, analyze it, pick it to pieces, pick our reaction to pieces, pick the world to pieces, we might as well just forget about it.

Cheers,

Roger

Click to expand...

I'm always one for thinking and talking about things, and trying to get a better understanding through that. I don't suppose that will ever change.

It's not the subject here so much - or rather not only the subject - that makes me feel reluctant to thrash out ideas here - but the medium. A personal view, that internet forums are increasingly frustrating and inappropriate places (for me) to discuss complex issues.

Purely personal, and nothing against anyone else debating 'til kingdom come, if that's what they find useful.

There was a lot of photography going on, from what I was told. My brother was a bartender at Heartland Brewery on Union Square at the time, and somehow I managed to get hold of him on hi mobile, of all things, after the 2nd plane hit. He said at the time that the place was quiet. When we talked later, he said that the place filled up about 30 minutes later, as it was one of the first bars north of the zone that got cordoned off. When the buildings started to collapse people went outside to take pictures - it wasn't just some sort of "trained photographer's instinct", it was just what people did.

We had Thanksgiving at my sister's in Brooklyn in 2001, but went into the City, down to the Strand annex, which isn't too far away from the site. Dust everywhere, and it reminded me of something. The rest of my family decided to go and pay their respects/see it, but I refused. That upset some of my relatives, so I told them, "I'm the only one here who's seen Auschwitz. This dust is getting to me." I walked along the East River instead.

...the kosher barriers of meat and dairy are justified as "one should not eat the animal AND the work of that animal" -- that is, if a cow produces milk, it seems a bit unfair to take the milk AND then kill the cow for the second half of your cheeseburger. Obviously a rule from well before the days of mass production. Today there are plenty of rabbis who make a full-time living examining modern food products and determining their level of safeness for observant jews. I expect there are similar functionaries in other cultures with similar restrictions.

No rule against shellfish in much of the non-hebrew middle east, btw.

audio aside:
http://nigelwarburton.typepad.com/philosophy_bites/2007/07/anthony-graylin.html

But the no-meat-with-dairy thing? And the no cotton-wool or cotton-poly blends??? Those make no sense at all.[/QUOTE]

I think the thing with milk and meat is that cross contamination of likely bacteria will result in likely quicker spoilage, particularily meat to milk, but, I don't think the original inhabitants of the Middle East had to worry about poly blends.

Regards
Bill

dr5chrome said:

I never really did understand the photo-journalist mentality. Do they take such images because they are drawn to it, or do they do it to make a buck?

dw

Click to expand...

I personally get the instinct to record a situation. I've missed three in the past month or so, and I haven't stopped beating myself up for it.

My grandfather has become something of a town celebrity where he lives (a small town in the Black Forest), because he has a collection of some 33000 meticulously documented slides dating back to the 1940's.

The sense of nostalgia and have-beens is enough for me. If I could make a buck selling some image, hey, a guy's gotta eat.

The "Falling Man" picture was iconic because it was photographed and seen by all.

The "Falling Angels" that day was not (to my knowledge, at least) photographed but seen by those of us standing below Tower One.

They were the inspiration for the title of a short-lived "off-off-off-Broadway" play.

They were two women who held hands as they leaped and appeared to fly away as their hands separated.

I saw them fall.

I am not sure why people bring religion into something like this, maybe to make themselves feel better or attempt to grasp something they do not understand, but in reality it is really simple. You are above a fire created by jet fuel in a building. In places the fire reaches several thousand degrees. Heat rises. Add these together and I'd jump. Anyone would. Doesn't require much thought.

As far as the photograph is concerned, I would hate to see someone make a profit from something as tragic as the end of a human life, but in reality many have and still do. Perhaps the image will have some historical value in the end, but whatever its value, the man in it will see none, and it is no use to him. I am sure careers were made that day, and grand egos ruled many a journalist. I find Meyerowitz' book on the aftermath somewhat distasteful in many ways because of his perceived self importance. He seemed to me to be capitalizing on the tragedy, but I'll admit I don't know all the details.

In the end it was a tragic event and we will never really know the truth behind what happened that day.

Patrick