The Migrant Mother picture by Dorothea Lange

naeroscatu · Dec 3, 2008

This makes for an interesting read and rises few ethical questions:
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/12/02/dustbowl.photo/index.html

keithwms · Dec 3, 2008

What are the ethical questions that you see?

naeroscatu · Dec 3, 2008

perhaps not keeping a promise during such difficult times:

"She asked my mother if she could take her picture -- that ... her name would never be published, but it was to help the people in the plight that we were all in, the hard times,"
So mother let her take the picture, because she thought it would help."
The next morning, the photo was printed in a local paper, but by then the family had already moved on to another farm, McIntosh says.

Or this: As a photographer can I decide that embarassing my subject is less important than the good resulting on the long run from publishing her picture? Do I know better than my subject what is best for her?

keithwms · Dec 3, 2008

But what promise did Lange not keep? Was the woman's name published? I mean, surely the woman knew that the photograph would be published. At any rate, it's not like Lange took compromising pictures of her or Greenberged her. The photo is very journalistic in spirit. And Lange was certainly capable of taking it in a different direction if she'd wanted.

As I understand it, Lange accurately depicted the reality of that family and of the broader story, by taking photographs in a public space. It's not even clear to me why Lange needed to ask for permission in the first place.

In the photojournalistic spirit of trying not to affect the condition of the subject, it might even be regarded unethical to converse with the subject before taking the shot. What if the woman declined to have her picture taken because she felt she didn't look her best! Would it be ethical for Lange to have accepted that and walked away?

My read of the article is that the family (and the daughter they interviewed) was embarrassed about the condition they were in. Not about the photograph. But frankly, if they were embarrassed by the attention the photo brought them, well, tough noodles. That was the reality in which they found themselves and people needed to know about it.

Vaughn · Dec 3, 2008

I will have to agree with Keith that no promises were broken, and from the article linked to by the OP, no shame or embarrasment came from the photo. The woman in the photo even had "Migrant Mother" put on her headstone.

Nothing but good came from that photo.

Vaughn

SuzanneR · Dec 3, 2008

naeroscatu said:
perhaps not keeping a promise during such difficult times:

Or this: As a photographer can I decide that embarassing my subject is less important than the good resulting on the long run from publishing her picture? Do I know better than my subject what is best for her?

It's not clear from the story if she was embarrassed by their situation in general or by the picture. The picture may have added salt to an already painful wound, but it did shed light on some very difficult working conditions.

I don't thing Lange was passing judgment on this woman, and I think your questions are a little too simplistic. I doubt Lange felt she knew what was best for her subject, but I gather she didn't think living in a tent with seven children was it.

Christopher Walrath · Dec 3, 2008

And honestly if Lange had not taken that photo, someone else would have. Of another family, in another place. Photographs taken for the purpose of accentuating a volatile situation of any sort can come from any source, more especially now than in any other time in photographic history with the advent of consumer digital photography and the internet. But the photography I know would not be quite the same as it is now without Ms. Lange's particular vision.

Sirius Glass · Dec 3, 2008

Dorothea Lange was paid to put a face on the Great Depression. She did that without ever publishing the names of her subjects. Other journalists sought out and published the names.

Curt · Dec 3, 2008

This one says more about the '30's to me than the Migrant Mother, which is also powerful. These are cautionary images of what can happen again, that's the context I see them in. They are more than just historical photographs and should be used as a guide for the future.

Margaret Bourke-White
Bread Line during the Louisville flood, Kentucky
1937

Christopher Walrath · Dec 3, 2008

My great grandmother spoke about the flood while she was alive. That coupled with coming out of the depression really hurt 'Lowavull' very badly. Months before the flood my Great Grandmother purchased a handmade metal spatula from a peddler trying to feed his family for a nickle. My mom still flips the pancakes with it today.

matt comeskey · Dec 3, 2008

We are less than a generation away from loosing eye witnesses to the depression. Thank goodness people like Lange and Steinbeck recorded what they experieneced and saw, and what my parents lived through. They no doubt were controversial in their time- society generally resists having a light shone brightly on the unpleasant, the inequitable, and the confronting - I'm just glad they had the courage to see it through. Remember she was working for a US government agency, at the time, whose policies had clearly failed.

I don't think our current media has the same degree of courage needed to expose the living conditions of the most vulnerable citizens today in a way that will move future generations, as Langes images still move us today.

Was she acting ethically? Yes. She remained true to her journalistic mission.

naeroscatu · Dec 4, 2008

Folks, thanks for jumping on me but the article says what is says. I'm not disputing why Lange took this picture nor the value of the picture or the role of the picture in the history of photography and the society. Yes, we have a duty to document such moments but the issue of how we do it remains. You can split the hair and say Lange promised she will not publish the name of the subject, like no one can recognize the subject in the picture... Well then let us formulate differently. What would you do today, in this great depression assuming you are well dressed with a good job as journalist facing an unemployed family. What would you say to these people before taking their picture?

Vaughn · Dec 4, 2008

The mother was a migrant worker, not a local. I doubt that anyone who could afford a newspaper in town knew or would reconize the mother. The family had even moved on before they would have known their photo was in the paper.

So I don't think it is a matter of "spitting hairs" but of making a mountain out of a molehill. Lange kept her promise, and Lange, the family, and the country benefited from the photograph. In the long term the family became quite proud of the image, and to them it represented their determination and success in over-coming hard times.

Vaughn

In today's world...I'd get a model release.

nyoung · Dec 4, 2008

What would you do today, in this great depression assuming you are well dressed with a good job as journalist facing an unemployed family. What would you say to these people before taking their picture?

It's easy really, you explain who you are and your purpose then LISTEN to them. Generally, you get access and permission to photograph AFTER you listen to their stories. This applies equally to the impoverished/homeless, accident survivors, disaster survivors etc.

Lack of patience and willingness to let the people tell their stories is what gets photojournalists who haven't also trained as print reporters/interviewers in trouble. Interviewing skills and general "people" skills are more important than photographic skills in this arena.

keithwms · Dec 4, 2008

naeroscatu said:
What would you do today, in this great depression assuming you are well dressed with a good job as journalist facing an unemployed family. What would you say to these people before taking their picture?

Why would you say anything to them? If you're a journalist and they're in a public place, and their appearance fairly represents the broader conditions that you are reporting, then you just take the picture. No? Maybe I'm idealistic but I like to imagine photojournalists trying to remain impartial and thus not getting so involved with their subjects that they start to filter what they do or don't record.

But let me give you a rather different scenario. Suppose you wait at the checkout at the grocery store and when somebody uses food stamps, you snap their picture. Now that would be unethical. Because you applied a specific filter to your coverage by deciding that you want people checking out in the grocery with food stamps. In that case I would definitely ask for permission from the subject. And you'll notice that in TV reporting on that sort of thing, they don't show faces.

What about sick people... well, if reporting a famine, you wouldn't think twice to take a photograph of a starving child. That photograph would be broadly representative and fully ethical and probably quite compelling and important news for those who aren't there to witness the famine.

But taking selective shots of particular people going privately to a doctor's office, now that would be unethical. Again because you would be filtering the story to get specifically what you want, as opposed to depicting what is broadly representative. In that case, I can definitely imagine privacy concerns being a big issue.

Unfortunately there is so much opinion-filtering in the news media today that these lines are not so clear. You really have to look at a lot of different sources to have any hope of getting a representative picture.

ic-racer · Dec 4, 2008

I saw this thread in the 'Ethics...' area and thought it was going to be about retouching the thumb...

JBrunner · Dec 4, 2008

naeroscatu said:
Folks, thanks for jumping on me but the article says what is says. I'm not disputing why Lange took this picture nor the value of the picture or the role of the picture in the history of photography and the society. Yes, we have a duty to document such moments but the issue of how we do it remains. You can split the hair and say Lange promised she will not publish the name of the subject, like no one can recognize the subject in the picture... Well then let us formulate differently. What would you do today, in this great depression assuming you are well dressed with a good job as journalist facing an unemployed family. What would you say to these people before taking their picture?

Something like "Hi, do you mind if I take your picture?"

df cardwell · Dec 4, 2008

"Yes, we have a duty to document such moments but the issue of how we do it remains."

What do YOU think she did wrong,
and how you would have behaved differently ?

Bonus points for fact checking. Did Lange betray the subject ? Is the CNN informant reliable ?
Did she tell the truth ? Revisionism is less about Ideology, and more about lazt reporting: make a scandal,
stir somethiing up.

We have a different outlook on news pictures, and documentary work, 75 years later.
Lange wasn't the first documentarian / journalist, but she was a groundbreaker,
and she shaped our perception by what she saw, and through her pictures, showed us. This is a completely different process than we have today. Now, the full corporate media will construct the narrative they will apply as they cover a story, and present only what fits their agenda.

In Lange's time, there was no such thing as Editorial Photography. And in Lange's work, we were carried along as she looked, saw, and presented what she found. Her context was self consistent.

Applying a neo-post-modern viewpoint, in an era deluged by pointless images,
made by half witted paparazzi whose only concern is to show us girls' knickers,
is not only a disservice to Lange, but a seminal concession to The Popular Culture,
pandering meaningless images to an empty society.

It was just different then, and THAT context must be understood.

One illusion we have today about the Depression is that it was about Us and Them.

There was never much difference between Us and Them. A little bad luck, and a prosperous banker is out digging ditches.

keithwms · Dec 5, 2008

So, I'll just say that I do think naeroscatu raised a reasonable general topic, I don't feel baited.

Again, I do think Lange acted appropriately and did a wonderful job. But indeed, the rights of underprivileged subjects are sometimes overlooked. I mean, if I had a buck or every shot of a homeless person I've seen... ooh look there, it's a homeless person with a crutch, how exotic, let's take a picture!....well that would be quite a lot of money to put towards helping the homeless

Lee L · Dec 5, 2008

df cardwell said:
Did she tell the truth ? Revisionism is less about Ideology, and more about lazy reporting: make a scandal,
stir somethiing up.

We have a different outlook on news pictures, and documentary work, 75 years later.
Lange wasn't the first documentarian / journalist, but she was a groundbreaker, and she shaped our perception by what she saw, and through her pictures, showed us. This is a completely different process than we have today. Now, the full corporate media will construct the narrative they will apply as they cover a story, and present only what fits their agenda.

I was just thinking a couple of days ago along the same lines when viewing this thread. Contrast Migrant Mother with Joe the Plumber. I was thinking that Lange would have had the good sense to walk right past Joe.

Lee

Sirius Glass · Dec 5, 2008

Lee L said:
I was just thinking a couple of days ago along the same lines when viewing this thread. Contrast Migrant Mother with Joe the Plumber. I was thinking that Lange would have had the good sense to walk right past Joe.

Lee

I was thinking that any normal intelligent person would have had the good sense to walk right past Joe.

Steve

Lee L · Dec 5, 2008

Sirius Glass said:
I was thinking that any normal intelligent person would have had the good sense to walk right past Joe.

Steve

And yet he drew the media hordes and became a pop "news" icon, proving Don's point.

Lee

Sirius Glass · Dec 5, 2008

He drew media hoards because the media looks for sound bites rather than get coherent thoughts. Proving the point that many people in the media do not have two neurons in their brains to rub against each other.

Back in the day of Walter Cronkite, Eric Severide, Edward Murrow, Huntley and Brinkley we got real news not the brainless crap on network news. May be that is why we ended up with #43 was brainless and arrogant.

Steve

John Koehrer · Dec 6, 2008

That's an insult to the brainless and arrogant!

jgcull · Dec 6, 2008

I think the story attributes a beautiful dignity to the woman. (And I know this isn't your point, but I must say; that's one of the most beautiful photographs I've ever seen!)

The Migrant Mother picture by Dorothea Lange

naeroscatu

keithwms

naeroscatu

keithwms

Vaughn

SuzanneR

Moderator

Christopher Walrath

Sirius Glass

Curt

Attachments

Christopher Walrath

matt comeskey

naeroscatu

Vaughn

nyoung

keithwms

ic-racer

JBrunner

Moderator

df cardwell

keithwms

Lee L

Sirius Glass

Lee L

Sirius Glass

John Koehrer

jgcull

The Migrant Mother picture by Dorothea Lange

Moderator

Attachments

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency