Nicaragua, Susan Meiselas. I don't have
this book yet, but I'll have it soon. I had the opportunity this evening to attend an hour presentation by Meiselas at a conference in Las Cruces -- a rather rare event since we don't see many Magnum photographers pass this way. Most of her talk was devoted to the pictures in the book, produced in 1978 and 1979 during the initial stages of the revolution which ousted the dictator, Anastacio Somoza.
I don't usually go out of my way to find images of violence and war, but close contact with a photographer who has recorded such images presents an extraordinary opportunity to explore the process by which such images are made. Also, people like Meiselas who are able to do creative work at great personal risk are always good talkers-- that is the way, after all, that they survive long enough to tell their stories. Of course, what never gets explained is how such people develop the courage to do what they do, and to do it repeatedly. I didn't ask the question of Meiselas, but I'm sure she would give the stock answer: that's what you have to do to get the pictures.
There were also lots of interesting asides in the presentation, some prompted by the audience made up of photo academics. Meiselas said that Magnum is struggling against great odds as one of the very few remaining independent photo agencies, but they are still taking on new associates, of which there are now fifty. The agency's mission continues to be to give the members some leverage in dealing with media clients, particularly in regard to copyright issues.
There was some interesting discussion of digital issues. Meiselas said that there is a great deal of on-going discussion in the agency about the issue of image manipulation. A decision has been made to set up a section of the agency web site which specifically identifies presentations which include manipulated images -- while the intent may be perfectly legitimate, there is a widespread feeling that it is important to segregate such images and explain why they are sometimes appropriate. On the plus side of the digital divide, Meiselas acknowledged that digital does give the photographer much more control over what is submitted for publication. In the past, color work in particular always had to be shipped off sight-unseen for processing, and the resultant images often were used in ways unforseen by the photographer. Meiselas cited her own example of this in a picture she made in Nicaragua of unmasked revolutionary combatants; she said she had sent along detailed notes explaining the importance of maintaining the anonymity of the subjects, and was profoundly shocked to see the picture published later. Meiselas also said that in the early days of digital, she felt more secure in transporting digital images across difficult borders as they were not in an immediately viewable form. I would guess that situation has changed rather dramatically now that digital has become commonplace, but that was not further explored in the presentation.
