Sunday, September 11, 2011
Making Medicine of Our Grief
The website of On the Media (a WNYC radio podcast) featured a fascinating photo (see lower left) taken on the infamous morning of 9/11/01 by Melanie Einzig. The background of the picture shows some familiar sights: the perfectly blue sky, smoke billowing from the Twin Towers. The middle of the photograph shows some horrified spectators, presumably looking on with incredulity and awe. But it is the foreground that really makes this photograph unique. There, a UPS man is delivering a parcel, apparently oblivious to the horrifying spectacle behind him. That he is walking toward the camera, and that the narrow street seems to corral him in an alley of shadow (is he literally in the dark?) offer competing details to the all-too hideous scene behind him. 
I think it would be a mistake to read this man as unfeeling. It seems to me he is simply doing his job (and doing his job simply): he is not paid to gawk. His uniform is striking — a contrast to the casual clothes of the people behind him — reminding me of Paul Fussell's book Uniforms: Why We Are What We Wear. Is he merely a company man, a victim of institutionalization? Remember Thoreau: "If the engine whistles, let it whistle till it is hoarse for its pains. If the bell whistles, why should we run?" This man lets nothing deter him from his task. He is a mail carrier and, while on duty, he will [only] think of the mail, which he cradles in his right hand.The photographer, Ms. Einzig, felt it would be unfair to release this photograph too soon after 9/11. Its narrative is hard to read, and similar "life-goes-on" photos led to stormy controversy. But to what extent might this photograph be useful in capturing the day's events? What images are clearest in your mind? Why are those images so clear? Who chose to feature those pictures and how do they frame the story of that day's events?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I am a little confused as to why the photographer, Ms. Einzig, felt that it would be unfair to release this picture. Personally, as Mr. O'Connor questions if the man if "merely a company man, a victim of institutionalization?", it is all up to the audience. Maybe even the photographer does not know the answer to those questions. One can come up with many theories as to what this man is doing and how he is feeling but we will never know the truth unless we talk to this man himself. If stormy controversy is the worst possible thing this picture can do then why not show it to the public?
When I first saw this assumptions came rushing through my head: he's unfeeling, he's insensitive, he doesn't care at all bout all the innocent people who were suffering. But as I considered it more my opinion changed. The man looks woefully confused, and rightfully so. He has a job to do, he only gets paid if he does his job. That is what laborers like him are conditioned to think. So in this situation, he probably is feeling scared, sad and concerned, however these emotions aren't able to surface and he appears to be moving on with life without even taking notice to the horrific tragedy that is unfolding not more that a few blocks a way because he has a job to do and he doesn't get paid unless he does it. I assume that a UPS delivery man get minimum wage or not much above it, so it is essential for him to continue working so he can make the money he needs.
After shortly discussing this picture in class today, I have come to the conclusion that this man was not in distress (as some students tried to claim), and that he does not look saddened or even alarmed. Now, I don't know, nor does anyone else, really know what was this man was thinking, but perhaps this picture is a representation of a disturbing, American habit. Americans often push the mentality that moving onward and upward is always better. Although this man may or may not have taken concern over the crash, he was still on duty, and he still had work to do. As I mentioned in my blog (*self promotion alert*), Americans like to work. A lot. And even though one of the most tragic events in American history was happening right behind him, this man still had work that was not going to get done by itself.
In my opinion, the mailman in this picture shows neither an unfeeling spectator nor a 'company man' that wants nothing more than to get his job done. Jordan mentioned in class today that he looked worried as he looked to the side of the builder where other spectators probably were. This facial expression shows that he was not unfeeling and yet I don't see a determination in his eyes to suggest that he desperately wants to deliver the package. Everyone experienced fear that day and I see his fear characterized in "flight" mode, whereas the others around him were too paralyzed to move. He is tearing his eyes away from the scene to protect himself and prevent further scarring - a reaction which makes perfect sense in my mind. This leads me to wonder which is braver - to stand and gawk or to leave and protect oneself from emotional scarring.
I think that this man saw the disaster occurring behind him, did his bit of gawking for a few minutes, and moved on. With the situation clearly not under his control, he made the decision to continue with what he could control and what he was assigned to do. Assuming that he had no connections to people in the buildings based on the lack of concern on his face, I think he made a respectable choice. Although he may appear to be under-reacting, it is impossible for us to know what he is really thinking. Regardless of what is on his mind, I think Thoreau would have been pleased with this man for not running when there is definitely a "bell" whistling.
I doubt that with all of the commotion around this man that he had not seen or did not care about what was happening behind him, I rather believe like Sarah that he saw it but has seen enough of it. Looking at pictures of this horrific day are hard for most people, so I can only imagine how badly this man did not want to see the destruction of the Twin Towers in person. It's likely that because his head is facing towards the stores on the right side, more specifically their names, that he is thinking about his own well-being and trying to find somewhere safe to duck into, worried that while standing outside, another attack may be made nearby.
Upon looking at this picture, I had the initial thought that the man was oblivious to what was going around. However, the plane had to of made a huge noise crashing into the building, so therefore either the man heard it and had a reason to not want to get involved with it, or he was deaf. The likelihood of him being deaf is very low, so therefore, there must have been a reason for him to be doing what he was doing. I thought for a while and couldn't come up with any reason for why he was walking away. Then I decided to put myself in that exact position, and when I did that, it reminded me of a time when I was walking home from school one day. I saw a girl lying in the street who had evidently been hit by a car. I didn't stay though, because I didn't want to face the pain caused to someone or get involved in any way. So I kept walking home. I believe that is what this man is doing. He couldn't face what had just happened to all of those innocent people in the plane and the building, so he just decided to repress it and walk away from it.
This guy isn’t unfeeling, he doesn’t even know what he’s seeing. I believe when this photo was taken the man had not even fully processed what was happening, which was why he kept doing his job--an instinctive response. By deciding not to release the photo, Einzig created a new narrative, a narrative that makes a big assumption about what this man is feeling. Who are we to judge (and truly know) what he was feeling?
Coming back to the original questions, I think this photo captures how when 9/11 occurred most people could not even fully wrap their head around the attacks. People initially reacted by resuming their daily duties in a somewhat autopilot state. When I think of 9/11, the image that stands most clearly in my mind is the photo that captured the plane crashing into the Twin Towers from a distance (image here:http://www.world-mysteries.com/911_1.jpg). I think this image remains so vivid because it is this photo that made what was occurring “click”. The media chose to feature this picture over and over because it framed America’s understanding of 9/11.
Upon understanding and processing what was happening on that frighting day in September 2001, I think people had multiple possible reactions. I'd say one of the most common reactions was just staring at the towers, frozen in place. The people who did this were probably so stunned by the planes crashing into the towers that they could do nothing but stare. However, I think the man in the photo responded differently. I don't think it is fair for the viewers of this photo to assume that the man was untouched by the horrific events; he just had a different way of dealing with it. Once he saw what was going on and took it all in, I think he went into "flight mode" as Kathleen put it. He couldn't make sense of what he was seeing and did the only thing that would bring peace to his mind - he kept on working.
I don't like how some people might take the position that he was somehow unaffected by the attacks. People shouldn't attack a man who was in a bad place at a bad time and simply didn't know how to respond.
Looking at this photo, I'm reminded of a similar one we looked at my junior year in "The Soiling of Old Glory" where there was a group of people across the river from Manhattan enjoying what seemed to be a jovial brunch. In the background was the same horror seen above. The writer determined that it would too be harsh to label these people as insensitive. It's easy to give a picture a thousand words, but it's not always easy to be accurate. I think only this man knows what was going on in his mind at this moment. We don't have any prior pictures or information about this man to determine if he's insensitive or not. The danger to me seems that sometimes, we read too hard. This doesn't detract from the photograph however. It's still extremely interesting. It's natural for the human mind to wonder, pictures provide our quizzical minds with the entertainment. We're naturally curious. I guess what I'm saying is read and wonder, but stray from immediate and definite assumptions when given evidence that's only 1/250th of a second. We simply can't have the whole story.
Post a Comment