I was struck by the pictures in this interesting and somewhat offbeat feature in the NYT*: "A Luxury Dish Is Banned, and a Rural County Reels."
Politically you could have any of a range of reactions to the story, but let's not go there. In a nutshell, a traditional delicacy for wealthy people is banned in New York City as being gratuitously cruel to animals, echoing many other such bans worldwide, but the poor people who produce it—some of whom have had a dreadful odyssey to reach safe haven—are going to have their lives upended. The article tells the story from every perspective. I guess it touches me a few ways, as I live in rural Upstate New York, and my investment banker grandfather (d. 1993) happened to love duck liver pâté.
But...to the pictures.
They're the work of a young photojournalist named Desiree Rios (right). From the opening montage (I watched it several times through) to the inline illustrations, it struck me as a excellent job of photo-reportage. The pictures don't cry out for attention and don't insist on some forced signature style—they tell the story. But they're beautifully done all the same, and they work in concert with the written story. Words and pictures are full partners, you might say—something I look for, and like, in photojournalistic work.
As far as technique goes, they made me reflect that digital is finally coming of age, not looking like film but not overburdened by the old digital nasties either. And (importantly for me) not looking too much like photo-illustration, all fakey and manipulated. The opening picture ("Vacant buildings...") is perhaps the exception, the weakest picture in the set, too dark and too saturated and with too much perspective distortion, but let your eyes rest for a while on the picture of the duck food mill ("
Photojournalism is difficult. You have to put the story above your ability to pick and choose what works best visually.
"Desiree Rios (b. 1991) is a Mexican-American photojournalist and documentary photographer from Fort Worth, Texas. She received a Bachelor of Science in Photojournalism at St. John’s University in New York and a Master of Fine Arts from the San Francisco Art Institute. Rios is currently based in New York City and Dallas-Fort Worth." That's lifted from the "About" page of the photographer's website.
Nice work. She made a difficult task look easy.
Mike
(Inset photo by Ricardo Mexia)
*A.K.A. "the world's best photography magazine." Regular readers will recall that I recommend subscribing for the rich and varied photographic content. [UPDATE on this: see Ken's Featured Comment below.]
Original contents copyright 2020 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Please help support The Online Photographer through Patreon
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Kenneth Tanaka: "Re '...it struck me as a excellent job of photo-reportage. The pictures don't cry out for attention and don't insist on some forced signature style—they tell the story. But they're beautifully done all the same, and they work in concert with the written story.' I heartily agree with your opinion of Ms. Rios' work, Mike. More generally, I highly recommend that all hobbyist photographers, from 17 to 70 years old, study featured story work in the NYT. It's about as good as it gets. But, more to the educational point, study how the images hold together. Light. Gesture. Context. Color. Figure spatial relationships. Damon Winter produces much of my favorite humanist work. But the NYT has many of today's best photogs producing a variety of work for them each week. It beats a workshop, at least in my book."
Gary Nylander: "Good to see that young photojournalists like Desiree are being championed and that the NYT is willing to give new talented photographers the recognition that they deserve. As an ex-photojournalist who was laid off due to declining revenues on a small daily paper, it makes my heart glad to see there is some photography work out there for these photographers."
Dave Millier: "Photojournalism is an interesting field. This series tells a great story. But it also shows that journalism always comes from a particular perspective or slant; it can't be objective, and the selection of the images demonstrates that.
"I have every sympathy for the livelihoods of the people involved in the production of this food product. Having their entire product line come under threat with minimal warning must be devastating. On the other hand, it is hardly unique: many, many, businesses close all the time with the commensurate misery to employees.
"Imagine if this photojournalism had been done from a different perspective, to tell the stories of the food animals rather than the workers. How would the photos have differed?
"People are cruel enough to one another but the cruelty dished out to animals in the food industry usually has to be hidden away safely from the cameras. A lot of people might by put off their lunch if they were forced to face up to exactly where it had come from and how their enjoyment came at the expense of, in some cases, some pretty extreme suffering.
"I've been a vegetarian for 25 years—at some personal sacrifice, because I do love my food. But one day when my then-flatmate saw me making meat food with carefully homogenised and disguised meat, he pointed out how hypocritical I was to eat products that have been designed to hide from me their true nature. I reflected on that and came to the conclusion it was true. I liked the taste of meat, hated where it came from and bought products that hid the truth from myself and thus circumvented my conscience for entirely selfish reasons. So I became a vegetarian.
"The food industry uses some pretty horrible practices and does a lot to hide this from consumers. A parallel story from the animals' perspective would make a useful counterpoint to this human interest story and demonstrate how story telling is always from one angle or another...."
Mike replies: I'm not sure journalism is ever supposed to be objective, truly, because what we are looking for from it is not an ethical stance or judgement. What it's supposed to do is present a coherent picture of the facts, which I think this piece does. What interests me about this piece is that the ethical and political issues are so complex and interwoven that a clear and plain values-based interpretation is impossible to arrive at quickly and surely. What's important to me about journalism is that I be made aware of the slant or bias of the journalists, so I can take that into account when digesting the information they're presenting to me—I don't have any problem reaching a personal conclusion that is opposed to that of the journalists.
Kenneth Tanaka adds: "With special regard to Dave Millier’s featured comment, readers may enjoy a recent essay by Jacqueline Lopez, an intern at the Art Institute of Chicago’s Department of Photography."
Mike replies: Jacqueline's essay is good and on point, but the "context" I'd like answered is: who is the white guy really and what was his actual relationship with the black men sitting behind him? Who is the white person on the extreme left who the white man on the right appears to be talking to, and what were they talking about? Dorothea has already forced the issue somewhat with her image title, making all of them stand for something other than just themselves. But even so it's we the viewers who assume any relationship at all between the white man on the right and the black men. The word "plantation" is possibly leading, too (in 1936 people would have been widely familiar with Uncle Tom's Cabin in which the word is also used). One feature of photography, however, is its insistent specificity: those were actual people, and presumably they have actual stories. For instance, consider these imagined scenarios:
—The white man is a local farmer who is at the store hiring day laborers. He bucks the local trend by hiring black workers instead of poor whites who also want the work. They men behind him were hoping to be hired but the ones he hired are already seated in the car.
—The white man is an overseer at a huge local cotton plantation and has 75 black workers under his direction. He is known for being ruthless and a stern disciplinarian. He has a high position in the local KKK. The black men in the picture, who work for him, know they are safe in public but feel cowed generally by the power he has over their lives.
—The white man owns a local plantation but the black men behind him have nothing to do with him—they're local guys who often hang out at the store loitering on the steps. They're just listening to the white people talking only because that's what happens to be going on at that moment.
See what I mean? We really have very little context except that which is supplied by the title in concert with our own prejudices and assumptions. Which could be right or wrong. Dorothea was a truth-teller by nature and conscientious by the standards of the time, but we know there were others among her pictures where she got the title or caption substantively wrong.
I suppose the real details are lost to history, but it's what I'd want to know about that picture.