BagNews Archives About Staff BagNews is a progressive site dedicated to visual politics and the analysis of news images.
Sunday, February 12, 2012

Twitter

@bagnewsnotes »
Advertisement



April 30, 2005

Higher Protection

Newcabinet

Thursday, the NYT trumpeted the naming of the long-delayed Iraqi government.  Although the event was not visually noted on page 1, this three column wide photo stretched half the height of page A12. 

Obviously, the picture tells a story about security.  Besides our man on the roof, just count all the suits in sunglasses.  (You’d think that pose was the first thing they taught at “secret service” school.)

The image is also about the scale of the job ahead.  With Iraq’s ever increasing violence and political animosity, the photo reflects concern — likely as palpable in the Administration as in Baghdad — that the Jaafari government could end up as significant as a bunch of ants. 

With help coming from on high, it seems fair game to include an allusion to the divine.  You could say this photo also raises the issue of how much these brave men –  struggling so greatly against ethnic and religious strife — can look toward the heavens for protection.

Hopefully, the companion article on page A12 is no reply. 

That story detailed the killing on Wednesday of Sheikha Lameah Khaddouri al-Sakri, a member of Ayad Allawi’s political party.  Most notably, Ms. al-Sakri became the first member of the new Iraqi National Assembly to be assassinated.  Although she recently agreed to protection, the outspoken human rights activist refused to live in the Green Zone along with many of the other legislators, and continued to moved about freely.  The article ends with a quote from one of Ms. al-Sakri’s neighbors, a 17-year-old named Husam:

“When she was elected to Parliament, I said, ‘Why don’t you have better security?’ And she said, ‘God will protect me.’ “



(image: Alan Chin, April 28, 2005 in The New York Times, p. A12)

  • MonsieurGonzo

    this is a frightening and revealing image on many levels; and this is news.
    even before we begin to fully analyze it, we know these two things:
    first, that the artist / photographer and editor / publisher have chosen not to produce and mass produce a stock ‘group portrait’, rather they have chosen instead to make a political comment & editorial statement of this event: the first so-called democratically elected governing body of Iraq.
    second, we know that the group of men depicted in this ruling body are either woefully naive of how to present themselves to the photojournalist = world or, they are powerless to control their own body image politic.
    in europe, and i presume the middle east, too ~ one would use the phrase “powerless to direct” rather than “powerless to control” ~ that verb, control having entirely different meaning ouside of The States…
    …semantics aside, what is universally apparent in this image FRAME is the notion and emotion, thus, of powerlessness.
    these men are either cowed by some controlling interest or entirely incompetent to present themselves to us with any sense of dignity. The Truth is probably a little of both.
    The Soldier’s insignia is not clear; that he is in uniform costume tells us that he is a member of conventional forces, ie., anglo-american or ING, rather than un-conventional forces of the resistance. but his very presence suggests to us that resistance must exist
    …else he (The Soldier, whose purpose is so ominous by virtue of the amibiguity of his presence: is he safe-guarding or, over-seeing the body politic?) would not be in this image FRAME. his position, above ~ and so distant, by virtue of that massive curved, barrel-distortion brick wall ~ that seems more to contain the elected body rather than back -it- up…
    …entirely reinforces to us the realization that, as Chairman Mao once said, “power flows from the barrel of a gun.”
    it certainly does not project from this group. and they’re not simply being humble, either; if anything they’re wary or, just plain un-aware.
    the Iraqi people, and this group of impotents in particular ~ would probably feel embarrassed by such a stark mirror image as this ~ another painful reminder of their real position. if these newly selected Ministers really are as naive and incompetent as they here appear, their first directive may well be something like, “shoot the photographers.” :-/
    Americans of whatever political bent should be outraged by this image. after all, this is what your 20.000+ casualties and $300 billion USD has come to; this is what your President says it’s all about! but you seem no longer capable of shame or anger. perhaps it would help you feel something if you knew that for many people around the world, this image is hilarious, and it is America ~ not Iraq ~ where they see the sick joke of Democracy Inaction.

  • hauksdottir

    All I see is clutter and concealment… no power, no confidence… they could be standing in front of a rathole ready to duck back inside at the first growl of a dog.
    The number of bodies out there is just distracting flak. In a real government, you’d have ministers and secretaries and people to actually do things, and any guards would be a bit more ceremonial, not foreign mercenaries standing around in cool shades waiting to take a bullet. And, by being packed like anchovies, it further diminishes any sense of authority these men may have had. If Iraq is as big as California, surely their elected president can sneeze without putting his elbow through 3 other people?
    One other point: with all the height in this image, how come the feet are cut off? Either the not-so-dignitaries are in danger of dropping out of sight, or they lack a firm foundation on which to stand.
    Carolly

  • GKoutnik

    “that massive curved, barrel-distortion brick wall ~ that seems more to contain the elected body rather than back -it- up…”
    That was my first impression – and for a second I thought they might be standing in front of a concave dam… What better image of future threat and uncertainty…

  • MonsieurGonzo

    place your finger over that central light fixture and its shadow (about the only object in this frame with any sense of pomp & circumstance) and look at the image again at arm’s length…
    …to most viewers, this makes an amazing difference: gone is any sense of noble stage, and instead that weird architecture becomes even weirder: the gate behind them could be a jail cell door (!) the arched windows, of which we see only a part, appear to be the same apparent colour/tone as the sky ~ that tells our brains, “this is no ‘building’ at all, it’s a WALL” of some sort; yet that jail-door must go somewhere ~ so WTH is this thing, anyway ~ a facade? a fortress? a palace? a prison?
    some kind of Escher Architecture? (^_^)

  • Asta

    Monsieur Gonzo, I really do enjoy your analyses. The Escher reference is perfect.

  • aethorian

    The correct POV is Relatively simple, depending upon whether you’re on the inside or the outside.
    After the salient withdraws behind the wall and closes the door, does its steel bars keep the new (land)lords safely within, or keep all others safely without?

    I am always wandering around in enigmas. — M.C. Escher