> in one narrated incident, a sepoy was mutinied in his camp and started firing on his officers. Rather than rush out of his tent with a gun, Hooper charged out with his camera and attempted to photograph the assailant.
Willoughby seems like a true artist, gambling his life for a photograph. Calling him an “Indifferent bystander” seems like a rash reaction by those who don’t understand the power photographs like these have in the public eye.
Sure, he could have fed these groups of families and children going through extreme famine instead of taking photos, but those families were a drop in the bucket of starving people in India. Sometimes spreading images to the masses is more affective than helping a few people.
I do not think, Sir, that the most tenacious money-lover could look upon these indisputable evidences of human suffering without experiencing the impulse to do something in the way of alleviation.
> in one narrated incident, a sepoy was mutinied in his camp and started firing on his officers. Rather than rush out of his tent with a gun, Hooper charged out with his camera and attempted to photograph the assailant.
Willoughby seems like a true artist, gambling his life for a photograph. Calling him an “Indifferent bystander” seems like a rash reaction by those who don’t understand the power photographs like these have in the public eye.
Sure, he could have fed these groups of families and children going through extreme famine instead of taking photos, but those families were a drop in the bucket of starving people in India. Sometimes spreading images to the masses is more affective than helping a few people.
I do not think, Sir, that the most tenacious money-lover could look upon these indisputable evidences of human suffering without experiencing the impulse to do something in the way of alleviation.
Would that this were true.
I really dislike seeing real world pictures of death.
And yet you clicked.