Scan barcode
dchalamish's review
dark
informative
reflective
slow-paced
4.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Genocide, War, and Violence
moranguinhos's review against another edition
challenging
dark
informative
reflective
sad
slow-paced
still so relevant, 20 years after being published. war and history is cyclical & people are still figuring out ways to compartmentalize the atrocities. Sontag’s predictions about the future of news and online information are spot on.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Grief, Gun violence, Colonisation, Murder, Body horror, Gore, War, Genocide, Violence, and Injury/Injury detail
mads_jpg's review against another edition
dark
informative
reflective
medium-paced
3.75
After seeing so many haunting images from Gaza of Palestinians either dead or dying, many of them children, I wanted to understand it all better. Whether violent imagery creates lasting pathos, whether we should look or if it's just self flagellation, and whether images like these can actually make significant change.
These are admittedly very complicated questions to answer, so Sontag's ideas have left me feeling both less and more confused. Maybe it's harder to compare the almost real-time images from Motaz's Instagram stories to the war images filtered through television companies and journalists. Maybe it's a whole different beast seeing images of death through the eyes of someone you have a parasocial relationship with.
But I did leave this book feeling like I understood the desire to document and witness these atrocities, despite all the complications that come along with it. And all the emotions that can come up for people for different reasons, how sympathy can turn to apathy when someone feels hopeless to stop the suffering.
These are admittedly very complicated questions to answer, so Sontag's ideas have left me feeling both less and more confused. Maybe it's harder to compare the almost real-time images from Motaz's Instagram stories to the war images filtered through television companies and journalists. Maybe it's a whole different beast seeing images of death through the eyes of someone you have a parasocial relationship with.
But I did leave this book feeling like I understood the desire to document and witness these atrocities, despite all the complications that come along with it. And all the emotions that can come up for people for different reasons, how sympathy can turn to apathy when someone feels hopeless to stop the suffering.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Suicide, Misogyny, Antisemitism, Injury/Injury detail, Genocide, Slavery, Violence, Body horror, Colonisation, Gore, Grief, Blood, Torture, Death, Racism, Sexism, Rape, Sexual violence, and War
pseudolain's review against another edition
challenging
dark
informative
reflective
sad
medium-paced
5.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: War, Violence, Torture, Slavery, Murder, Colonisation, Injury/Injury detail, Racism, Genocide, Antisemitism, Rape, Physical abuse, and Gore
Moderate: Body horror, Classism, Fire/Fire injury, and Child death
flara's review
challenging
dark
informative
slow-paced
3.5
I had a love-hate relationship with this text and having finished the book 2 months prior, I still can't quite decide whether I liked it or not.
I was put off at the very beginning by Sontag's argument that wars have always belonged to men, and that women would not choose violence to resolve their power struggles (I don't have my copy of the book at the moment, I am relying solely on my memory; and so I might be mis-remembering some of the nuances). I could go on a tangent here, but that would be an entirely different discussion. I'm choosing to concentrate on what these essays entail, rather than what they're missing.
Throughout her essays, Sontag points at things that are fairly obvious, but yet I have never thought of them? This is a book about war and war photography; and the fact that the majority of famous war photographs of 19th and early 20th century were completely staged shouldn't surprise us - and yet I have never questioned their authenticity? We expect drawings/paintings/etc. to take artistic liberties, perhaps to make the real event seem more dramatic and shocking than it actually was. But we don't always hold photographs to the same standard (obviously I am not talking about studio photography here). After all, they are real-time snapshots, they should be trust-worthy. I found this especially relevant in regards to what is currently happening in Ukraine.
I really enjoyed Sontag's observations on how as a humankind we have become immune to the shocking nature of news and yet we are obsessed with gory images. We have become disengaged from the suffering of people paraded to us daily on evening news, we don't even flinch when we hear the mention of armed conflict/natural disaster/etc. At the same time, images circulating around the world are getting gorier by the minute. They are sensational. Those are the ones that grab our attention (for what could be argued are the wrong reasons). We latch onto the shocking nature of these images, rather than on the human element.
Sontag uses several war conflicts as her case studies. The one that stood out was Crimean War; if I remember correctly, this was the first war to be documented in photography. I would prefer if discussed photographs were included in the book, rather than having to look them up (was there a copyright issue?). In conclusion, I found this to be an enjoyable read. However, the opening chapter really annoyed me. Sontag certainly pointed out the obvious, even if the obvious wasn't so obvious after all. For this selfish reason I struggle to give her enough credit.
I was put off at the very beginning by Sontag's argument that wars have always belonged to men, and that women would not choose violence to resolve their power struggles (I don't have my copy of the book at the moment, I am relying solely on my memory; and so I might be mis-remembering some of the nuances). I could go on a tangent here, but that would be an entirely different discussion. I'm choosing to concentrate on what these essays entail, rather than what they're missing.
Throughout her essays, Sontag points at things that are fairly obvious, but yet I have never thought of them? This is a book about war and war photography; and the fact that the majority of famous war photographs of 19th and early 20th century were completely staged shouldn't surprise us - and yet I have never questioned their authenticity? We expect drawings/paintings/etc. to take artistic liberties, perhaps to make the real event seem more dramatic and shocking than it actually was. But we don't always hold photographs to the same standard (obviously I am not talking about studio photography here). After all, they are real-time snapshots, they should be trust-worthy. I found this especially relevant in regards to what is currently happening in Ukraine.
I really enjoyed Sontag's observations on how as a humankind we have become immune to the shocking nature of news and yet we are obsessed with gory images. We have become disengaged from the suffering of people paraded to us daily on evening news, we don't even flinch when we hear the mention of armed conflict/natural disaster/etc. At the same time, images circulating around the world are getting gorier by the minute. They are sensational. Those are the ones that grab our attention (for what could be argued are the wrong reasons). We latch onto the shocking nature of these images, rather than on the human element.
Sontag uses several war conflicts as her case studies. The one that stood out was Crimean War; if I remember correctly, this was the first war to be documented in photography. I would prefer if discussed photographs were included in the book, rather than having to look them up (was there a copyright issue?). In conclusion, I found this to be an enjoyable read. However, the opening chapter really annoyed me. Sontag certainly pointed out the obvious, even if the obvious wasn't so obvious after all. For this selfish reason I struggle to give her enough credit.
Content Warnings
Graphic: War
Moderate: Torture, Body horror, Murder, Violence, Death, Grief, and Blood
sarahrose_a's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
3.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Grief, Violence, War, Body horror, Child death, Death, Rape, and Genocide
tailwhip's review
dark
informative
3.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: War, Fire/Fire injury, Torture, Violence, Gun violence, Gore, and Injury/Injury detail
z0eok's review
challenging
informative
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
4.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: Violence and War
Moderate: Sexual violence
moonyreadsbystarlight's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
4.5
This was a look into war photography: the history, the reason it is made, and the reactions it elicits. There are so many points that Sontag makes throughout this. She looks at early military art, more staged photography of earlier history, and censorship that some photographers have been met with. She talks about the creator's intent and how that may be at odds with how it is presented in context or consumed by the public. One of the big points that really resonated with me was how different people and places were photographed and how those pictures were presented. Who is afforded dignity and who isn't? Whose tragedies are being broadcasted? Why is pain elsewhere viewed and memorialized, when atrocities within the US are ignored? She also poses and discusses the question: does sharing these photographs hurt or help the situation? There was mixed discussion about whether or not all images make the public desensitized, but one thing seems certain -- seeing an issue in print does not mean that someone understands or will work to fix the issue. Near the end, she also expresses the issue of perspective -- this is all a very middle to upper class western perspective. They are the ones who get to see pictures and decide whether or not to change the channel.
There are so many great point in here, I only wish that she would have fleshed it out a bit more and discussed more in detail. I think integrating her more philosophical commentary and history would have paired excellently with some social scientific research. I also would have loved to see her tie these ideas into her other work on illness and how that is perceived.
There are so many great point in here, I only wish that she would have fleshed it out a bit more and discussed more in detail. I think integrating her more philosophical commentary and history would have paired excellently with some social scientific research. I also would have loved to see her tie these ideas into her other work on illness and how that is perceived.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Gun violence and Violence
More...