The Camera as a Weapon of Imperialism
When looking at the history of photography, the usage of the camera as a weapon of colonialism becomes extremely apparent. Throughout history, the stories of Black and other racial groups have almost exclusively been told through a white lens. With this article, my goal is to explain the different ways in which the camera has been used as a tool of imperialism and white supremacy. I will discuss the usage of photography as a way to justify discrimination, the objectification of people of color, the power dynamics between the photographer and the subject, the usage of Black struggle for profit, the commodification of women of color, and finally the role of the photographer.
Throughout history, photography has been used as a way to not only document personal and historical moments but to also document remote regions of the world as well as to make scientific observations. Additionally, the influence of photography during colonial times should not be disregarded since photographers used to push certain colonial ideologies that aimed to show the differences between people from different ethnicities (Hight & Sampson, 2004, p. 1). Moreover, the usage of photography has been used as a way to justify slavery among other types of discrimination against Black people (Hight & Sampson, 2004, pp. 2–3) in an attempt to maintain white supremacism. Anthropologists, who often doubled as photographers would compare facial structures and skin tones to determine the reasons why the white race was more evolved and therefore superior to the other races (Hight & Sampson, 2004, pp. 2–3).
Examples of colonial anthropology can be seen in NW Thomas’ work, a British anthropologist who showed a primary example of the colonial mindset during the European Colonial time. Thomas was the first government-appointed anthropologist by the British Colonial Office and in his work the notion of white superiority is apparent.
The images above are an example of his work in Kogi Stage, Nigeria (1910) in which the aim was to focus on the ways in which Black people were different. He focused on things such as facial structures, hair, and scarification marks. In addition, Thomas had a collection of West African vocabulary and languages as well as a collection of artifacts that he had gathered during his time in Africa (Blench, 1995, pp. 21–23). Through this collection, Thomas managed to objectify Black people by effectively dehumanizing them and by turning them into what feels like a display of exotic objects instead of the documentation of people in remote areas of the world that were unknown to the common westerner of the time. Even though Thomas often recorded the names of his subjects, the images attached will show that many of Thomas’ work shows the dehumanization of the subjects by taking away their identities while simply referring to them with a number and the label “Man”, “Woman” or “Child”.
Nowadays anthropologists and scientists have discredited the belief that race is a biological concept (Hight & Sampson, 2004, p. 3) however, by turning Black people into objects, Thomas not only helped shape the way in which westerners at home saw imperialism but also helped reinforce white supremacists rhetorics. Unfortunately, examples of the objectification of people of color can still be found in this day and age.
Richard Mosse’s “Moria in Snow” (2017) is a prime example of how imperialism is still part of most documentative photographs. By inserting himself into a refugee camp, Mosse, who used a military-grade thermal camera disturbs the little amount of peace that these refugees had. Furthermore, the usage of a military camera in a space filled with individuals who are trying to escape war comes across as ironic and ultimately out of touch. In addition, by turning the refugees into mere white shapes Mosse is essentially erasing the identities of all these people. “Moria in Snow” presents itself as an overview of everyday life in refugee camps while failing to address the individual stories. Moreover, “Moria in Snow” serves as an example of the influence that imperialism still has on photography by objectifying people of color and turning them into aesthetics while romanticizing their suffering.
Mosse’s work not only fails to break from the imperialistic bonds that documentative photography has but also opens a question about the power dynamics in the previously mentioned form of photography. In Mosse’ “Wrap Your Troubles in Dreams” (2012) the power dynamics become evident simply through the choice of the rich white photographer going into a warzone and photographing a vulnerable Black child. Additionally, the ability to choose whether or not to be part of a warzone speaks of power and privilege for itself. Ultimately, “Wrap Your Troubles in Dreams” will continue to be shown in articles, art books, and museums and Richard Mosse will remain a worldwide known photographer while the child in the photograph will continue to be just another forgotten Black child in the middle of a warzone.
Even though throughout history the power dynamics between the photographer and the subject can be seen in many different ways, the position of white photographers has yet to change when it comes to photographing and profiting off Black struggles and suffering. In the early 20th century, the imbalance between those who survey and those who were surveyed was even more evident.
Pictured above is a postcard from the early 20th century showing the lynching of four African American men as well as a photograph of the lynching of 17-year-old Jesse Washington (1916). In both of these images, the imbalance of power is extremely evident not only due to the fact that the white photographers are photographing the African American men who are being lynched by other white people but by the already existing position of power that white Americans had over Black Americans at the time, a position of power that allowed them to do the things that are depicted in these images without any repercussions. Both of these images manage to illustrate the privilege that comes with the ability to observe things from the outside since none of the subjects had the privilege to remove themselves from the situation nor the frame.
In a similar fashion, Robert Cohen’s “Ferguson” (2014) effectively profits from Black struggle, the photograph is highly acclaimed as well as a photograph for which Cohen received a Pulitzer award, while Edward Crawford, the man in the photo, faced charges for the act. Crawford was among the protestors who died in what many believe to be suspicious ways after the protestors were photographed and later identified from the photos. Additionally, Cohen’s photograph also acts as an example of the colonial ideals that are still alive in modern documentary photography. Like many of the previously mentioned photographers, Cohen inserts himself in situations that he does not fully understand while portraying himself as the storyteller of a story that is not his to tell. Cohen’s photo is an example of the way in which white photographers position themselves in spaces that belong to Black and other people of color. While doing so the photographers turn the bodies of people of color into commodities by portraying these spaces in a romanticized way in which the only purpose appears to be making the photograph more marketable as well as digestible for white audiences. Cohen’s portrayal of the Ferguson protest is one that glamourizes the situation in a way that feels disconnected from the protest itself. Cohen’s photograph feels almost like a painted depiction of what the white audiences believe the protests were, instead of a more accurate portrayal of the everyday Black American who was fighting for their rights to coexist in a white society, without having the need to fear for their lives.
But the commodification of people of color is not something that is new to photography. In a similar fashion during the early 20th century, photographers used to portray women of color the way they imagined them to be and not necessarily the way they actually were like. One of the hundreds of examples of this are the French colonial postcards in which the aim was to turn women of color into commodities by sexualizing and successfully turning them into a fetish for white colonial men.
As Sentilles writes in her New Yorker article from 2017 “photographers wanted to take pictures of Algerian women as they’d imagined them: lounging in harems, smoking hookahs, trapped in the prison of their own homes, topless, sexually available”. Just like the title of the article declares, “Colonial Postcards and Women as Props for War-Making” which itself emphasize how women of color have been turned into commodities by not only being sexualized and fetishized but also by being used as pawns for war-making under the imperial racist excuse that brown men are oppressors who do not know how to nor are able to take care of their women.
Ultimately a question is raised from all of these topics which is what exactly is the role of the photographer. Consciously or subconsciously, photographers interfere in every photograph they take and their role in none of the previously discussed images was passive. Additionally, photographs are often seen as a representation of people or places but they can never be taken as the ultimate truth given the fact that the photographer’s own biases will always reflect through their photos. In most of the previously mentioned photographs, the subjects did not have a say in the way they were portrayed. This meant that the photographer’s choices helped create an image that was reflective of their values and not the way the subjects actually were like.
Nowadays the situation has not changed too much given the fact that we still have many examples of photographers going to so-called third world countries, -which are more accurately known as the countries that are still recovering from colonialization- to photograph its people while portraying them in ways that are not extremely accurate. Even though some photographers such as Jimmy Nelson have started to depict the subjects in positions of power rather than the usual way in which people of color are portrayed, they are yet to escape from the influence that colonialism still has on documentary photography due to the fact that generally the photographer still holds all the power and the subjects still do not have much of a say in the ways they are being portrayed nor have the opportunity to see or discuss the final product.
Alongside the photographer, it is also essential to ask ourselves who the intended audience of these pictures is. All of the photographs used in this article were taken by white photographers and all of the photos feel like the work of someone who was either not educated enough to portray these stories or had no interest in portraying more accurate singular stories. In addition, most of these images were intended for white audiences and they either helped reinforce the image that white people already had of people of color or helped white audiences in creating a false reality of the situations in which people of color found themselves in. By doing so the photographers served as a tool of white supremacism helping maintain the imperialistic beliefs that white people were superior and that Black people were helpless on their own thus satisfying the white gaze. Perhaps the need to satisfy the white gaze can be used to explain the reason why even nowadays white photographers continue to portray people of color in situations of struggle or helplessness. Moreover, it can be used to explain why white photographers have the necessity to tell the stories that are not theirs to tell. Besides, when one compares the difference between the way white photographers portray Black people in comparison to the way Black photographers portray Black people one can see a substantial difference. As an example, the works of Black civil rights movement photographers such as Gordon Parks or R.C. Hickman helped illustrate Black struggle as well as they helped illustrate a community that was filled with love and joy just like everyone else thus proving that there was and still is a way to document the struggles of racial groups without the need to just focus on glamourizing their pain.
In conclusion, when looking at photography throughout the years one can find a vast number of examples of how photography was and is still being used as a weapon of imperialism. Throughout history, photography has been used as a tool to maintain the supremacy of white people over other racial groups as well as being used as a way to legitimize the inhumane ways in which people of color have been treated. Even though the imperialistic sides of contemporary photography may be more subtle than what they use to be before, its existence in modern photography is undeniable. By emphasizing the struggles of racial groups, white photographers whether consciously or unconsciously, mimic the ways in which colonial photographers portrayed other racial groups. Through the works of contemporary white documentary photographers, we see people of color but we rarely get to know their stories thus working as a perfect example of how people of color are still seen as mere objects by a lot of white documentary photographers. In addition, the struggles of people of color continue to be romanticized by white photographers often resulting in the gaining of profit and in many instances international recognition. The photographs used in this article aimed to illustrate the objectification that people of color have been submitted to throughout history as well as to show that there is still a lot to be done when it comes to the issue of decolonizing the camera. Even though there is a lot more to be said about this topic, I would like to end this article by emphasizing the importance of diversity in documentary photography due to the fact that this is the most efficient way to decolonize the camera. Once it becomes more accessible for people of color to tell their own stories, we as an audience will be able to learn the real and more positive stories of people who have had others tell their stories for a tremendous amount of time. Once we manage to diversify documentary photography we will be able to learn about the stories which are often left out by white documentative photographs due to the fact that they are not deemed as dramatic enough. We will not only learn about the stories of struggles but also learn about the stories of love, laughter, and the overall joy of everyday people who manage to find happiness in situations in which happiness might be very hard to find.
References
Eleanor M. Hight, Gary D. Sampson (2004), Colonialist Photography: Imag(in)ing Race and Place, pp. 1–3
R.M. Blench (1995), The Work of N.W. Thomas as Government Anthropologist in Nigeria. The Nigerian Field, pp. 20–23
Sarah Sentilles (05.10.2017), Colonial Postcards and Women as Props for War-Making https://www.newyorker.com/books/second-read/colonial-postcards-and-women-as-props-for-war-making
