2 photographs taken 35 years apart to the day by the same photographer

[Hamlette]

taken June 8, 2007


taken June 8, 1972 One of the most famous photographs from the Vietnam era.

both by photographer Nick Ut.

wierd.

[gemlake]

1. So he's become another tabloid photographer?

Sad.

[RB TexLa]

4. Pays the bills

[mondo joe]

6. Most news photographers take shots of a lot of different things. NT

[Redstone]

59. Do not judge, lest ye be judged.

Redstone

[devilgrrl]

2. Wow! How the mighty have fallen.

:crazy::-(:crazy:

[aquart]

3. Uh. Older man now. Not up to a warzone, maybe?

Is that at all possible in your judgement?

Nice to know that aging is "falling."

[devilgrrl]

7. Uh, that's not what I meant...

he could be covering Gonzales, Rice, Cheney, etc... you know, pertinent issues.

Aging? Oh my... go tell it to the late Richard Avedon, he was busy until the end and as brilliant as ever.

Oh how the mighty - as in "The Fourth Estate" - have fallen. And what a drag it must be to have to cover fucking Paris Hilton. That is what I meant.

Are we clear here?

Aging.... You're unbelievable. :eyes:

[greendog]

35. There was a lot of variety in Avedon's work...

...not sure why anyone would expect Nick Ut to make the same type of image over and over.

[devilgrrl]

40. Yep...

make it about me.

[calimary]

57. Nick Ut was, and is, a very dedicated photojournalist. I had the privilege

of working alongside him at the Associated Press here in L.A. Yeah, his photography went from the sublime (that Pulitzer Prize-winning Vietnam image) to the inane (Paris Hilton enroute back to jail). He's just a good, solid photographer and worker-bee.

If you worked with him and didn't know his background, you'd never guess he was a Pulitzer winner with one of THE most memorable and jarring photographs ever taken. I liked and admired him very much, and sometimes when I'd be in the gang-bang on Hollywood Blvd. when some celeb was getting his/her star on the Walk of Fame, there he'd be, crouched down below our mikes and cameras and tape recorders, to get the shot. He was quiet, humble, friendly, and sweet-tempered. He covered what he was assigned. When he first started helping at the AP bureau in Saigon (I believe it was), he was steeped in war. When he came to this country (and if memory serves, the AP worked hard to make sure he got out of Vietnam safely when Saigon fell), and went to work for the L.A. bureau, he covered what news was here in L.A.: mainly celebrity stuff. It's the nature of the beast and not a signal of "how the mighty have fallen." Nick Ut deserves FAR more respect than that, for the courage and poise and honesty and humility he always showed on the job, how he was willing to do whatever the assignment was, do a great job, deliver some great photos, never complain, never snap at coworkers, never get upset, never do the diva thing because he had a Pulitzer Prize and we didn't. He NEVER talked about it, but lemme tellya, I got little chills every day that I knew I had the privilege of working with THE guy who took THAT historic photo.

BTW, it may interest you to know some background trivia - the AP brass had some pretty serious debate about whether to publish that photo because of the nudity in it. They had very mixed emotions and didn't know whether the member newspapers and magazines would find it objectionable or not. They decided to go with it as is, no editing, no cropping, no airbrushing, no nothing. This little screaming girl was running down the road in the throes of the worst pain she'd ever experienced, because she'd just been frickin' NAPALMED. They decided the riveting, desperate image of her screaming agony was too important as a one-shot parable of the war and how it was destroying innocent people. And everybody ran with it once it was issued.

I loved Nick Ut. He was so sweet, so kind, so friendly, so unassuming. The whole bureau was full of what you might call "mild-mannered Clark Kent types." And he was rather a Superman type, too, IMO.

In the news biz, you go where you're assigned to go and you cover what you're assigned to cover. If you don't want to, you can go work somewhere else, doing something different. That's the nature of the job. And hey, at least he wasn't being shot at when Cybill Shepherd and others were being saluted with their stars on The Boulevard.

Watching the whole Paris Hilton insanity today (we in the press corps called these things "pig-fucks") made me glad, yet again, that I retired from that. My closest brush with something like that was when Zsa Zsa Gabor slapped that Beverly Hills cop and went to trial and then to jail for it. It was nuts. NUTS! As I recall, back in late summer of 1989 when the trial took place, the world was going to hell, Washington was going to hell, you name it, and ALL the AP Radio affiliates wanted was Zsa Zsa, and more Zsa Zsa and still MORE Zsa Zsa. I remember calling in with some report and having the supervisor on duty bemoan how ridiculous it was and how embarrassing that, of all the things we were covering around the world and the nation, THIS was what our members wanted. At the same time, he'd be hollering across the room to one of the tape editors to drop everything and take me in, PRONTO, so they could put it out on the network. It was ridiculous! But that's ALL anybody wanted and ALL anybody talked about. You wind up with some ridiculous and hilarious stories as though it were a war or something. But it's what you're supposed to do, and when you work in news in L.A., L.A. is a company town, and the company is show biz and that's a LOT of what you cover. Nature of the beast and that sort of thing. And if I were still working, believe me, I'd be on the Paris Hilton beat at this very moment. Probably would be putting in another night of unpaid overtime cutting tape and writing and recording reports and soundbites to feed in. And I'd probably call it quits for the night at about 3am - again. Nature of the beast.

[Bucky]

5. How is it bad that this man is paying his bills?

This was a silly complaint.

[slampoet]

26. double pst oops

?

[slampoet]

27. Crack dealers have bills to pay too, right?

Or are we making distinctions about making a profit on human suffering?

[Bucky]

55. Reporting someone's suffering is not the same as profiting by it.

Dow Chemical profited by the napalming of that Vietnamese village. The reporter only profits by reporting the bad that befalls other people--something I assume you want him to do.

[slampoet]

67. Whether I profit from Him getting paid for recording others suffering isn't the point.

I might benefit from someone's death but it doesn't make the circumstances of that death any better.

Getting paid to report suffering is profiting from suffering.

No suffering. No report. No money.


Without that little girl running burned down the road, neither the reporter or Dow Chem gets paid.

[Berry Cool]

68. In that case, I guess everyone profits from suffering.

No exceptions to the rule.

[Dhalgren]

8. Those are indeed strange career bookends...

[BrotherBuzz]

17. Yet in a perverted way, one could make the argument that both endeavors are oddly similar

[bling bling]

9. Good eye.

That's interesting. And wierd in some ways, true.

[Warren DeMontague]

10. That sums up American Journalism in a nutshell.

It's like the Michael Jackson trial was taking place right when Iraq started to go to shit- where do ya think those FOX reporters wanted to be; Baghdad? Or Santa Barbara?

Back to you, Chip.

[Deja Q]

37. Bull - the man is mocking America and its jounralism. Not being a slave to it!

Why can't people read between the lines? Or what am I not reading, since I'm clearly in the minority in this thread?

If I'm reading the photographer right, he knew that by taking a photo of Paris, he could drive home a HUGE point about the people we in America idolize today.

If I was in Vietnam in the 1960s to have taken that photo, and still alive today in America, to have lived through the ages of our society, I sure as hell would get flown out there if necessary get a snapshot of this so-called "idol" to show how badly America has devolved.

In the 1960s, he was in Vietnam showing the horrors bestowed on the South Vietnamese (Heaven help us if he was showing the plight of the Communist faction).

Contrast to 2007 - he was in California showing a bogus horror bestowed on a bogus person; because nobody cares anymore about anything else.

Had anybody else taken Paris' pic, there would be no point to discover. And there's lots of paparazzi, pepperoni, pappajohns, paparanazis, or whatever these amateur non-thinkers who ARE the journalists of today to have done it. Why would the SAME GUY, some 40 years later, otherwise be bothered?! Simple: To make a statement.

There is so much to be read from this genuinely fascinating turn of developments and more people bitch about it supposedly being more sell-out tabloid journalism... wrong.

[Warren DeMontague]

43. I wasn't criticizing the guy, specifically.

More where we're at in general. But your point is taken.

[greendog]

45. You might be right...

....especially if he realized that today was the anniversary of the earlier photo.

When you look at them together the first photo does shed a bit of light on the second one.

[Tsiyu]

54. HypnoToad

you have a great mind

:thumbsup:

[shadowknows69]

11. One helped end a war

one is helping to lobotomize America. Go back to the important stuff Nick.

[IndyOp]

12. If you mean to criticize Nick Ut - I suggest you learn more about him first.

I am haunted by a great movie called "War Photographer" about James Nachtwey - he has photographed violence all over the world including Kosovo, Africa, Indonesia and the West Bank. After decades of risking his life and having seen more than one person should see his friends spoke about him with tremendous admiration and concern. How many more times could he go and return alive and sane, whole?

THE BIGGER PICTURE
Nick Ut recalls the Events of June 8, 1972
http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0008/ng2.htm

[shadowknows69]

14. You're right Indy that was out of line

You go where the news is and unfortuneatly it's fucking Paris. Not France; the one that doesn't wear pants.

Feelin grumpy at the world tonight. I'm not usually this cynical. Oh, ok yes I am. Sorry Nick. I envy that you get to do that for a living.

[gemlake]

15. So his only alternatives

are to travel overseas and risk his life photographing "voilence," or to stay in America and stalk celebrities? Aren't there other stories here in America that he could photograph?

Someone find this guy a real job.

[mondo joe]

16. You're posting about Paris. Why are you dissing him for photographing something

you think worth your attention?

[gemlake]

19. Yes, and you're posting in a thread about Paris.

I'm not allowed to question why a famed photographer is reduced to chasing after Paris Hilton? Get over yourself.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

22. Yes, but mondo joe's not being a hypocrite.

:shrug:

[gemlake]

28. He is being obtuse though, just like you

[mondo joe]

29. Please answer: why are you dissing a photographer for documenting something

you consider worth your attention?

[gemlake]

38. I'm not dissing him, I'm dissing the state of

journalism that has someone like himself chasing after a car holding Paris Hilton!

Ugh. Why are you being so obtuse. see devilgrrls post

[mondo joe]

46. Photographing the news isn't "a real job"?

If it should be beneath his notice, why isn't it beneath yours?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

30. My momma says I'm a cutie.

[glitch]

18. Wonderful reading, thank you for posting. nt

[devilgrrl]

21. Why are so many taking this as a slight against the photographer?

When it's obvious that the media as a whole is the target? It's the media and what they send their people to cover that is being made fun of here.

Then again, I wouldn't be surprised me if Mr. Ut lived in the area and was annoyed by the army of helicopters hovering in the sky this morning. "Say, why not get a few shots of this circus?" That could be too. :shrug:

[wicket]

44. Thanks for the link

n/t

[calimary]

58. Indeed. Indeed. Indeed.

Good post. GREAT, in fact. Nick Ut survived and endured more than most of us are capable of imagining. And he never got jaded or conceited or angry or resentful. Just a really good, nice, sweet guy with virtually no ego, and a towering talent.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

13. bizarre.

.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

20. I'm reminded of Haing Ngor...

and what a weird, crazy town L.A. is.

[otherlander]

23. Whoa....

Is that really the same photographer?

My god, that would be like Upton Sinclair writing for a tabloid or something!

:wow:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

25. LOL

I've no idea if you're being sarcastic or not.

[Hamlette]

24. I did NOT mean to criticize Nick Ut, I meant to critize us. n/t

[rug]

31. Here's the video.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7110703835241279117&q=Kim+Phuc

Fuckers.

[slipslidingaway]

47. The second child in the video being carried by the woman, there

are no words, but that image will stay with me.

:( :(

[FloridaJudy]

49. Oh Jeez

I'm beyond speech: I'm crying. Have we learned NOTHING in 35 years? How many more pictures of injured and dying children will it take before we come to our senses?

I'd like to send that video to every saber-rattler on the planet, and ask them how they manage to sleep at night.

[Berry Cool]

32. The difference between these two photos is striking

in that I feel sympathy only for the girl in the older one.

Didn't he also take a photo of her just a few years ago? As an adult, holding one of her children?

[BrotherBuzz]

41. Nick Ut's actions saved Kim Phuc's life

<snip>

Nick Ut called in London, 28 years later, with Kim Phuc standing beside him: "When we reached there the hospital was overcrowded with war injured people. I had the impression that the emergency nurse who received us intended to hospitalise Kim Phuc, but not rush her to be treated - considering her a hopeless case and to die sooner or later. I got through to a doctor and explained who I was, what I had photographed and that Kim Phuc needs immediate help."

Kim Phuc said in London about Nick Ut (1999):" He saved my life. He's wonderful, isn't. he? I am so grateful that he didn't only do his job, but he's a human being helping another."

Kim Phuc now calls Huynh Cong 'Nick' Ut her 'Uncle Ut'.

<more>

A very interesting read and well worth the time to do so.

http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0008/ng3.htm

[Kokonoe]

33. Wow, brilliant and creepy

Could this be the poster picture to show what's wrong with the U.S. and maybe turn this country around.

[Deja Q]

36. Right place at the right time? Or did he fathom precious Paris' behaviour patterns,

much as an insider trader would find hot stock tips? :evilgrin:

Either way, it's a logical and appreciated development. I know full well what he's trying to say and it's a Goddamn shame HE is getting the graft for his pic of Paris. Funny that me, with my emotional disability can pick up what most other people in this thread cannot (he's just a tabloid photographer or no better than a crack dealer, whatthefuckever...)

I've hinted at what's likely his point in other responses.

[Deja Q]

34. Did all the kiddies in the second picture drink, drive, and violate their parole?

Paris is a brat.

I envy the photographer. He has so much more to say about humanity than the bleached 'superstar'.

My next career will be that of photojournalist... assuming nobody perfects the ability to offshore such a field... oops, they did.

[NJCher]

39. interesting, creative juxtapositioning by the OP

Cher

[Cetacea]

42. A perfectly valid photo-journalistic image. Good for him.

Suffering is suffering. And the guy nearly ended the war with the famous Napalm shot.
Too bad Bushco 1 and 2 prohibited photojournalists from the front..

[alcibiades_mystery]

51. I agree: moaning about the fate of American journalism on this thread

is hilarious and hysterical.

That said, it is uber-bizarre that these two photographs should be taken by the same photographer on the same day 35 years apart. That's just wacky.

[flying rabbit]

48. Interesting reactions to the OP. Ya think? n/t

[autorank]

50. More power to him. He took a photograph that changed history to a degree.

I hadn't seen that in a long time. I can remember my initial reaction. It's amazing art.

Good for him w/Paris. I hope he made a zillion dollars.

He certainly captured the wretchedness of the situation and her meltdown.

What's her major malfunction, btw? I understand that she had a suspended sentence. She got in trouble during the probationary period. Just about everywhere, that means one thing. You go back to court and the judge can execute the sentence. That's the deal you make, right in open court.

[BrightKnight]

52. Rat Pack & Mean spirited Paris bashing

I can't join the kick her when she is down party. The whole thing makes me nauseous. Nobody seems to be able to see past her media image. A lot of people would be emotional about going to jail and I doubt that she has had much sleep.

The sentence should not be set by the media. I doubt that a normal person would serve much of that sentence.
------

I guess the male equivalent of her little group would be something like the Rat Pack. Apparently it is no cool when women do it.

I like to think that if I had her privilege I would be doing a more with it. I admire her freedom and respect her right to live her life her own way.

I don't condone breaking the law but all of the other noise is irrelevant.

[Berry Cool]

69. I can see past her media image just fine.

I can see past it to see that she's someone who broke the law repeatedly and deserves to pay for it.

The media aren't setting the sentence. She's getting what a normal person without money who did what she's done would get. Maybe even better.

And please don't try to bring sexism into it. What a ridiculous red herring to throw into the mix! It doesn't matter whether she's a woman or a man, she should pay the price for what she did. I have yet to see anyone anywhere saying it would have been all right for her to do what she did had she been a man.

Your statement "I like to think that if I had her privilege I would be doing a more with it"? What does that mean? You'd be doing more good? Or be partying more?

"I admire her freedom and respect her right to live her life her own way." Why do you admire her "freedom"? It was earned off the work of others. She did nothing to achieve it herself, other than be born to the right people. What's to admire in that? And do you "respect her right" to drive recklessly without regard for those with whom she has to share the road?

"I don't condone breaking the law but all of the other noise is irrelevant." This IS about breaking the law. That's why they put her in jail. Sheesh.

It just amazes me how some people will hold up and worship another person just because she was born rich.

[alittlelark]

53. Both are NAKEDLY REAL shots....

One of a nakedly terrified socialite being forced to deal with the REAL WORLD,
The other of a nakedly terrified child dealing with the REALITY of her world.


As Stephanie Miller says "I think I'm gonna :puke: "

[Pachamama]

65. And they are both powerful snapshots for us of our world realities then and now...

And to think that right now, there are more Americans that seem to care about what's happening to Paris Hilton than to the children of Iraq, our soldiers, and everything else going on in our screwed up world right now....

So I don't think that the photographer has somehow demeaned himself...I think he caught a stark picture of our times....

Yep, as Steph Miller would say.... :puke:

[file83]

66. I was actually going to say that the composition of that Paris shot was interesting too.

Keep in mind, this photo is cropped. That is to say, the original photo more than likely included Paris's entire face and probably had her centered in a wider angle. I say this because the Paris shot is grainy (also caused by image enhancement).

So, the artist zoomed and cropped this photo on purpose for the effect. Let me explain.

The way her face is cut off means he is presenting Paris as marginalized. That's where the photographer thinks she should be. But he placed her to one half of the photo and something else to the right of her.

Is it nothing? Look again.

This creates an "other half" of the shot, the subject transversing the entire photo, yet no one seems to notice or speak about: the reflection of the power lines in the glass. Those are a symbol for energy, environment, War for oil, etc. They are right there in front of our eyes in this photo and in the real world, yet most people only focus on Paris Hilton.

The artist chose to give the power lines in the photograph (something even he may not have noticed while shooting it) emphasis with this composition. Composed in a different manner, the power lines would be insignificant.

But the artist also chose to crop and position Paris's face on one half of the photo in order to emphasize this point.

Such is the reality we find our selves in today. The photo is a metaphor about our collective focus. We see what we want to see. This is only possible because of the composition chosen by this excellent photographer.

So I think that this photo, as edited and submitted, is the artist's commentary on America's conflicted interests as a whole.

It's the emotional appeal of Paris's expression that draws us to Paris on the side of this photo, and paradoxically, the power lines also pull us into her because our eyes follow them until they cross over her head. Like that, in the real world, the numbness we feel about the war is what makes the Paris story such a popular story today.

[progressoid]

56. Sadly the average editorial photographer today makes just a little more than a 1972 photographer.

Newspapers, magazines and even online publications have been bleeding editorial photographers for decades. There are a handful that do well, but most just scrape by.

[Redstone]

60. I'll say in reply to your scorn yet again: Do not judge, lest ye be judged.

NONE of you has the moral authority to judges this photographer.

Unless you've been where he's been. And have you? Even one of you?

Redstone

[piesRsquare]

61. The artistic insight posted on this thread

regarding the photographer and the two photos is quite extraordinary to me (the commentary on society, the "nakedness", the confrontation with reality)...threads like this always give me a sense of being "home", as it's truly a safe and cozy feeling to connect with others who "think like I do", who can perceive and communicate depth and complexity within that which so many others only glance at with passing superficiality...

That said, another defense of Nick Ut for his photo of Paris Hilton (albeit more superficial)...

All artistic expression aside, this shot of Paris in the car being dragged back to court is worth a fortune. Nick Ut will no doubt be financially very stable for quite a while because of this photo alone. A very smart move, for that reason alone.

Makes me wish I were still living in L.A...

[RagingInMiami]

62. I think a lot people are reading way too much into this

But it's good to see that Nick Ut is still shooting.

[leftofthedial]

63. gawd bless a murka

[cui bono]

64. Fascinating find. nt

[treestar]

70. What a comment on America, and what constitutes News to

Americans.

Probably dozens of photos can be and are taken in Iraq that are just as horrifying as the 1972 photo.

But today, there is no audience for them. The viewers are more interested in Paris.