Realistic portrayal of war dead in images

[ElizabethClark]

Re: Realistic portrayal of war dead in images

Elizabeth, I'm glad to see you on this discussion.

Here's what is really circling around in my head: What if this was a much more common 19th century post-mortem image than that of war dead? What about a staged post-mortem image of a child? Does this change opinions?

Side-discussion to the actual topic. :)

If I turn off my Mother side, I can look at those post-mortems of non-war-casualty people with interest and objectivity. But, the more I study about the past, the harder it is to turn off the Mother, because the people of the past become very real to me. That's my personal connection to it, right, wrong, or otherwise. It sometimes comes as a shock to me when I stop and realize that *any* period image I'm looking at holds the face of someone who is dead right now... so for me, it doesn't matter whether the image is of a person alive at the time of the image being taken, or deceased.

I'm glad a challenging image was used. It's good to examine our responses to things now and then.

[Greg Barnett]

Re: Realistic portrayal of war dead in images

I am very glad that Mr Decker asked me to post this image. I am glad for the discussion. I am thankful for all that were and are willing to give all.

Nothing greater deed than a "man" who would lay down his life for another.

Respectful regards,

[GrumpyDave]

Re: Realistic portrayal of war dead in images

I was wondering if the recreated photographs by R. Gibson in the video "Frassanito: Battlefield Photography then and Now, The unknown civil War by GHistory.com effected folks in the same way? both real folks and "dummies" were used in it's production.

[DougCooper]

Re: Realistic portrayal of war dead in images

Being someone that has seen actual real war deaths, I asked myself how I would feel if I saw casualties from the war I recently fought in a recreated image no matter how noble the intentions. On that note, I felt a bit repulsed by the submittal.

Exactly how I feel. I don't want to see simulated photos of my real dead comrades some day, anymore than I suspect the real heroes from 61-65 wanted to see the same in a photo like this. What the hell do we know?

We take hits at reenactments because we need to show what the effects of CW combat were to folks watching...and to teach us what effect losses have on our ability to lead and be part of units on the field. That is useful and educational. Any other purpose for taking hits I find just as silly as this photo. This photo is useless as an educational vehicle because it is greatly eclipsed by the awful real deal. We don't need this photo to remind of us anything other than the interesting talent on the part of Wendell Decker and all those reenactors that tried to look like dead people.

To me, this isn't about honor, or even realism, or "making a statement about the horror of war", its about the coolest, most unusual photo. Its not even an intellectual exercise. In my opinion this photo won because it is different, not because it is accurate. If you think it is the best because it is cool, morbid, fascinating or whatever, just say so. But don't tell me it honors the real heroes. The real photos of their shattered bodies and their gravestones do that.

Whats next on the agenda? A Turner Ashby in death lookalike contest?

Did not take us long to descend from honoring someone who made a real difference in the hobby to another cool photo of simulated dead people.