WP1

Photography is something that, when analyzed can be incredibly insightful. There are several ways that you can look at photos that can make viewing them much more meaningful, rather than just judging it based on whether or not you like the picture. In the photo “new labour” there are certain aspects that are truly meaningful and do a good job of capturing the overall theme of the picture. It is a good idea to view pictures from different viewpoints and be able to fully understand what the photographer is trying to relay to his audience. The most easily understandable theme in this photograph is the idea of resistance and defiance, most easily comprehendible by the the large

arrows pointing in the opposite direction of the immense crowd.

"New labour” was taken in London, England in April of 2003. At the time, the governing party in was called “The Labour Party,” which explains the pun in the title of the photograph “new labour.” It was taken right in the heat of the invasion of Iraq, which was led by The United States of America, but was backed by British forces. Although the United States was the main force in this war with 248,000 troops, Great Britain had the second most with 45,000. The leaders of these nations claimed that the reason for the war was “to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction to end Saddam Hussein’s support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people.” Several

countries in Europe were opposed to the war. The main counter argument to George Bush’s stance on getting weapons of mass destruction out of Iraq was that the Iraqi people in fact did not even have weapons of mass destruction and that the only reason we were going over to Iraq was to drill for oil. People called Bush a power thirsty leader and viewed him as more of a dictator than a president. Opinion polls taken in Spain and Italy revealed that upwards of 90% of the population opposed the war. In London, it is estimated that between one and two million people marched in the streets to protest the war. There were over 600 cities across the world that marched during the time of invasion, which The Guinness Book of World Records estimates as the largest mass protest movement in history. Police said that in February of 2003, the biggest demonstration of protesters in the history of London took to the streets to shows their anti-war feelings. (BBC) Europe in general was incredibly upset with the Iraq war. It wasn’t just a few countries whose citizens turned out to show endorse the protest of the Iraq war. According to Dominique Reynie, a French academic, between January 3 and April 12 of 2003, thirty six million people worldwide took part in around three thousand protests.

There are many ways that the picture has characteristics of anarchy. Typically, streets are a place to drive automobiles and this street in particular appears to be a one way street. The group of people here refuse to follow the social norm of walking on the sidewalk because they have decided that what they believe in is more important than following typical social norms. The street is a place where people on foot are usually not welcome except for when given the go-ahead to cross a street. Growing up, we are told to never cross the street without looking and definitely not to be congregating in the street.

Pathos can be found in this photo, however, you would need to know the background of this photo to be able to make a knowledgeable, educated summary of it. This picture is trying to bring out the idea that the Iraq war was unnecessary. The people walking away from the arrows could put a “cause” in to play that says they are defiant towards the United States’ position in the war. The effect here is that you may have many people who are for this and many who are not. This means that this photo is not just a photo to look at and say “Oh, that sure is pretty!” Rather, it sends a message and the audience who views it can either be for it or against it. It divides the audience in half, just as it has done with the arrows on either side with the street line going down the middle.

viewing this photograph, it is important to take into account three very important aspects; The hue, brightness, and contrast are three elements that make this picture so powerful. There is in fact, very little brightness in this picture since it was taken in black and white. The black brings out a sense of focus, darkness, and anger. Being black and white gives this photo a sense of gloom. It seems as though the colors very closely represent the feelings of not only the United States at the time of the war, but the entire world. Growing up during the Iraq war, I don’t recall a single time when I would turn on the news and not see news anchors and politicians arguing over what was right and wrong in the war. The fact that this picture, along with every other picture in the album is taken in black and white gives it sharp detail especially on the main focal points, the arrows, but makes sure that the highlights of the photo are not completely blown out. There are smoother transitions from shade to shade and it is overall, a lot easier to view. The crowd is only seen on the top half of the photo. The bottom half is extremely easy to view because of the fact that there are only two colors on it. There are also two vectors of attention that catch the eye. The two arrows pull the viewer much closer to the photo because they point directly at them. The photo is also slightly tilted, which makes it seem like the viewer is part of the crowd and not a third party viewing it. This photo really makes the viewer feel like he/she is a part of what is happening. When I viewed this photo, I felt an immediate connection. I felt as though I was being pulled into the picture. It was as if I was walking behind the crowd of protesters. I felt a direct connection with the people in the street. After doing more research and learning that the picture was taken during the Iraq war, I felt closer to the crowd. Being raised in a Democratic family, I was never as ambitious about showing my thoughts on the war as these people were, but I still never thought the war was a good idea and would consider myself to believe some of the same things that these people do.