Network / Groong
to a Photograph of “Armenian Widows with their Children” Wrongly Dated 1915. It actually dates from 1909.
Plus a comment on why it is important to get an accurate ‘paper
trail’ for photographs.
Armenian News Network / Groong
September 22, 2015
Special to Groong by Abraham D.
Krikorian and Eugene L. Taylor
Long Island, NY
“Guh Badayee” [Things happen.]
“Ahl Chapuh G’antse’nehn” [They exceed
we pay very little attention to Copyright symbols © since so much of the
economically developed world seems nowadays to be ever more deeply embedded in
a culture wherein claims to intellectual property rights to trivia and the like
abound. A dear academic friend of ours,
the late Professor A.N. Rao of Singapore, used to quip that
“They jealously guard their ignorance!” None of this means that we
do not respect copyright when it is legitimately claimed. We most certainly do, and indeed do our best to
seek permission and give credit when credit is due. But there are many occasions where we simply
chuckle and go on with our work, albeit noting that a given situation is no
longer very amusing. It is
irritating. Anyone who wants a very
special, wise and humorous exposition on “Copyright” is encouraged to access Groucho Marx’s
retort to a lawyer’s letter from Warner Brothers on alleged infringement of
rights to the use of the name “Casablanca”.
The letter is in the Library of Congress and has been posted online in
many locations. It is a classic and
certainly worth reading. “What’s in a
to the point, we recently were re-shelving books in our library and once again
noticed that the dust jacket to Raymond Kévorkian’s magnificent book The Armenian Genocide, A Complete History
(I.B. Tauris, New York and London, 2011) utilized a half-page sized image that
we knew was incorrectly described on the inside back flap as “Armenian Widows
With their Children, September 1915.
Photo: akg-images/ullstein bild. Cover design: Ian Ross.”
far as we know from our research the earliest that the photograph appeared was in
The Literary Digest (NY) volume 38,
no. 23, June 5, 1909 pg. 957. It may
well have been earlier but we have not encountered it. The June 5 article was entitled “Who Will End
the Armenian Killing?” See below for a
scan of the full page. This enables us
to state firmly that any attempt to attribute the photograph later than May 1909
does not stand. In a word, dating the
photo as from “September 1915” is wrong. It may well have been used after 1909, perhaps
even 1915, but that is another matter.
accompanying caption reads “Armenian Refugees near Adana.”
the most noteworthy thing about this print is that it is part of the Bain
Collection in the Department of Prints and Photographs at the Library of
Congress in Washington, D.C.
description to “Armenian widows, with children, Turkey” includes “Date created/Published:
9/16/15 (date created or published by Bain [Bains News Service]).” It seems reasonable that the information
accompanying the dust jacket derives from confidence in the Library of Congress
Prints & Photographs Online Catalog information which if so, is wrong.
with children, Turkey." Bain News Service publisher.
Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Online Catalog.
(digital file from original negative); Call Number LC-B2-807-10 [P&P]. It further states
“General information about the Bain Collection is available at
have discussed the Bain collection before in some detail in connection with an ever-increasingly
widely used photograph of an Armenian widow and her children. See our “Widowed through Violence, Dirt Poor,
Desperate, Burdened with Heart-Wrenching Decisions Concerning Her Three
Children: the appalling woes of an Armenian woman from Geghi [Գեղի]
(Erzerum Vilayet) after the Hamidian Massacres: A publicity photograph of 1899”
posted on Groong, Armenian News Network, September 7, 2015. The Bain Collection is described in Endnote 8
and an authoritative reference citation is given from one of the specialists at
the Library of Congress who is especially knowledgeable about it.
brief word is in order about photographs used on covers of scholarly works
dealing with the Armenian Genocide. We
recognize and appreciate that there are many ideologies of remembrance, and many
views on what symbolism is appropriate for this remembrance. Many might argue that there is no appropriate
symbolism, and thus the most respectful and tasteful approach is to keep things
simple and direct. No imagery.
on the other hand, some semblance of appropriate symbolism is to be adopted, we
would urge that it should at least be fully relevant, and as accurately
attested and attributed as possible.
in our opinion, there are few photographs relating to the Armenian Genocide
that are so readily recognizable to any viewer or observer that they would be informative
and self-evident - iconic as it were. We
would argue that the horrors of the Armenian Genocide seem hardly conveyed in
any accurate measure by the image selected – no matter who
selected the image in the first instance. (We are cynical enough to recognize
that ‘free’ downloads of high quality scans from the Library of Congress Prints
and Photographs are bound to be an incentive to those faced with pressures of
cutting costs. Besides the Library of
Congress is a world class institution with high
credibility and therefore nominally spares the user from having to do any
additional research. But all sources
should be used with caution and the responsibility falls on the user. The Library of Congress in fact states that.)
back to the photograph in question, we confess that the widowed women and
children nominally representing the Armenian Genocide in some direct or perhaps
subtle or even obtuse way or other escapes us. A fair amount has been said about
“gender-specific” aspects of the Armenian Genocide. This photo might be taken to suggest that
women and children were somehow given special treatment, and only fighting-age
men were murdered. This is simply not
true despite what some self-styled experts and pundits may have opined. The well-known, vicious and varied patterns
of genocide are in no way evasive. On
the other hand, what is to be interpretable from a photo of widowed mothers
with their children? This is not simply
a question posed by those of us who do not hesitate to be polemical when we
think it is required to knock some sense into a situation. We went close to berserk when we encountered
the expression “Existential genocide” in a nominally scholarly article on genocide
– mercifully not relating to the Turkish Genocide against the
Armenians. The phrase means nothing to
anyone with half a neuron!
to the point, it is of interest to us that the French edition of this work, the
original publication in 2006, did not utilize the photograph of Armenian Widows
that we have spoken of above. Instead,
the publisher apparently saw fit to utilize a color post card issued in 1908 to
commemorate the restoration of the Ottoman Constitution with Sultan Abdul Hamid
II as the focal point, and the emphasis on the theme “Long Live the
Constitution, Liberty, Equality, Fraternity” [in French as used on the post
card, Vive la Constitution, Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité (minus acute accents
on the post card we own at least). The
Armenian language ‘banner’ reads Getseh Sahmanatrutiun, Azadoutiun,
Yeghpayroutiun, Havasaroutiun [Long Live the
Constitution, Liberty, Fraternity, Equality; note the difference in order]. The other banners are in Greek, Turkish,
French, and Ladino [Judeo-Spanish in Hebrew characters]. What we are ‘hinting’ at is that this imagery
is not very informative either. In fact,
the printing is so tiny, that without a magnifier, one cannot read it. The imagery, while colorful, certainly would
not elicit, we believe, any measure of reaction from the average viewer. It would be a long jump from the promise of
the restored Constitution to the failure and reality of a State-organized and
perpetrated crime as heinous as Genocide.
So, where are we left and what are we to conclude?
have slowly but surely come to the conclusion that authors of very fine books
are left open to criticism because “production” matters are rarely left to
authors. Parceling out chores to those
who may have talents in graphic design but little specialized knowledge of
photographs and their interpretation does not help matters either. The same might be said of photograph
selection as well. Errors creep in. Sometimes they exceed the mark and end up,
accidently or by design, being protected by copyright. We shall not go there either, just now. Again and as we have stated time and time
again, the reality of the Armenian Genocide does not rely on photographs or
imagery. It would be nice, however, if
people would be a bit more careful in their selection of illustrative matter. Many University and scholarly libraries remove
dust jackets from hardback books. These
are frequently discarded. We personally
do not like this practice and merely state that in so doing, one frequently
loses ready access to information that might have instructive value. So far as we know the soft
bound copy of the English-language edition has not appeared. If it ever does we hope more attention will
be given to the choice of imagery if imagery is used.
we have said before, we decided long ago that the area of attestation and
attribution of photographs needs considerable work to get matters into shape. This
is yet one more tiny step to clarification of
Library of Congress has always been direct in seeking input from those who have
modifications or additions to be made to their catalog descriptions. Publishers
on occasion are sensitive to criticism.
Groong articles, such as this one, to any other media, including but not
limited to other mailing lists and Usenet bulletin boards, is strictly
prohibited without prior written consent from Groong's Administrator.
Copyright 2015 Armenian News Network/Groong. All Rights Reserved.
| Home | Administrative
| Armenian News
| World News