We, the viewers, are told that the Secretary of Defense didn’t want to see anything beyond the hanging chambers. Then we are shown a picture in which the Secretary of Defense is giving a disgusted look. We do not know if he is disgusted by what Saddam Hussein’s people had implemented in the prison. We only know that he looks displeased. The presentation of the photograph, however, is embedded within several shots of U.S. soldiers looking strong and capable in photographs which I might otherwise deem to be patriotic.
When Javal Davis is presented to the viewer, he speaks of arriving in this disgusting place full of fecal matter and urine and decaying bodies. The photograph presented at this time depicts a U.S. soldier standing on a mound with a rather gross looking atmosphere behind him, full of grey-brown liquid. The picture may have no connection to the speaker, but it certainly illustrates the type of atmosphere in which they arrived. It also depicts the manner in which the United States occupied that space—they were tourists. The picture seems to say to the view “Isn’t this place disgusting? I can’t wait to do my duty and then get back home to humane conditions.” The area around Abu Ghraib is not the normal space in which a U.S. soldier—or citizen—would inhabit. The picture could’ve easily been of someone standing in front of the Eiffel Tower or Ground Zero or the Pyramid of Menkaure…just showing you that I was there—documenting that I have traveled to somewhere new and/or important, regardless of the background.
The photograph of Lynndie England holding the leash with a prisoner dragging (crawling?) behind her is shown as a cropped photograph throughout much of the movie. At least one other woman was beside her and yet the image which circulated the prison and which was most frequently used by the media only showed England. The reasoning for this is unclear. Was Graner trying to protect the other woman? Is Errol Morris trying to suggest this as a possibility?
The photographs of Standard Operating Procedure, torture, sunsets, good times with friends, etc. is all scrambled together within each of the cameras that Morris used. Morris wanted to show that these were not just documentation of specific events, but a lifestyle there. No one would be taken aback at the prison if they were to go through a camera because they are things that they had seen—took part in. I am not suggesting that every American stationed at Abu Ghraib enjoyed the torture sessions and were taking pictures to remember the good times. I am, however, stating that Morris wished us to consider how mundane these events were to those who took part.
The photographs are portrayed in the movie with a white frame against a black background. My first thought was that they are presented this way so that they stand out—that it was all about visibility. I then realized how much the photographs presented in this manner resemble a scrapbook. Morris is suggesting that these photographs are, to the Americans who took them, akin to what any of us would put into a scrapbook at home. I began to think of which events I would document in this fashion—especially if I were abroad. I would document everyday life if for no other reason than to show how different it is from my life at home in the northeastern USA. The scrapbook idea also brings up the question of cropping. Of course I would crop photographs going into my personal scrapbook…if it made them fit better. Morris has me questioning if that is not exactly what Graner did at Abu Ghraib—made things fit to his liking. In any case, the photographs are presented as just some fun pictures that Graner and friends took while abroad.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2007/09/18/arts/20070919_ALBUMSS_AUDIOSS.html
At the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum lives a scrapbook of an Aushwitz officer. Unlike the photographs taken at Abu Ghraib, the pictures are PG and, for the most part, depict a bunch of nice looking men and women having a grand time just socializing. Some of the time the pictures look boring—mundane life. This is what becomes terrifying for many people. The Nazis were as human as those involved in the atrocities committed at Abu Ghraib and as you or I. Torture and genocide are not exceptions which occur sporadically—they are concepts which humans are astoundingly capable of carrying out.
Standard Operating Procedure. Dir. Errol Morris, 2008
http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/ssalbum/ 9/30/10
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2007/09/18/arts/20070919_ALBUMSS_AUDIOSS.html 9/30/10
I really like your idea of the scrap book and I think it works for the film in general. For example, we read parts of letters that one of the soldiers wrote to her wife while serving in Abu Ghraib. I think the white frame around each photo also worked to emphasize each image, to make us look at them and pay attention. I think this film works with visualilty really well in guiding the viewer through the time line of events and incorporating the voice over to this.
ReplyDeleteI think that the album at Auschwitz was a fabulous find to make your point. I must say, I completely agree with you. While watching the photo reel, I got chills; not because the photographs were particularly chilling, but because I know that while those officers were having their picnics, genocide was going off camera.
ReplyDeleteI feel similarly to the photos shown in SOP. Though those photos *are* particularly chilling, I have to wonder if even worse things were going on off camera. In fact, one of the soldiers interviewed made the point of telling us that what we saw "wasn't torture," it was just the softening up part. The foreplay, if you will, to the big act of torture for information.
You're right. I don't like the idea that any of these people, Nazi or US soldier at Abu Ghraib, is as human as I am. I cannot think of myself as capable of doing such terrible things to other human beings. After this unit, though, I have to wonder...what if I am?