 |
  |
| Based on an amused spectator's list Send FReepmail if you want on/off MSP list |
|
| The List of Ping Lists | |
Posted on 09/14/2006 12:28:14 PM PDT by Naptowne
Yesterday, Slate posted this piece criticizing Frank Rich's New York Times column about the 9/11 photo shown here. The picture was taken by Magnum photographer Thomas Hoepker on the afternoon of 9/11. Calling the image "shocking," Rich suggested that the five New Yorkers were "relaxing" and were already "mov[ing] on" from the attacks. Slate's David Plotz disputed that characterization of the picture, arguing that the subjects had almost certainly gathered to discuss the attacks and to find solace in others' company. Rather than showing callousness, as Rich suggested, it depicted civic engagement. But since neither Rich nor Plotz knew exactly what the five New Yorkers in the photo were doing or thinking, we invited them to contact Slate and tell us.
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
Frank Rich is an arrogant ivory-tower inhabitant who thinks he knows the mind of everyone, thus can sit in judgment even of an anonymous group in a photo.
Always good to see frank rich reaffirm what a POS he is.
We were in a profound state of shock and disbelief, like everyone else we encountered that day. Thomas Hoepker did not ask permission to photograph us nor did he make any attempt to ascertain our state of mind before concluding five years later that, "It's possible they lost people and cared, but they were not stirred by it." Had Hoepker walked fifty feet over to introduce himself he would have discovered a bunch of New Yorkers in the middle of an animated discussion about what had just happened. He instead chose to publish the photograph that allowed him to draw the conclusions he wished to draw, conclusions that also led Frank Rich to write, "The young people in Mr. Hoepker's photo aren't necessarily callous. They're just American." A more honest conclusion might start by acknowledging just how easily a photograph can be manipulated, especially in the advancement of one's own biases or in the service of one's own career.Still, it was nice being described as a young person. I was forty at the time the photograph was taken.
He was 40 and considers himself young. I'm almost 52 and I consider myself young, too......
Frank, when you assume, you make an a$$ of u and me...
|
|
| Based on an amused spectator's list Send FReepmail if you want on/off MSP list |
|
| The List of Ping Lists | |
But I repeat myself...
I saw the original article and remember wondering how Rich could tell that these people were indifferent.
Guess Rich will use the "fake but accurate" defense.
Frank Rich, FOAD.
The NYT's favorite tactic.
Hmmm. Wonder what Frank Rich was doing that day? Wonder how he would objectively characterize his actions?
Wonder how he would characterize the actions of the photographer, who was obviously so callous about the day's events that he was out sniffing around for a photo he could sell?
Rich was the Times' theatre critic. He got the job on the editorial page because he's Pinch's boyfriend.
All of them are focused on the discussion, every one of their bodies are directed at the voice.
If I were walking up on this group I would be aware that I was interrupting an intense discussion.
Another cousin is a Newark fireman and when he came off-duty he and his bretheren reported to Ground Zero and would spend days sifting through and looking for survivors.
At the time I worked for Praxair in Dallas. One of our Associates who was the warehouse forman for the medical supply warehouse in Hoboken NJ, responded heroically. He knew that supplies would be needed so he filled up a semi with emergency rescue air breathing cylinders, O2 hospital cyclinders and other gas supplies. He didn't have any invoices but knew the paperwork could wait but the supplies must move NOW! When he tried to cross the George Washington Bridge was stopped because he had no permission slip and Manhatten was locked down. He was able to "sweet talk his was past the guards and deliver these urgently needed supplies.
Dumb @ss Rich was propably in an editorial meeting where the topic, "How to Blame Bush" was the order of the day!
Nailed it.
Meanwhile we've almost completely forgotten the people who celebrated the attacks that day IN THIS COUNTRY.
And they may have been small in number, but certainly did exist.
One employee of the city of Houston gloated in an email exchange. He was later terminated (I think over a prostitution solicitation charge stemming from another email).
I bet if you look at the next Frank Rich column, you will be able to find the letters that will spell "I made a mistake." Of course they may not be in that order, and there will be other lettes between them.
Gee the NYTimes is 100% wrong. How unusual.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.