Study on The Boston Photos

As a human being most of your time is spent stumbling around this tiny rock in the universe, trying desperately to add your own personal brushstroke to the intricate mosaic of life. It is simply human nature to avoid the frightening topic of death, however unavoidable and relevant it may be. Because we like to dance around the uncomfortable idea of inevitable death, we tend to be caught off guard when it is thrown into our faces through mass media. One such instance of nation-wide exposure to death occurred began in July 1975 when a photojournalist from The Boston Herald American set off an avalanche of controversy by publishing photos of a woman and a child falling to their deaths from a fire escape (Ephron 1).

The Boston Photographs (as they were commonly referred to) gained popularity as they were circulated by various media outlets throughout the country. Many were outraged and labeled the photos as inappropriate and taboo and the debate still exists about their place in the public domain. Some literary experts, such as Nora Ephron, believe that such photos have value as emotional, human pieces that highlight one of the most important parts of life: death. In her essay, The Boston Photographs, Ephron suggests that such pictures should be published as representation to the human side of news stories. She suggests that photos like the Boston Photographs serve as a reminder to the public that there a people behind the headlines (1-6). I suggest that Ephron is wrong in her assumption and that publishing of such photos only kindle our society’s growing de-sensitization to mortality.

There is no denying that these photos were sensational, they swept through the country and were published in more than four hundred newspapers. The photos were edgy, new and explored a topic that is hardly ever seen in the news. Everyone saw the pictures and nearly everyone disagreed with them being published. Ephron herself reveals the fact that the public uproar from the photos was extensive and that those who published them were thought of as villains for invading the privacy of death. It seemed that the public was not ready for such gritty, real life depictions of death in their news. Charles Seib of the Washington Star stated that ‘“the largest reaction to a published item”’ that he had ever seen. One reader even equated the voyeuristic photographs to ‘“Assigning the agony of a human being in terror of imminent death to the status of a side-show act”’ (3-5).

As negative as the public reaction to the photographs are, there still may be a shred of validity to publishing pictures that deal with death. Ephron mentions that the news follows a trend of portraying events such as disasters and accidents that involve loss of human life from a cold and analytical perspective, giving statistics and depicting the physical aftermath without any acknowledgment to the victims (5). In a way, this approach can be seen as a method to undervalue death. Some may even argue that not showing a body eliminates an individual from the news altogether leaving only a headline. It is plausible that humans may lose true sympathy for the dead if we never have an opportunity to see what death really is. Death in its raw, un-adulterated form like in the Boston Photographs.

As useful as it may be to understand and value the complexities of death, there is no need for excess representation of death like in the Boston Photographs. People do not need a morbid picture of the average American citizen dying an unfortunate death to inspire in them the meaning of death. The media as we know it is essentially saturated with grizzly tales of the carnage of global conflict and images of genocide, random acts of violence, and ultimately death in general.

On a daily basis, the average citizen is subject to exposure to numerous morbid images like the Boston Photographs on nearly every media outlet. It could even be argued that so much exposure to death is de-sensitizing people to death itself. With the recent rise in reports of death and violence around the world and what seems to be the rise of mass killings and wanton violence becoming common place in the American mainstream it is hard to see any other explanation other than people are starting to just not care anymore. Whether or not this is the case has yet to be decided but what cannot be debated is the constant stream of death that the news bombards us with every day. Ephron believes that the Boston Photographs deserve to be published because they make the audience acknowledge death and they are beautiful photographs (6). I say this reasoning is a pathetic excuse to justify yet another dark image of death polluting our collective consciousness.

Death is the only constant in the complexity of human life. It is unavoidable and confusing and everyone knows about it. It can be a difficult thing to deal with and it should not be taken lightly. Our culture is dealing with an epidemic of sorts in which our lives are attacked by visions of death and morbidity regularly, making it easy for an individual’s perception of death to be warped in a negative way. It is because of this prevalence of death in day to day life that I suggest that the Boston Photographs have no place in the public domain. To me they are just another unnecessary invasion of the privacy of death. The average human has a hard enough time making heads or tails of this crazy existence and images like the Boston Photographs are just another distraction from what could arguably be our purpose here- enjoying life.