At the MFA, I learned a lot about the photojournalism process: how photos were selected from negatives, by whom, and for what reasons. It was fascinating to see famous photos in the gallery and uncover the stories behind them. I learned that most negative editors were actually women, and this definitely surprised me that females were given such an integral role in the photojournalism process at that time and played a large part in the printing of many well-known images. One such notable instance was Peggy Sargent, responsible for selecting the best negatives from Alfred Eisenstaedt’s photos covering World War II victory celebrations. The fact that she also suggested cropping it to be the way it is now also highlights the major role female negative editors held.

The postulation that this photo was possibly an instance of sexual harassment was even more shocking. And having that fact brought to my attention made me pay attention to details I hadn’t seen before. For instance, that the woman being kissed in this picture seems to be holding a fork pointed straight at the man’s jugular and that the man’s arms appear to be aggressively trapping her head. This part of the exhibit and others like Alexandra Bell’s critiques on implicit bias made me realize the power that images held and how they can be greatly misleading at times.

The exhibit that resonated with me the most was the exhibition photos of the Japanese internment camps during WWII because it struck me as ironic that a majority of the images published were ones depicting civilians that appeared happy and smiling despite being forcibly removed from their homes, locked away, and segregated from the rest of society. The subtle racial bias and even the use of the slur “Japs” in the Life Magazine article published along with these images was also very shocking. The quote “They have everything except liberty” especially saddened me. It was also interesting to observe how the Japanese civilians were able to adjust to their new situation and make the best of it.

In addition, Julia Wachtel’s work critiquing Life Magazine’s “sometimes euphemistic presentation of U.S. ethnic discrimination” was a novelty. Her juxtaposition of the mundane life of the Japanese women and a painting of General MacArthur and her decision to compose certain parts of it into dots were cool to read about.

I learned that photography can be very impactful. The photomontage (almost like photoshopping) that was done to switch the truth was very interesting and scary. I do think people are more aware that photographs can be modified and don't always show the truth.

During the mid-20th century photos and photo-magazines were popular forms of media. Among them, Life Magazine was the most popular. It is estimated to have reached a quarter of the American population regularly. As such, they yielded great power. From what I saw in the exhibition, the publishers and editors of Life were aware of this power and the responsibility that came with it. This can be seen since the start of the magazine's prospectus. “Pictures have become a dynamic power in the Fourth Estate of the 20th century,” they understand. This awareness and thoughtfulness is seen repeatedly during the time the magazine was active. Notably when making decisions about publishing controversial images, like that of the Holocaust.

Prospectus, Life Magazine

Life's stance on Publishing Holocaust Photographs

From the exhibition, Alfredo Jaar’s works stuck out the most to me; his ”The Silence of Nduwayezu” is one of the most powerful artforms I have seen. I had heard about the event tragic Rwandan genocide before and the fact that around a million people died during that. But Jaar’s work gives a soul to that number. He lays out 1 million slides on a light table where each slide has a translucent picture of a kid’s eyes. ‘Eyes are the window to the soul,’ they say, and looking into these slides with a magnifier, one looks into the eyes of a kid who saw his parents killed before his own eyes. And presenting a million of these eyes, and thus stories, is a powerful way of depicting the scale and extent of the tragedy which just saying the number ‘1 million’ cannot justify.

The Silence of Nduwayezu, Alfredo Jaar, 1997

The retrospective on the photojournalism done by Life Magazine during its lifetime was eye opening in many ways. Specifically, the articles which focused on the disparities between image and text reinforced my understanding of the complicity of the media in supporting white supremacist ideologies. Even when covering events where law enforcement is clearly the aggressor, the articles paint the events as just retribution to activists and protestors. Life was written for a predominately white audience, and the focus of the articles certainly showed that. I also really appreciated the exhibit which edited articles in the New York Times to underscore the biased messaging which occurs daily. I thought it was a impactful way to force the viewer to reconsider how framing can affect our perception of an event, and how even traditionally left leaning media outlets have a tendency to protect the systems that oppress people.

The exhibit that really stuck with me was the section at the very back which discussed the pictures of the Holocaust. Photojournalism is one of the only ways which can truly convey the atrocities committed against Jewish peoples in Europe, and Life's commitment to posting the uncensored photos was an important step towards acknowledging the atrocities caused by antisemitism in the Nazi regime. Most Americans were unaware of the true extent of the concentration camps until after the war had ended, and photos like these were widely circulated. These large scale, unadulterated glimpses into the murders perpetrated across Europe were extremely impactful, and should continue to serve as a reminder for the dangers of populism and just how terrifying the existence of Neo-Nazis is.

The MFA’s Life Magazine and the Power of Photography was a captivating exhibit that included a breadth of work from Life Magazine photographers, while contrasting it with several modern photographic artworks. One of the first things I noticed in myself upon entering the exhibit was how much more I have grown to appreciate photographs in museums; previously, I did not have a critical eye to explore the depth of an image and think of the creation process. I was also reminded of the importance that analog, B&W photography held in media during the period when Life was active. I appreciate the exhibit’s coverage of the teamwork process behind each photographic project: the journalist, scouts, and level of embeddedness that came with each assignment. Finally, I thought the background for the creation of Life and its early mission were valiant and admirable; to bring the world to many people’s eyes with truthfulness and depth was a lofty and noble goal.

The LIFE exhibit at the MFA was a fascinating collection of multimedia art that both celebrated and criticized the era of Life magazine. I was fascinated by the extent of Life magazine's monopoly over media representation in photojournalism, from the impressive feat of owning the rights to the moon landing photos to how certain stories got attention while others did not.

Out of the artists in the LIFE exhibit, Alfredo Jaar particularly got my attention. I enjoyed his methodology of adding to an image through simple devices (such as using dots to emphasize the surprising lack of white people at Martin Luther King's Funeral). I found myself agreeing with him that 2+2 here is no longer necessarily 4, since by adding to your photos through multiple devices you can create an explosion of meanings. This is precisely what Jaar has done in his work by marking the people in the photo, the artpiece can now deliver a message that it never could do on its own.

Any exhibit that highlights a critical but forgotten piece of history teaches us mixed messages. New ages come with young and bold passion to replace their predecessors, but will inevitably be usurped by another new age. This is my take of the Life magazine exhibit. A slice of history, where it boldly pushed the culture of its time, and went to the sidelines with the popularity of television. That it is forgotten does not mean it was not impactful. You can see the impact it had with the Vietnam photos. If you, like me, sensed a familiarity in those images, it is likely that those pieces from Life taught our culture what a typical scene in the Vietnam war looked like.

I do not put photography itself and Life in the same bag; Photography as an art has not been pushed to the sidelines (though by this point we’ve read and heard of so many people crying that). Instead, I believe the democratization of photography with digital media has allowed for far more exploration and creativity than previous times. Life magazine, on the other hand, was simply a popular form of media that met the end of its era.

Perhaps ironically my favorite works were not even of Life magazine, but featured contemporary art. I loved Alexandra Bell’s work with the New York Times edits. The relatability of that work, i.e., it’s focus on racial bias in media, and the fact that it surprised you when you found out the edits are not really by NYT is probably what made it so strong. Perhaps that is what makes art subjective; the relatability of subjects, and how that relation depends so much on when you are born. I would have loved Life if I was born in that period of time. I do not love it now. Does that mean photographic art has an expiration date?

The pieces of Life magazine that I thoroughly enjoyed were photojournalistic ones, even though they should be taken with a grain of salt (remember the photoshop-life edits made to war-pictures). My favorites were the pieces done on the concentration camps, and how simply enlarging the photos to full print with minimal text made the horrible dread and guilt confront the reader.