Didn’t know either until I read my paper today. Think it was screened earlier on in the year on the Arts channel which I don’t have. So was glad I was able to see it tonight. He is one of my favourite photographers.
I am not surprised. Loved his work. Learnt a bit too. I may watch it again on iplayer it was so good although quite harrowing in parts. I am pretty sure I could not have coped so well with the places / subjects he was taking photographs of.
I recorded this and am watching it now. Like he says it raises questions of conscious. Should a photographer photograph scenes of dead bodies, people being executed and slaughtered? I think the answer is yes because the world needs to know what’s going on and the realities of war. This must deeply effect the photographer emotionally. His photographs are horrific enough is black and white, but in colour there would have been truly awful. McCullin got his message over by showing the reality and not the glory of war.
Agree with some of your points Pete. When I interviewd Kate Adie as part of my dissertation,in 2000 at the Imperial War Museum London,I soon realised we don’t know half of it. The censoring of images is a sensitive issue,rightly so,we had talked about whether we see war warts and all. But as she reminded me as with one of our more recent conflicts Bosnia, there is the need to keep some images off of our screens,newspapers etc, so that when it came to apportioning blame etc, a fair trial would be given. That is the perertrators couldn’t drag out the court hearings stating that they couldn’t get a fair hearing because all had been laid bare for the world to see. Ironic when you begin to understand was done in the name of freedom,religion etc.