An Artist's Role in Times of War

Originally published at: https://www.naturephotographers.network/an-artists-role-in-times-of-war/

The world is going to pieces and people like Adams and Weston are photographing rocks! – Henri Cartier-Bresson (regarding social significance in photographs)

As artists, it may be difficult to determine what role, if any, may be played during times of war. For landscape and nature photographers, especially, there may seem to be heavy-handed truth to the quote above, as said by Henri Cartier-Bresson. The photographing of rocks, of natural elements, seems to be of menial help to any war effort as compared to building tanks or heading to the front line. And to a certain degree, it is true: the resulting photographs of nature are unlikely to help the ongoing war, let alone stop it altogether. A strong argument may be made regarding the longevity of nature versus human lives, and how the ongoing conflict is of greater, more immediate importance.

Yet this does not mean there should be shame filled in the hearts of artists during these such times. As Robert Adams says in his book, Beauty in Photography, “photography as art can seem an inhuman escape” in times of social crisis. It is thanks to this ability to escape the world while viewing art, that it’s being filled with strong inner meaning is most beneficial. When done right, artwork may help to garner within viewers strong emotions, thus helping to bring about a sense of confidence, specifically in those who already feel strongly toward one idea or the other. Once stirred, the emotions lead to actions in the form of revolts, protests, and, in the modern day, blathering on social media. “And though poems and pictures cannot by themselves save anyone […] they can strengthen our resolve to agree to life.”

A prime example would be Picasso’s Guernica as made in 1937 at his Paris home. This piece was created in response to the bombing of Guernica (a Basque Country town in northern Spain) by Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, as requested by the Spanish Nationalists, on the 26th of April, 1937. Once completed, Picasso’s piece was exhibited at the Spanish display during the 1937 Paris International Exposition; it was then shown at various venues around the world. The money raised through its touring was used to help with the Spanish war relief, along with bringing about worldwide attention to the Spanish Civil War (1936 – 1939).

Even a single piece of artwork may have a grand impact on the feelings of the public, especially as it pertains to the spreading of knowledge. It is said that, when a German officer saw a photograph of Guernica in Picasso’s home and asked him if he had done that, Picasso replied quite simply: “No, you did.”

Yet what about artists working within the realm of nature? For those, we turn to Cartier-Bresson’s quote, once again.

Cartier-Bresson had joined the film and photography unit of the French Army in 1940 – only to be captured by German forces that same year – which likely made himself feel to be of a higher regard than Weston and Adams, who at the time were doing little for the war effort. Being thirty-two years old at the time, Adams was only six years his senior, expunging the idea that Adams was too old to join the war.

Adams did have an opportunity to join the war effort as brought to his attention by Edward Steichen, who was forming a Naval Aviation Photographic Unit in early 1942. Adams was asked to help with the building and directing of a state-of-the-art darkroom and laboratory in Washington, D.C. Forever having a heavy ego, Adams agreed on the condition that he would be commissioned as an officer. Though Steichen was fine with that, Adams’s unavailability until the first of July due to a photographic project in the Sierras forced Steichen to pass and look elsewhere.

It was not until October of 1943, through July of 1944, that Adams did anything with his photography which Cartier-Bresson would deem “socially significant” and helpful toward the war effort. Brought on as a photographic consultant to the Armed Services through the Office of War Information, Adams was charged with photographing the Japanese Internment camps at Manzanar. By the time Adams arrived, the incarcerees were quite used to their unfortunate living situations and were able to enjoy the fruits of their labor. Because of this, they were much more receptive and welcoming toward Adams, a strong juxtaposition compared to Dorothea Lange’s treatment.

The argument brought upon by Cartier-Bresson falls flatter with the reference to Edward Weston, who was fifty-four years of age at the time the former had joined the war. Given his age, it was unlikely for him to lead the front lines. Even still, he and his wife, Charis Wilson, became Aircraft Spotters at Yankee Point, California for the Army’s Ground Observers Corp, Aircraft Warning Service. At the same time, he photographed on Wildcat Hill (Point Lobos was closed to the public during the war), likely making photographs of rocks.


It is unreasonable to believe every individual around the world must be doing something to directly help in each war effort. The world ultimately cannot stop, placing all its focus upon conflicts between the human species. Even saying that an artist must create works of social significance is simply not feasible, nor is it required.

According to Enclyclopedia.com, artists who did not serve in the military or civilian positions during the war, “helped to create an extensive pictorial record.” Their work helped to boost public morale and remind the people what they were fighting for, ultimately aiding “local and national campaigns.” Without art, the public would know little of any war efforts from the past, besides the stories told by the victors.

And much like Picasso’s Guernica, works of art may hold within them great benefit during these such times, though it may not be as directly helpful as some may wish for. Yes, this even applies to simple photographs of rocks.

In his article Artists in Times of War, Howard Zinn fights against the ideals as pointed by Henri Cartier-Bresson, telling how artists “needn’t apologize, because by [giving to the general public beauty, laughter, passion, surprise, drama], the artist is telling us what the world should be like, even if it isn’t that way now. The artist is taking us away from the moments of horror that we experience everyday – some days more than others – by showing us what is possible.” But, he contends, the “artist can and should do more.”

Zinn informs the reader how artists should be using their work, and whatever voice it is they have, to ask the questions of dire importance which few others have the courage to ask themselves.

Questions, such as asked by Mark Twain when the United States went to war against Spain in 1898. When the US went after the Philippines after the “splendid little war” against Spain was won, and several thousand Filipinos were dead after five years of war by 1906, Twain spoke out against the actions performed by the US. Though his patriotism was deeply questioned, Twain denounced President Theodore Roosevelt, writing about the idea of loyalty in his novel A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court. In this piece, he makes mention of patriotism not being the stereotypical idea of supporting one’s government but, rather, supporting one’s country and being ready to point blame upon the government when wrongs are done.

It is also possible for artists to make such bold statements as Twain, in a much more quiet manner. Take, for example, Joseph Heller, who used his book Catch-22 to say in fiction what would have been deemed disgraceful to say in nonfiction. Having been a bombardier in the air force, Heller understood the deeper psychological tricks the bombardiers played upon themselves, pretending to bomb military targets so as to not think about the truth of the situation. And in his novel, he denounces war, writing about such situations. But since it is a piece of fiction, he is able to get away with it.

There are also times whereas refusal, or acceptance, of invitations may be used to reveal one’s side regarding a war. When poet Robert Lowell was invited to the White House during the Vietnam War, he denied the invitation. And when Eartha Kitt, a singer, was invited to the White House for a social event in January of 1968, she was quoted saying to Lady Bird Johnson, “You send the best of this country off to be shot and maimed.”

At the end of the day, the artist’s role in times of war is much the same as their role in everyday life: to create pieces which reveal the beauty and potential of the world we live within. In the words of Zinn, Art is meant to “transcend the madness of the world.” It is meant to help people realize there is more to life than the everyday arguments had between two opposing political parties. And as Zinn had ended his article so brilliantly, I, too, shall use the same line to end my own:

“All of us can do something, can ask questions, can speak up.”

2 Likes

What a thought-provoking article this one is, Cody! Thanks for sharing this piece and the beautiful photos you added. Although there are several worthy-quoting passages for discussion, this early morning (for me, at least), I keep going back to Twain’s

Whether at war or not, this is highly relevant to many governments. It is never too much to realize the power of one’s voice and photos in today’s present world. Even when we are discouraged by current events, we must start small and local.

Your end quote sums up beautifully the course of action we all must take. We can use our voices and photos to show what we can do.

1 Like

Nice read here, Cody. I think at times of great peril, sometimes having a way to escape it through art is of benefit. I often feel similarly about nature photography in the face of climate inaction, etc. Sometimes it feels guilty to be driving around and making photos and spewing carbon into the air in order to make a photo, but that is also useful in that it can help show people what we have to lose if we don’t take action.

2 Likes

This article is about selfishness. Many people feel that artists in general are a group of selfish people who are out to enjoy themselves with little regard for the ‘public good’. They try to shame them for not being part of one cause or another. I don’t agree with that. Some people, for example, believe that being an artist isn’t really ‘work’. Work is an unpleasant sacrifice we all must do to put bread on the table. Basically, personal happiness should be sacrificed for the sake of the hive. Furthermore most artists, I sense, are very independent people who are motivated in exploring their personal world.

Thank you for bringing these thoughts to my attention with this article.

1 Like

I agree wholeheartedly the importance of one’s voice and photographs, especially when taken in such a manner as to convey a message, along with sharing them in a proper setting. It is vital we, as you say, start small and local - that applies both with political means as well as photographic, which is something I strongly convey (or hope to).

Thank you for taking the time to read and share your thoughts. They are much appreciated.

1 Like

Thanks Matt! I agree with the whole climate inaction aspect, the spewing of carbon just to make a photograph that is, unfortunately, unlikely to make a difference in the grand scheme of things - or so it may seem. This is partially why I tend to stay close to home with my photography, rather than traveling around the world. Nonetheless, as you mentioned, it is important to realize that our photographs may one day become useful in revealing the beauty of the world - both the intimacies as well as the grand scenes - which we will lose if action is not taken. Thanks for reading, and for your thoughts!

You bring on a compelling point, Igor, which I had not thought much about until now. I do agree that there is a strong tinge of selfishness going on, when it comes to the perception of artists by others. There are many times whereas I feel as though making money from photography, from writing, should not be something I am proud of, as it is not seem in the same way as making money from being a doctor, for example, is. Nonetheless, it is work which, in just the same way, is at times unpleasant and laborious, though in different manners. I spoke a bit about this with @Ben_Horne on our podcast, Creative Banter, but your comment brings upon new topics to explore both through writing and discussion. Thank you for that.

Yes, exactly. Artists are perceived as being self indulgent. Therefore, their work has less merit. In a way, I think that’s what Cartier Bresson is implying indirectly about Adams and Weston. But perhaps I’m taking this off on a tangent that makes it relevant to my life and not specifically what he meant with the war effort.

BTW, I’ve been perusing your website with great interest. But I will comment on that later.

1 Like

Very interesting article and relevant unfortunately at all times. Great war photographers like Robert Capa or Don McCullin are examples of artists who bring us close to the direct horrifying experiences of our brutality to each other. Like Picasso, though more directly, they try to appeal to the viewers’ instincts of revulsion or shock, in the hope that they can compel those in power to say: “Let’s put an end to this”. They show the other side of the coin to all the beauty we may lose. I would just add to the brilliant closing quote that the worst thing of all is to do nothing.

1 Like

I have not heard of Robert Capa or Don McCullin before, but I will certainly look into their work now that you’ve mentioned them. There are certainly two sides to every coin, as they say, and I believe each has its merits. We need to show the public the beauty we are to lose, as well as the reality of the world as we face off in war with others over frivolous ideologies. And, as you mentioned, the worst we can do is nothing at all.

Thank you Cody for such a captivating article on the artist’s role in times of war. This last section really stuck with me. The world today does seem to be spiraling into madness but I still hold hope that those in power will realize what we all have to lose (our natural world) if we continue down this destructive path. I think art and photography can help.

In the words of Zinn, Art is meant to “transcend the madness of the world.” It is meant to help people realize there is more to life than the everyday arguments had between two opposing political parties.

1 Like

Hi Cody - Thank you for this interesting and thought-provoking post. My thoughts fall closer to Zinn’s, mostly based on personal experience. I spent about five years of my life deeply involved in political activism as the main focus of both my work and personal time. I quickly learned that I am not cut out for that intense, nasty world, so I turned my attention to working in the nonprofit sector. While I do not think the time spent in those two pursuits was a total waste, it does feel like my efforts were pretty fruitless on both fronts and had little long-term impact. By comparison, I think my photography and writing has changed the way a fair number of people interact with the natural world, mostly in the sense that I think my work has helped some see nature more deeply and possibly as a result, care for it more. So, in that sense, I think my photography has had a bigger impact on the things I care about most than my years spent in organized activism and advocacy. While this might seem like a more selfish pursuit than those other careers, and in some ways it definitely is, it also feels far more purposeful in terms of leading a personally meaningful life and that is enough for me.

2 Likes

Unfortunately, I feel as though there is much more convincing for us to do in the eyes of corporations around the world, rather than politicians. While the latter may implement strategies and such that may help - and restrict corporations’ actions - the big businesses of the world will always find a way to continue on as they are, especially if there is potential for loss of revenue. Until we convince the billionaires and corporate leaders of the world, that something must change now, the world will continue in its maddening spiral.

More selfish, perhaps; but it is because of that “selfishness” that you have managed to get people to better see the beauty that is at stake, that can be found around the world when one chooses to take the time to stop and look. As others have mentioned, there is a dire need for revealing the beauty of the world to those around us. And unfortunately, this need is more prevalent now than it was even back when Ansel Adams was doing all he had done for the National Parks system.