Charles Moore's Civil Rights Photography

In front of the Alabama state capitol, marchers (those who went the entire way wear vests) sing "We Have Overcome" and listen to Martin Luther King, Jr., who told them that "segregation is on its deathbed." The Selma March, 1965. (Durham 204-205)

Charles Moore was working as a photographer for Life magazine when he captured some of the most influential images of the American South during the 1960s.  Some photographs, like the one pictured above, show the overwhelming power of people who stand together for what they believe.  However, the overwhelming majority of his most memorable images show the depths of human suffering during the Civil Rights movement, and those photographs have a different kind of power entirely.  Moore's striking images, which earned him the first annual Kodak Crystal Eagle Award for Impact in Photojournalism in 1989, have been credited with not only successfully publicizing the efforts of Martin Luther King, Jr., but also for kindling a national outrage for the atrocities committed against Civil Rights advocates.  The nation's anger eventually culminated in President Lyndon B. Johnson's signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Moore's Life photographs were given due credit for helping to influence the legislation's passage. (Kaplan 127)

Moore was himself an Alabama native, so I think he definitely felt compelled in his work, capturing events on camera that he admitted were sickening for him to watch.  He gained a reputation for always seeming to be right where the action was taking place, a position he compared to being a war photographer on the front lines.  He picked up the philosophy of combat photographer Horst Faas, saying "You have to know when to duck and when to shoot. Or you'll die." (Kaplan 137)  I do not think his war comparison is far off, especially after reading Susan Sontag's perspective on this issue, with her discussion of "photography as shock therapy" (Looking at War).

As demonstrators lie on the sidewalk to protect themselves, firemen hose them down with high-pressure jets of water./Demonstrators huddled in a doorway seek shelter from the hoses.  The water is propelled at a force of one hundred pounds per square inch. Birmingham, 1963. (Durham 94-95, 99)

The fact that Moore's images are so painful to study means that they are having an effect on the viewer, which is of course the desired result.  They were not created to simply record history, but to utterly shock the on-looker into having an emotional response, hopefully leading them to take action.  Once they are published, ignorance of such activities becomes a choice, not so different from denial.  Thankfully, history has shown that these photographs were successful in delivering their truths: John F. Kennedy spoke about how the Birmingham riots had disgusted him just a month after publication of Moore's photographs of the event, Malcolm X gave a speech mentioning the attack dogs used against protesters that were pictured in Moore's images, and a year after Moore's photographs were first published in Life, Dr. King was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. (Kaplan 134)

Even though I believe that Charles Moore's intentions were pure when photographing his subjects, it cannot be denied that his position as a photojournalist makes him part of a culture that thrives on controversy and thirsts for dramatic images such as these, because that is what sells.  Sontag writes about humanity's "appetite for pictures showing bodies in pain" and the "satisfaction at being able to look at the image without flinching.  There is the pleasure of flinching." (Looking at War)  Even though Moore's images were not posed like some war photography of the past, they still turn these horrible, real-life events into a spectacle on display for all to see.  They skirt the fine line between providing evidence of these events as they took place in front of the camera, and inviting the viewer to appreciate the aesthetic qualities of the image.  One of Moore's most disturbing images of police dogs attacking a man in the street was even replicated in a completely aesthetic work, a silkscreen painting by Andy Warhol.

A man looks calmly over his shoulder as a police dog rips his trouser leg, then braces himself as two other dogs attack him. Birmingham, 1963. (Durham 104-105(

Andy Warhol, Red Race Riot, 1964

I think Warhol's representation of Moore's work speaks loudly about many things Sontag also addresses in her writing.  For one, the multiplication of the image and its subsequent fading can easily be seen to represent the numbing effect that repeated exposure to even horrific images can have on a person; it having less and less impact on our minds which are already full of such images. I think Sontag would say that Warhol is effectively "demystifying" the image by removing it from reality, by doing so he is also taking away it's power over our emotional response to it. (On Photography 27)  

Many factors combined in order to make Charles Moore's photography have the positive effect it did on the American public in the late 1950s and into the 1960s.  His handheld camera allowed him the freedom to capture images of events as they were occurring that would have been impossible in earlier stages of the camera's development.  The immediacy of his photographs publication in Life magazine let the whole county know what was really going on while it was still happening, giving people the opportunity to take action when it was most necessary.  Also, Moore's willingness to put himself in physical danger for the sake of those who were suffering should not be taken lightly.  

I was moved while looking through his photographs in Powerful Days.  Seeing them one after another created a narrative of the events that I think made captions almost unnecessary.  I decided to include the captions for the images I shared just so everyone could see them, but I really think the images speak louder on their own.  And despite Susan Sontag's theories about sensationalizing photographs and the numbing effect they can have--theories which I do happen to find very compelling--Moore's images clearly stood out to the whole nation, and their effect remains just as strong today, as representations of images that resulted in much-needed change.

Works Cited

Durham, M. S. (1991). Powerful days: The civil rights photography of charles moore. New York: Stewart, Tabori & Chang, Inc.

Kaplan, J. (1999). The life magazine civil rights photography of charles moore 1958-1965. Journalism History, 25 (4), 126-138. Retrieved from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/detail?vid=3&sid=ad9a9a5d-61c1-4c23-b38e-6a33e134f666@sessionmgr4005&hid=4203&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU=

Sontag, S. (1977). On photography. New York: Dell Publishing Co., Inc.

Sontag, S. (2002). Looking at war: Photography's view of devastation and death. The New Yorker.