masks of identity

    Newer Older

    Monsieur, Madame,

    Votre photo (publiée dans Le Figaro du 19 juin 2009) d’une femme habillée en burqa, à côté d’un couple dont les visages ont été « voilés » numériquement, symbolise parfaitement l’incompatibilité des arguments en faveur d'une interdiction du port de la burqa en lieu public avec une autre loi, celle du droit à l’image.

    En effet, la notion que le citoyen aurait des droits concernant son apparence physique (au point qu’il est jugé raisonnable d’interdire, sauf autorisation, toute reproduction ou utilisation d’une photo) se heurte aux arguments en faveur de l’interdiction de la burqa, quant à eux fondés sur la notion que l’apparence d’une personne, c’est à dire ses traits et par implication son identité, est « dans le domaine publique » et ne peut donc être caché. Ceci est le fondement des arguments qui invoquent la sécurité, l’égalité entre hommes et femmes, l’oppression sur base de genre, etc.

    D’où la situation absurde que la loi permettrait, sans autorisation des personnes concernées, la publication d’une photo d’une femme habillée en burqa, tandis que les deux piétons pris dans cette même photo sont protégés par (ou bien, dirait-on, soumis à) une « burqa juridique » en forme de masque numérique !

    En fin de compte il faudra choisir entre ces deux interprétations opposées de la personne, son apparence et son image…

    + ++ o o0o o ++ +

    Dear Sir (or Madame, as the case may be),

    Your photograph of a woman dressed in a burqa (Le Figaro 19 Juin 2009) next to a couple whose faces have been digitally "veiled" encapsulates perfectly the incompatibility of the arguments put forward in favour of a ban on the wearing of the burqa in public places with another law, that of the "droit à l'image".

    In fact, the idea that a citizen might have rights over his or her physical appearance (to the point that it is deemed reasonable to prohibit any unauthorised reproduction or use of a photograph) clashes with the arguments in favour of banning the burqa, which are in turn based on the idea that a person's appearance, i.e., his or her features and by implication identity, is "in the public domain", and should not therefore be concealed. This is the basis of those arguments that invoke security, equality between men and women, gender-based oppression etc.

    Hence the absurd situation that the law permits, without obtaining authorisation from the persons concerned, the publication of a photograph of a women dressed in a burqa, while the two passers-by appearing in the same photograph are protected (or should we say subjected to) a "legal burqa" in the form of a digitally applied mask!

    At the end of the day a choice will have to be made between these two conflicting interpretations of the person, his rights and his image...

    Yours etc.

    axel_rosito (hi, how are you?), Hs7th, and 4 other people added this photo to their favorites.

    1. Lani Barbitta 69 months ago | reply

      and the powerful number of three.

    2. DELLipo™ 69 months ago | reply

      Such a beautiful shot!!! ;-)

      ♫♪♫ ♥♥ L'amicizia fa la differenza the original group ♫♪♫ ♥♥

    3. Zuiko_Addict 69 months ago | reply

      And the use of DOF to self-impose a filter on those in the background ...

    4. filtran 69 months ago | reply

      good observation, earl - I didn't think of that

    5. Hs7th 69 months ago | reply

      wonderful!

    6. Holden Richards 69 months ago | reply

      This is a great capture!

    7. *toni.r 69 months ago | reply

      you've touched on something here colin... this is showing as a 'take me to the kittens' shot... falling outside my usual 'safe search' filter...[safe search filtran?]...

    8. Dubris 69 months ago | reply

      You point out the absurdity of the situation very well.

    9. filtran 69 months ago | reply

      @Toni - actually I set it deliberately to safe search, partly to make people think "oooh filtran's done a nude" but also out of irony...

    10. sebastiano.riva 69 months ago | reply

      Good Shot!


      I've seen this great shot in Selective & Conceptual DoF
      Please tag your photo "SelectiveConceptualDOF"

    11. rollei guy 69 months ago | reply

      pretentious tosh.

    12. ~ ann marie [deleted] 69 months ago | reply

      Mais quelle absurdité royale! Bien pensé.

    13. *toni.r 69 months ago | reply

      ah ha! you had me thinking... wondering about the trigger... whether was word 'burka'... which sent my head spinning towards somewhat far reaching conclusions...

    14. filtran 69 months ago | reply

      you mean, flickr censoring politically inflammable hot potatoes? that would be interesting...

    15. ptbx [deleted] 69 months ago | reply

      Excellent pamphlet...

    keyboard shortcuts: previous photo next photo L view in light box F favorite < scroll film strip left > scroll film strip right ? show all shortcuts