h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I keep coming back, sorry. I keep remembering things... Rich, can you put some more dates in? Just a couple more to give a sense of timing.

Reading this again, it strikes me how fragile Carter was from the outset; how incongruous his colleagues' settled lives were when juxtaposed with his scrambling desperation to stay sane for long enough to complete his mission. How cruel life can be. How horrible that since his eventual release from life we have had more evil, blind destruction of Man by Man from Rwanda to Bosnia and it still continues today:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6367545.stm

Heartbreaking.

Thanks, Alex and Trig; I've sorted those out I've just found another source of material that I want to add, so this will expand further soon...

Wilma, I'll add some more dates; when the book arrives, I should be able to be a bit more specific. I can't find a date for the Sudan trip other than '1993', so when I find one, I'll make sure I add that as well.

'Reading this again, it strikes me how fragile Carter was from the outset; how incongruous his colleagues' settled lives were when juxtaposed with his scrambling desperation to stay sane for long enough to complete his mission. How cruel life can be.'

Did that come across, Wilma? That's what struck me about the whole story. Carter wasn't a superman or a great hero; he was just an average guy in many ways. His flaws and weaknesses weren't exactly well hidden. He was undoubtedly brave and talented, but I guess most of us would fold in the same way that he did when faced with these horrors.

Thanks again for all your comments about this

>>Carter wasn't a superman or a great hero; he was just an average guy in many ways. His flaws and weaknesses weren't exactly well hidden. He was undoubtedly brave and talented, but I guess most of us would fold in the same way that he did when faced with these horrors<<

Yes, it does come across, Rich. That is just it though, for someone to have the level of sensitivity and artistry required to pull the soul off a situation onto a 2 dimensional medium often means they do not have the emotional stamina to stand up afterwards.

Have I ever mentioned we have the first psychiatric hospital in the Middle East in my home village? The large majority of those who (usually) choose to enter the haven (it is a convent) are suffering PTSD (post traumatic stress). Without exception, they are all intensiely intelligent and insightful individuals. Would that Carter had found this place

If only. I've found it's not uncommon, either; it's a very risky business. I've read of a few getting beaten to death by mobs or 'committing' suicide (I find those two words together odd but inescapable), but, faced with an horrific photograph, we never think of the bravery of the guy who got the shot, do we? Nor what he goes through emotionally.

Here's a fairly typical anti-Carter rant, and a response to it. I haven't included it in the Entry, but it shows the kind of one-dimensional thinking some people have.

'Kevin Carter took that picture of that little Sudanese girl and walked on to under a tree to calmly have a cigarette. S**t, I would have stomped that bird, picked up that baby, put her in my camera bag and gotten her to a hospital and then adopted her. But her little bones are laying in the Sundan [sic] sun bleached white by now.

Claudia'

'Claudia,

I think you'll find that it's much easier to criticise than it is to act. Have you adopted an orphan? Joined a political activist group? No? Oh.'

Exactly so, Rich. We humans have much to be ashamed for - and no right to cast accusations at those who put a mirror up to our face.

RIP Carter. I hope he has found peace at last.

I've found a letter written to Time magazine by Patricia Gird Randberg, Carter's sister, objecting to the article printed by the magazine just after his death:

'As Kevin Carter's sister, I am sad that Time has stooped to such sensationalist reporting concerning my brother's death. Scott MacLeod did not interview me or my sister or two of Kevin's very close friends. His "detailed digging" resulted in the presentation of a series of negative issues through which he attempted to explain a suicide. Suicide is obviously the result of the negative outweighing the positive, in the victim's mind, but this does not mean that there were not hundreds of positive aspects to the particular individual. Kevin was a person of passion and presence; he left his mark wherever he went. He was an incredible father to Megan and a man who grappled deeply with issues most people just accept. In many ways he was ahead of his time. The pain of his mission to open the eyes of the world to so many of the issues and injustices that tore at his own soul eventually got to him. The year 1993 was a good one for him, but at the end of it he told me he really needed a break from Africa, that it was getting to him. He knew then that he was losing perspective. Unfortunately, the pressure only got worse, with the increased violence leading up to the elections and, worst of all, the loss of his friend Ken Oosterbroek. The Pulitzer Prize certainly didn't send Kevin "deeper into anguish." If anything, it was a confirmation that his work had all been worthwhile. Your version of Kevin's death seems so futile. What is anyone going to learn or gain from reading it?'

I think I need to go through my Entry and make sure some of those more subtle tones are in there. Almost I've read of Carter has been tragic, but this wouldn't be complete without the joy and passion as well. I want to get this one exactly right. I need this to be definitive. It would be an injustice to get a single word of this wrong, and I should probably stick to writing about things that don't really matter at all in future

... and when you're done, Rich, imho I think it would be a mistake to omit sharing the impact this experience has had on you (and all of us) with that sister of his.

<>

I don't think so Rich. Somehow in writing a matter of fact article you managed to convey the raw pain felt by Carter( and yourself) in writing it., together with the sheer brutality of the situation.

Writing about the happenings in South Africa would be difficult enough, but to couple it with a specific suicide took great courage and a good deal of understanding and I commend you for an excellent article.

I haven't looked at the photos yet. I am still digesting the text which was difficult enough. I spotted a few tiny blips which you will probably discover when editing, but I will come back with them, if I may, when I have a little more time. I should have noted them at the time, but was too absorbed in the reading to be bothered.

I do agree you should not undertake another such serious issue for a while. It is far too draining. You must remember you have a life outside of h2g2

Websailor

I've just red this emotional piece in one sitting and here are a few things I have picked up:

perhaps you could say what a Pulitzer Prize winner is

>>He returned to the … is this out of place? should it be on the end of the previous para?
>> targeting commuters in particular – change to particularly targeting commuters
>> The four would move among the workers at dawn. This doesn’t make sense to me on its own.
>>Carter, Oosterbroek, Silva and Marinovich did. How come were they black?
>>which we'll come back to – shouldn’t use first person
>> Many believe Carter eventually crossed this line. Like who? Perhaps quote someone
I think there may be other h2g2 entries you could link to
>>João Silva, Mail and Reuters- put in Italics
>>18 April 1994 = 18 April, 1994
>>The St Petersburg Times went to far as to say that the photographer = The St Petersburg Times went as far as to say that the photographer

Thank you, Opti - I've sorted all those out except:

>>He returned to the … is this out of place? should it be on the end of the previous para? - no, I wanted to break the paragraph at his suicide attempt, otherwise I'd agree with you

>> targeting commuters in particular – change to particularly targeting commuters - I think either can be correct, but as the sentence is quite short it seems to fit better this way. I think it's a matter of preference

>> Many believe Carter eventually crossed this line. Like who? Perhaps quote someone - it was more of a moral debate, Opti; just as if you were saying 'many people felt Tony Blair was wrong to go to war in Iraq'. What I'm trying to do here is point out at an early stage that some people do think that such raw photojournalism is immoral, that the ethics are debatable. I've included quotes later; here I want to sow the seed.

>>João Silva, Mail and Reuters- put in Italics - João Silva is a name, so shouldn't be italicised, but I've done the other two.

There are other h2g2 Entries I could link to, but as Woodpigeon has pointed out it's very important to get them in the right places. I would trust the detached gaze of a Sub-editor to get them in the right places more than I would myself, to be honest, but if this comes up again when I decide to PR it I'll have another look.

Thanks for scrutinising this so closely, Opti - I appreciate you taking so much trouble


Wilma, I'd love to - that was my first reaction, to get in touch and ask for an opinion. Her name doesn't Google very well, though. I'm wondering how I could get in touch. Silva and Marinovich both have websites, I think; I could try them? I wonder if they'd read it? Or am I taking this too seriously? I thought I was almost there.

Webbie, the site is about to do its weekly die - I'll get back to you personally tomorrow I just want to add a bit to the general making of thought-notes...

Is Carter's story about brutality and death? Or is it at least a little bit about hope? This was a normal guy. He changed the world - not all of it, but a significant part. He helped bring down apartheid and bring the world's attention on a particularly hateful war and famine. He was prepared to give his life for it, and - whatever the circumstances of that - he ultimately did. Is that actually tragic after all? Isn't that what we expect from heroes?

Allow me to come from the other end now. I read it most of the way through and found it stomach churning. But there were definitely places you got a bit too involved for the EG. Where you describe his reaction to his famous shot of the starving girl, for example. The line about "one can imagine what he was thinking" is not objective. Also, from where dooes the description of the scene come?

I've been reading about the New Yorker fact checking dept, and they always queried scenes that the author couldn't have known about, either because everyone was subsequently wiped out, or because the author describes thoughts that could easily have been twisted by the person relating them.

In certain cases it's best to just let a person's actions speak for themselves.

Thank you, Leo

This is where I'm not sure where the line lies. I sincerely appreciate you pointing this out; it's the grey area that is hard for me to see.

I've ordered the book for this very reason, because I've read a lot of Internet sources that put their own twist on things. The Time article that his sister mentions, for example, portrays his whole life as an utter tragedy.

You're right, but clearly there was an ethical debate going on in his own mind at the time. That moment clearly left him stunned; and if a friend of yours faced a dying child being stalked by a vulture would you know what was going through his/her mind? I personally think that to say 'One can only imagine what was going through his mind at the time' is quite valid, as none of us have been in that situation. I have not made the scene up; this has taken a lot of research. Everything else has been on hold while I pieced this together. The first-hand views of the scenes that are described most vividly have been the ones that have kept me awake the most.

Everything in this prospective Entry has been confirmed with two independent sources on the Internet. I will check and back up everything with Silva and Marinovich's book when it arrives. Please bear in mind that it is not in PR at the moment, and is very much a work in progress.

I can't tell if any part of it is 'emotive' or otherwise anymore, to be honest. Having just read it again, though, I don't feel that any of it is far from the truth.

Which scenes are you disagreeing with the tone of, Leo? Tell me which ones and I will go through them line by line and check they have adequate sources. As I say, I really need to get this one right, so your help is really appreciated

I hate being the Grinch, but IMHO, great things never become great (or greater) if they're not criticised. So here goes. I'm going to just dump everything even slightly problematic, whether it deserves it or not, and you can decide each one on a case-by-case basis, and don't feel the need to post an explanation.


I agree that the sentence (discussed above) may be valid, because after all, one can only imagine. But I don't agree that the statement is necessary at all. The reader will doubtless be imagining anyway. It seems to me like calling a fire hot.


As serious as the article was, this sentence nearly cracked me up:
>>haunted by the horrors of the scenes he had witnessed, and financial problems, he committed at the age of 33.<<
- if his was partially brought about by financial problems, shouldn't they be made a bit more explicit later on when you discuss the circumstances of his death? I gather that he was not holding down a job, but was he broke? In debt?

- you never spell out what ANC stands for. I was playing in the mud when all this was happening and only learned the summary and results from my history book. I have no idea what half the politics is about. The brief mention of violence between the ANC and the Zulu Inkatha leaves me scratching my head. Aren't those both black African groups? Or did I miss something?

>>The four would move among the workers at dawn, mingling to capture the vioelnce as it happened.<<
-typo

>>Wherever there was an incident, the four were there to cover it.<<
-hyperbole?


>>The four were not the only members of the club - others came and went - but they were the only ones who were there from start to finish, and the term is usually used to describe them exclusively.<<

- confused. the term 'club' used to describe them exclusively - then how can there be other members of the 'club' coming and going?


>>Look at the pictures taken by the Bang-Bang Club, and they hold an immense power; disturbing yet somehow intimate.<<

- this may be an editorial moment.


>>Silva's pictures of 'the day the Bang-Bang caught up', which will be discussed in more detail later.<<

- necessary? Kind of disturbs.


>>Viewing the images gives a real sense of the horror of the time, and the immediacy gives one the impression that this was, indeed, everyday life. <<
- well, was it? Or was that a false impression?
- another potential editorial moment. Telling about how the photos should seem. The description should suffice.


>>There is, however, no panic in the shots; composed with a steely nerve, they are fearless and toe a very fine line between an intense humanity and a cold lack of emotion for what is going on around. <<

- steely nerve? Sounds to me from the quotes that they were composed with nerves vibrating like guitar strings. Besides, clearly some felt they went over the line, so it is only opinion that they toe the line. The word "seem" might work.



>>marijuana was frequently smoked to relax, and it was frequently mixed with tranquillisers for a longer 'hit'.<<

- passive language. "They frequently smoked marijuana to relax" or "they calmed their nerves with marijuana" makes it more immediate.



>>The stakes had been raised. <<
-


>>It didn't take long for Carter to get the notorious shot that he is remembered for.<<
- for which he is remembered.


>> Landing near the village of Ayod, the two began work at an overwhelmed feeding centre.<<
- define two again, since Carter tes previous sentence?

>>Carter, often more fragile and emotional than his colleagues, found the scene distressing and took a stroll in the bush to calm his nerves.<<
- suggestion, cut fragile. Will get that impression anyway.

>> Moving towards it he found the source.<<
- something about the contruct bothers me. He moved toward it until he found the source?

>>A young African was crawling weakly towards the centre. She clearly didn't have the energy to stand.
- cut 'clearly'.

>>Emaciated beyond hope, she stood little chance of survival.<<
-


>>The advice given to journalists at the time was to avoid any contact with famine victims for fear of disease. Carter was torn between carrying the child to the centre and exposing himself to possible disease himself, and simply doing nothing. <<

- new paragraph.
- he describes being torn, I assume. Did he say what prompted his decision to do nothing? It seems like the following editorial lines are likely his line of thinking, and perhaps should be presented as such:
>>Besides, the famine was bad that a child was dying every three minutes in Ayod camp, so he'd probably just be moving her to a different place to die. It was utterly hopeless, utterly futile. <<
- otherwise, I'm not sure about "It was utterly hopeless." Surely the line can be argued? But based on what he knew, he felt it was a hopeless situation.

>>Carter received acclaim from critics and friends, but the scene had disturbed him profoundly.<<
- for what, that picture? Or his entire portfolio? Assume the picture because you say "scene", but I think it needs specifying.

>>and things would get worse.<<
-things?



>>Syndicated around the world, it was an image that was worth a thousand telethons. It was, and he faced strong criticism from those who felt he had abandoned the child.<<
- "It was" seems redundant, since you say the exact same thing in the previous sentence. Also, shouldn't the "and" be "yet" - "yet he faced strong criticism for abandoning the child".
- I think "felt he abandoned" is definitely slanted. Abandoned may have negative connotations, but in terms of denotation, it is exactly what he did. He left here there. Whether or not he was justified in abandoning her is the controversial part.


>>With failed personal relationships strewn behind him, an increasing drug habit and an uncertain future with Reuters<<
- never mentioned his personal relationships until now.


>>His humanity was called into question for not helping the , even though journalists were instructed never to touch famine victims.<<
- said that about the instructions already. Sounds defensive.


>>He told friends that if he had the opportunity again, he would have helped the .<<
- why the change?



I guess I sound aggressive in all this, but I'm just trying to bring in another perspective. I know this could coast through PR on sympathy alone, but I don't think that's right, either to you, to the subject, or to the EG.

for talking me through the points it will help address other people's work if they want me to help them

Hi Rich.

In terms of the big picture, there's not a lot to add. I think everything I intended to put in is in there, so just the detail.

"praise and condemnation by equal measures" - *in* equal measures - 'by' makes it sound like the measures did the praising.

disk = disc

Besides, the famine was bad that a child - was *so* bad that

I think the final quote would be better if it was attributed, just so the reader knows it's not you putting yourself in KC's head.

I don't have any suggestions about adding anything.

Leo, you really are the Friendly Grinch I'm very glad you went through it in so much detail, and appreciate the time you've taken. I'll go through them all; maybe tomorrow, though, as I need to sleep at some point I can't see much that you've posted that I'd disagree with, so thank you very, very much!

Thanks for reading as well, KB - I have to say that I wish you'd taken this one on, though

Pleasure.

Excellent article, Rich - all I knew previously about Kevin Carter was because the Manic Street Preachers wrote a song about him which got to number 9 in the charts, and he got talked about a bit in reviews and interviews at the time so I became aware of the very basic facts of his story.

Presumably you're already well aware of the song - but here's a link to the lyrics if that's any use - http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/manicstreetpreachers/kevincarter.html

I remember being very surprised and pleased to hear it played at the Blow Up club in Soho in about 1996, where it fitted perfectly on the dancefloor, and now somewhat strange about having danced so happily to it.

Ok, I've been through all those comments, Leo, and sorted them out. I still need to add something about his relationships, finances and a paragraph on the political situation in the early 1990s. Let me know if anything still grates, large or small. Thanks very much for giving me so much of your time. I've also corrected the bits KB picked up - thanks to you as well, mate.

Yes, I do know the Manics song, Number Six. I'm a bit of a fan, but that's the one album I don't have! I haven't mentioned it because it would feel odd to mention it after the suicide, and the lyrics aren't particularly quotable, so it's hard to see where it could be slotted in. I haven't managed to find an interview where they discuss it, either

I've been reading Silva and Marinovich's book - a biting read - so I'm bound to have more to add before this gets anywhere near PR...