A fresh look at Dorothea Lange's censored photos of Japanese internment

Great not only for America, but the entire world.

Nothing comparable to what was done to Japanese-Americans which resulted from racism ("yellow peril"), the bombing of Pearl Harbor (thus west coast fears), among other variables. Earl Warren as governor of California was a strong supporter of the interments. Once on the Supreme Court, I am convinced that his strong support of civil and defendants' rights was a way for him to atone for his sins.

"The beginning of Concentration Camps were called Reservations..."

It didn't start in the U.S. with mistreatment of the Native Americans (Who weren't very tolerant of other tribes either.) Humans have a long sad history of enslavement and ethnic cleansing:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_cleansing_campaigns

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/18/books/books-of-the-times-even-in-eden-it-seems-war-was-hell.html

Decent people recognize their shortcomings to make sure such mistreatment never happens again. But there always seems to be plenty of indecent people who think using violence & subjugation to advance their agenda is very useful. It's the nature of the human beast. There's a famous quotation attributed (apocryphally) to Trotsky: "You may not be interested in war, but war is very interested in you."

I too agree, that while what was done to our fellow citizens was horrendous and a black mark on our American way of life, it does not bring this action to the level of a "concentration camp". At least not the connotation one has of the term "concentration camp".
There is no minimizing what was done to American Citizens. There is no comparison to what was done to the victims of the Holocaust in the Concentration Camps".

nick101, you're right in that it was a bit of a throwaway generalisation, sorry. I had in mind the recent development of 'embedded' photographers in conflict zones, as became prevalent in recent wars in the middle east, completely under the control of the military units and all output having to pass the censor before publication. Contrast the output from, say, the invasion of Iraq from which we never saw the images of local civilians being killed, with the images from the Vietnam war depicting the horror of what we were doing, and which became influential in the anti-war movement.
Also, globalised press agencies have largely replaced local staff photographers employed by individual outlets, resulting in very homogeneous and un-trustworthy photographic records. Ruben Salvatori did a really interesting project on the role of the contemporary press photographer: http://www.rubensalvadori.com/index.php/project/photojournalism-behind-the-scenes/
Cheers.

nick101:

In the 1980s there were more newspapers, somewhat independently owned.

In the 1990s there was a huge consolidation of newspapers and cable TV news, and media companies in general.

Just by way of example, newspapers have massively cut back on reporting from state capitals. This kind of thing matters.

As for internet news, it can be fake, it can be just a claim without validation. Now the internet is very good at quickly moving information or claims. So if X reports from Y state capital, then that story may get more attention than in the past. But it can also be lost.

So in many ways things were better in the 1980s, but the information wasn't transmitted as quickly.

To SteveE: "The Japanese, The Germans and the Italians were all treated the same way",
Sadly that is not even remotely true. ALL Japanese Americans were rouned up and put into camps. Of the 1.2 million German Americans born in Germany, the 5 million German Americans with 2 native German parents, and the 6 million with one native German parent, about 11,000 were detained. That's racism. You can call it whatever you want.

Thank you, SteveE, for using facts to counteract the all-too-common false equivalencies that are distorting public discussion today.

hammar said:

" but photographs like this cannot be denied and are a powerful weapon to ensure it does not happen again."

hence their censure by the american authorities thru impounding
for many decades ,............... an agenda fufilled .

Germans and Italians didn't conduct a large, surprise attack on American soil (Pearl Harbor) either.

As StevenE said, espionage was a big concern at the time. FDR, US president at the time, and some military leaders were fearful of Japanese spies embedded on the west coast. Which they figured was part of the war theatre (as a result of what the IJN did on 7 Dec. 1941) Japan figured one big blow to the US fleet and they would bow out of the Pacific theatre, leaving Japan to control much of the region. After, there was fear Japan would invade the West coast.

Of course there was some racism present. However, racism wasn't the underlying reason for these camps -- fear and anger were the reasons (as a result of Pearl Harbor, and the war we were fighting with Japan at the time).

But it is easy to yell racism and judge the past 75 years after the event, in a totally different era, with the war over and all the facts now visible, no?

American citizens did not attack Pearl Harbor. Any deviation from that is racist, utter nonsense, and a waste of time and resources - not to mention the potential help in the war effort by tens of thousands of US Citizens who were just as loyal as the white immigrants from Europe.

Shoot, even the native Americans contributed to the war effort, in spite of less than 100 years since they were oppressed in bloody wars against them. But somehow, Japanese were special.

That's racist.

@Smitty1 Between Feb and May 1942 348 ships were sunk off the east coast of the United States by German submarines. Information on convoys was actively sought by Germany. During that time Germany made at least two attempts to infiltrate agents, plus there was the Duquesne Spy Ring found operating in the USA mainland. No such Japanese infiltration was ever found. Despite this there was not the large scale internment of German or Italian civilian population.

Fear and anger is the fuel that racism feeds on.

It is not yelling racism, but learning from history so the same mistakes are not made again. If we can't do that we are no better than many regimes around the world who try to suppress or rewrite history.

Before the War, the LA Times did a poll how other Americans felt of Japanese-Americans. The result was of feelings of them being good citizens and incredibly loyal.

After the war started that changed dramatically. Because... war. Due to fear and bitterness, not blind racism.

It wasn't as if the war started and people en masse decided 'Here is finally our chance to imprison these people.' It was more a case of, 'We are at war with the country these people ethnically came from, that country already initiated aggression towards us, are these people really loyal or are they going to sell us out to the Japanese and/or kill us?' Hysteria.

@hammarbytp, Big difference between that and a shock and awe attack on American soil, also sinking much of the Pacific fleet.

I'm seeing lots of people, here on this thread, yelling racism and racism alone. And that sentiment just isn't factual.

Assuming the Japanese Americans were treated worse than the immigrants from other Nazi controlled countries (most likely true) .... There was probably a revenge aspect to the internment in response to Pearl Harbour.

The sad irony is that except for the few Japanese Americans that actually were spies, wartime Japan leadership couldn't have cared less about Japanese Americans in the US. These immigrants left Japan for many many reasons but mostly because they no longer wanted a future in Japan.

So the US revenge against the Japanese was hollow and self defeating. Where they had a chance to stand up for thier core Constitutional values, they failed.

This was a systemic failure not only in leadership.

It was racism. The Chinese were not well treated either and they were allies.

Never heard of the Chinese Exclusion Act? It took until 1943 for it to be repealed and only because the Chinese government was mad and the Japanese were merrily using it as propaganda.

"Germans and Italians didn't conduct a large, surprise attack on American soil (Pearl Harbor) either. "
Neither did native-born American citizens.

"These virtue-signallers are far more dangerous than actual racists, since they would lead mobs in an attack on their victims simply in order to prove their virtue."
Is "virtue-signaller" a new disparaging term for people who believe that racism still exists? I haven't heard it before but it's all over this thread.

@grock: "Virtue-signaller" is popular nomenclature among those who seek to suppress any notion that racism or any sort of discrimination is (or in this case even "was") a big deal, trying to make themselves sound smart in the process. Basically you can safely ignore anything such a person has to say.

@Yohan Pamudji ... "racist" is popular nomenclature among those who seek to suppress any discussion or any sort of intelligent conversation about an issue, trying to make themselves sound virtuous in the process. Basically you can safely ignore anything such a person has to say.

Lol I have seen plenty of "retouched" USSR propaganda photos and most of them look like they were done by a house painter, so no, not terribly convincing. Then again there is a lot of sloppy PS work done nowadays.

However, AbrasiveReducer's comment about conspiracy theories is sadly all too true. The net seems to have enabled this phenomenon (and the people who choose to believe all that stuff) in a truly remarkable - if not terrifying - way.

We don't tolerate racism in our comments section.

allison you are confused .... i challenge you to show how any post i have ever made can be construed as being racist....
you cannot because it never happenned , and i resent the implication that it was in any way rascist ... pm me to clairify , or perhaps to offer an apology for your hurtful assertion
. im pretty sure my post was deleted because any criticisms of govt policies are seen as contraversial

i really love your site , but not the censorship.... and while im complaining also the transparent advertorials masquerading as real news ...and the endless tiresome and frankly pointless promotion of the iphone, thats destroying the camera industry ..... ummm thats it ., all the best

@Allison Johnson,
Seems like you don't tolerate the truth ether, or the "inconvenient truth".
Merry Christmas!

Do you think that the majority of people have the time of day to afford to not be ignorant?

Wallowing in willful ignorance is dumb. Very dumb.

Donnie G -- do you think the Japanese American citizens being deported should have exercised their 2nd amendment rights and barricaded themselves in their houses and began shooting?

Ryan Rosenberg, any such reaction by Japanese Americans would have clearly been fool hearty, But that does not negate the wisdom and value of the 2nd Amendment. I'm relatively certain Donnie G is referring to the right to defend yourself against criminal assault.
Even though the Japanese interment, in hind sight, was a clear miscarriage of justice, at the time it was done as a perceived measure of national security -- not as an attempt at genocide.
This government has been one of the few that ever actually acknowledges mistakes such as this one.

Was the interment of German Americans racist, as well?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_German_Americans

Actually, as someone correctly pointed out below, the correct term is 'internment' -- not interment.
While racism is wrong in any form, people on this forum talk as though it is indigenous to one nation. Racism is an evil that is generic to mankind, just as much as greed, dishonesty, envy, etc. -- not everyone exhibits it, but no nation or race has a monopoly on it. It is a problem that has to be overcome at the individual level -- because it is a problem of the heart/soul.

Does it make it less or more racist if the numbers were different?

@daddyo - The 2nd amendment is not about defense against criminals. It is about a balance between state/military and citizens. And I am quite sure that was exactly what Donnie G meant. If Donnie G had been an US Japanese and someone would come to take him - he would have defended himself - with weapons. Then, he, and maybe also his family, would have certainly been killed. But, I assume Donnie G would have found that fair.

Roland, You are patently wrong. The original purpose of the 2nd Amendment was a three fold purpose -- to allow the government to raise a 'well regulated militia' in the case of foreign invasion, to prevent the government from disarming the general population and gaining power to subjugate citizens (your stated reason), and to allow citizens the right to arms for lawful self defense, hunting, etc.
The right to bear arms for home self defense was clearly stated by the Supreme Court ruling in 2008 which included this statement; "The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home." I'm pretty sure they weren't talking about shooting your angry cat. :-)

The defense and prevention against such things is not to wait until they happen and you barricade yourselves inside your houses with guns. To prevent such things from becoming "legal" is to prevent these wrong laws from passing by Congress, to vote for the Presidents and Governors who will not make such executive orders, and to have Judges on the Supreme court who will rule against such laws if lawyers and brave enough to challenge their Constitutionality. It is far move brave to participate in our Democracy than to fantasize about being a "rebel" hero with your guns "defending" yourself. Had enough non-Japanese Americans made themselves heard, this would not have happened. Did they rise up? No, what did most Americans do when this was going on? Nothing. Were they being heroic, hiding behind thoughts that when the government come for me, I'll exercise my 2nd Amendment? I suggest you watch again "The Hangman" by Maurice Ogden.

2008? The SA is from 1791.

OK - I am not from US. But, as far as I can read, it was mainly about arming the country and preserving democracy. Nice thoughts 200 years ago, but today quite obsolete.

Whatever though - Donnie clearly meant to protect himself against the state taking him way. Which, of course, does not work. US police and military is by far to strong for that to realistic.

Roland, no, no, no The Supreme court should not be revising and reconstructing the intent of the Amendments but should stick to their original meaning as our founding fathers intended. Some of the recently restored original interpretations are as follows.

1: Corporations are people too.
2: A single person can be a "militia of one"
3: It follows that corporations have the rights to bear arms, to form militia, and to defend themselves if the legitimately feel threatened.
4: Using well respected Bush doctrine of Pre-emption, Corporations have the right to proactively use weapons to pro-actively defend themselves.

I can imagine in the not too distant future when Apple, threatened by Samsung, will carry out a coordinate systmetic attack on Samsung. Special ops at the Apple kiosh in Best Buy will casually saunter over to the Samsung Store and laid waste while Apple stealth cruiser launch cruise missle attacks against Samsung facilities in South Korea.

Unfortunately, shigzeo is quite correct. The word racism/racist has been claim by blacks for their own use/misuse. Therefore any deeds against blacks is always racism, whereas deeds against whites is.... just deeds.

And this is not what I claim, this is what I experience.

@mxx: didn't mention anything about blacks or any other race. Mentioned only that 'racism' can only be applied to whites, as a wonderfully non-falsifiable claim by modern feminist and other intersectional academics whose intellectual pursuits are justified by as many far-out ideas as they can pen.

Thank God the rape of Nanking didn't involve racism.

I wonder if the Japan attack on the USA was racist, as well.

It is always interesting to note that gun rights activists do not have outreach programs targeting minorities and urging them to buy and carry and train on as many weapons as they can for "self defense". If you feel that it is a good thing to have citizens be armed and well trained, organizations should be doing outreach so that inner city blacks and Muslims be encouraged to carry arms. I for one would feel much safer if bus loads of black youths and Muslim men were to enter my church wearing body armor and carry "defensive" weapons such as the Barrett .50 cal sniper riffle and form a circle so that they can provide us with protection while we pray. Why is it that so called American Patriots are white men walking around with guns supposedly defending America and yet men of colored with a weapon is either a criminal or terrorist?

shigzeo, I know that not all of them are white men. However, I don't see any outrage when a minority was shot and killed by the police and it was found that he had a gun in his car. As if, owning a gun is enough excuse for the police to kill him. Owning a gun or carrying a gun shouldn't be enough to justification for the police to shot anyone. I don't see tat outrage. Funny eh? Since 2nd Amendment activists don't believe in gun registration or restrictions on the sales of guns, it should be fighting for all citizens to have the right to own and carry at all times. Tell me of a gun rally where large number of black inner city youths parade down the streets with guns? Every rally I see were comprised mostly of white males. Where is the NRA outreach to Muslim Americans, encouraging them to defend themselves with guns because that is their Constitutional right?

JACS, your "they" is not my they. Where was the outrage from the 2nd gun rights activist? Were was the outrage coming from the NRA, protest along the black community in support of the fact that blacks should have the rights of own guns, the same as whites, and to have the same presumption of innocence? Where are the NRA ads, directed at minorities telling them to arm themselves for their self-defense.

Here is one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovl8qG3ciDs

Australians also interred people classed as 'Enemy Aliens' during both World Wars. This started with people born in countries with whom we were at war, but was later expanded to include those born in Australia to parents who were born in those countries. Men, women & children.

Although some of those detained would have represented a real threat, most would not have and it doesn't seem that there was any real effort to distinguish those who were from those who weren't. As with our current detention policy, the real purpose is to salve the fragile nerves of the proles, making them easier to control and shoring up power in the process.

"Interred" means placing a dead body in a grave or tomb. The term is interned.

Every country has some skeletons in their closet, you don't have to be so defeatist to bring up your country's., just sayin

@Frank C. - I don't think it's "defeatist" to acknowledge actions past, nor to examine them for parallels and useful lessons in the context of current actions. This widely employed technique is referred to as "learning".

Humans never learn, they always repeat the same mistakes, I suggest you read up on history. Humans have not changed over time ergo their behaviour & fate remains predictably the same.

Far too many Norwegian officials (i.e. the police), while occupied by Germany, were more than willing to hand out our Jews to the occupiers to what they must have understood would be a dark outcome:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Norway

On the other hand, after being liberated, what was on many people minds surprisingly were girls that had been intimately involved with the enemy, instead of those who had directly aided the occupiers through business, politics and public service. They were often subject to cruel punishsment without a trial, and they and their children were outcast from society:
https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyskertøs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_purge_in_Norway_after_World_War_II

War is not a pretty thing, and we who have been fortunate to not experience it first-hand should appreciate the art and the facts that gives us any insight into what it is about.

-h

Yes...most of the world...indeed, most of the USA has an issue with Trump. Nothing sad about it.

To Frank C. - About 2 million more popular votes for Clinton than Trump. At best the US is 50-50 on Trump. I share sh10453's hope in that regard. But to the original subject, glad Lange's work on the subject is seeing the light of day.

Trump is not "America's choice".
It's the choice of the Electoral College, not the Popular choice.
My original comment had nothing to do with "issues", or with America's choice either way.
Read it again, Franc.

Actually, it's more like 2.8 million at last count, and rising. And it's not even close to a 50/50 split on Trump; he has the lowest approval rating of any president-elect in modern history, down around 41%, and falling.

J A C S - The internment camps actually go against the constitution. Are you making it a habit of being wrong everywhere on DPReview?

Ignore which Law, JACS??? Hitler's law???

What kind of sick mind would assume that I was talking about internment camps? Oh, you.

Trump never said anything about camps. The left is trying to make it sound as if he did. He basically wants to enforce the immigration law which has been ignored and even sabotaged so far by several administrations, the Bush one included.

BTW, detention is legal:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_detention_in_the_United_States

Oh JACS, once again you show everyone that you can't read. The discussion was the Japanese internment camps....not current immigration. The Japanese camps, holding US citizens, was against the constitution. As the discussion is about those camps, one was assume that you would refer to the actual topic at hand....but as usual, you twist the topic to suit your agenda. That hasn't been working for you in the threads either. Why don't you just bow out? And yes...the world is laughing at Trump.

Intersting that you post a link to Wiki....when others do, you claim it is irrelevant...I guess your own rules only apply to others

Speaking about ability to read, the OP mentions Trump explicitly. He makes a connection between him and the camps.

As usual, you demonstrate primitive reading and comprehending abilities.

JACS...as usual, we have to correct you. The OP said...and I quote "Let's hope that trump and company will not repeat the same shameful act." The act in question is the topic of this page...Japanese internment. It is not the immigration issues to which you posted a link to Wiki. Thus, you have misread...as usual...and the rest of us of to step in and correct your misinformation. Before you try to tell others how to read...learn to do so yourself. The last few weeks you've been making a fool of yourself here to the point where people are questioning your ability to reason. Once again...you're wrong. Getting pretty regular.

Dare we dream he's not even the choice of the electoral college if enough of them wake up and realize the nightmare ahead?

@ c45 - I'm a bit lost... are you trying to justify what was done by comparing it to what other countries did?

Well, I always put myself on the other foot. If I lived in, say, Japan....and the U.S. began bombing Japan, I would FULLY UNDERSTAND why the Japanese people might want to keep an eye on me. They are not engaging in a "hate crime"...they are merely trying to shut all possibilities of additional threats.
Yes, I would be truly troubled by the situation, but it's how life sometimes happens.
Ok Americans, back to our favorite past time: self flogging!

Even if you were born in Japan? And your parents were born in Japan? Many of these people were "natural born" American citizens. How many generations would it take to be able to assume you were a loyal citizen?

@ c45 - You don't think Canadian forces fought in WW2? I'm an expert on good/evil because you think I'm Canadian? Wow... seriously, just wow.

c45 - You can not even put together a proper english sentence and I'm not a history teacher. I have no clue what kind of answer you want... but lets see:
- Canada was at war with Japan
- Japan had Canadian POWs
- Canada is/was part of the Comonwealth and it was at war with Japan

Can your closed mind grasp any of those concepts or are you still clueless?

Were they Americans like most of the Japanese?

As I recall from reading, it was a mix, just like the Japanese folks. It was war so they of rounded up everyone. Even after Italy surrendered in about 1943, about 300 Italians were held till the end of the war. Italian-Americans are still mad about it, I'm sure the Germans are too.

Most person of Japanese ancestry interned in the US were US citizens. Most persons of German or Italian ancestry interned in the US were German or Italian citizens. When US citizens of German or Italian ancestry were interned there generally had been probable cause shown for internment. For most US citizens of Japanese ancestry who were interned, no probable cause was ever shown.

I deny that a (general) "photographic standpoint" even exists. Every producer of photography, and every consumer of photography to boot, has their own individual "photographic standpoint". You can only talk about /your/ photographic standpoint—which doesn't quite seem to be mine ;-)

Perhaps what you mean is something like an "artistic standpoint" (which I'd probably still claim to be similarly subjective as the "photographic standpoint"), or a "technical standpoint", or a combination of the two?

Well, for me, the value of a photograph cannot be reduced to either (or both, for that matter) of them, and, for me, the shown photographs are of immense photographic value, regardless of how their artistic value or their technical aspects might be judged by whoever really feels the need to judge them. Personally, I don't even think there is such a need.

yeah they needed better bokeh

Concentration as in many deemed similar forcefully located to one place. Death or extermination camps are a different evil.

If you look at the government documents that set these camps up, they were originally OFFICIALLY called "concentration camps". That was, of course, before the rest of the world found out about the German concentration camps, and what was meant by that in Germany.

Concentration camps were used by the British and other colonial powers well before WW2 came around, although usually not for their own people.

I think that is to put too high demands on US. Its the same humanoids populating US as elsewhere. We are all a lousy bunch really. At least sometimes.

It was not certainly not a great example of how any government should act, but understanding the Niihau Incident does bring it into a bit more context.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niihau_incident

Bull.. the democrats under Roosevelt had little to go on and the Nihau incident was a shocking example of what might occur if an invasion was attempted. Also BBC journalist Alister Cook, in articles published in 1941, interviewed a Japanese diplomat in the US who told him he was confident Japanese American college students would rally to the emperor's cause if war broke out. In a vacuum of information these two items no doubt formed the critical basis for a decision that ultimately was unnecessary. But we in 2016 can not judge the decision of the democrat president 75 years ago-- who had just lost nearly all of the Pacific fleet. Just as we can't pass judgments on fashion, music, etc., from bygone eras based on modern tastes. Sadly our history teachers neglect the Nihau incident in relation to the internment camps. And it is a sin to the Jews killed by Hitler and the millions of others killed by Stalin to equate our camps with theirs!