A consequence of residing in Oakland and frequenting San Francisco is regular encounters with panhandlers.
Last evening was no different. I wandered around Old Oakland at dusk with my camera, trying to take interesting pictures. I was approached on two separate occasions. Instead of declining to assist them, which is my modus operandi, I told them that I was an amateur photographer and would pay them $2 for a portrait. Both were delighted and readily obliged. I chatted with one of them for a while. Oakland born and raised, Ivan is hiv positive and has lived on the street for 6 months. After a few pleasantries and good luck wishes, we shook hands and parted ways.
I'm not sure what to think about this. I dislike certain aspects of street photography because it is frequently exploitative. Is what I did really any less so?
I don't think you did anything exploitative. You engaged someone in conversation who probably doesn't get the opportunity to converse with people very much. You connected with someone who probably feels very disconnected. You exchanged money for a service--this is a tit for tat, a quid pro quo, but definately not exploitative. Just in my humble opinion...
ReplyDeleteP.S. It also sounds like a pretty cool experience :)
ReplyDeleteI think it sounds like a very cool experience Rachel! I've thought about it for a few days, and the only way I can see it as being exploitative is if you sold the photo for a lot of money. In that way, you would have made a big profit off someone's picture and only paid them two dollars. I think that the whole experience sounds mutually beneficial, and just very cool overall!
ReplyDelete