In this short reponse, I’ll be considering the question in the title. This is a very contraversial topic and many people have varied opinions on this. However, i can analyze some of the points that agree with each one.

A very famous photograph includes:

Nick Ut, was the man that recorded this disturbing image. It was taken in South Vietnam. At that moment, war planes had accidentally dropped bombs over their terrain, which caused an outburst of people in shock. The children are seen trying to evacuate the place and have a look of terror on their faces. The girl is left completely naked after the acidic bombs erode her clothes.

Discussing mind-set, I think it’s extremely difficult to change someone’s. It takes a powerful and meaningful picture to get to some people. Nick Ut was asked the name of this specific image, and he said: “Terrible War.” A lot of people say “Napalm Girl” or “Napalm Photo”, but when I use the photo I say, “Terrible War.”

This is a link to a website that I found. It shows the 30 most influential photographs that people say changed the world: http://www.photographyschoolsonline.net/blog/2010/30-photos-that-changed-the-world/

Example of a strong picture on that list:

Lewis bush, a photographer and lecturer posted an article on his blog. He talked about the topic in which I’m addressing, whether pictures have the power to change the world or people’s perceptions.

Bush’s official website: http://www.lewisbush.com/

Bush’s blog post: http://www.disphotic.com/photographs-wont-change-the-world/

In the title of his essay, Bush says: ‘Photographs won’t change the world’. He goes onto say that there’s no real evidence that an actual picture can change the world. He says: ‘photographs are just bits of paper’. Bush  states that pictures do help to ‘expose’ situations for what they are. Nonetheless, he say’s it’s always ‘incomplete and fragmented’. Bush says it’s not the same, to experience the situation in real life and look at it in a picture. For example, the picture of the drowned Syrian boy. Bush quoted: ‘This is not to say that seeing a photograph of a drowned child on a beach is the same as standing on that beach over that small body. But it is about knowing that somewhere a child drowned, and that his death is the consequence of other things which might be more within our power to change. Photographs present the idea that things are happening, or exist, or are possible’.

Lewis simply adds that photographs can’t drastically change someone, they also won’t completely make someone a saint. Picture can influence people in both ways, bad or good. Photographs can only change the world due to one link, says Bush: ‘in the unreachable recesses of the human mind’. Bush included that: ‘To claim that photographs, and by association the act of photographing, will in themselves change the world is disingenuous, a case of letting ourselves off the hook’. I believe that this is a very powerful quote. Bush very clearly exudes that there needs to be external factors, that work to make the world a better place and that the photograph should only remind us of the deterioration as a motivation. Bush ends with a slightly alternative view:  ‘To believe that photographs can’t drive us to change the world is to believe in a futile, solitary, and self-fulfilling prophecy’.

For me, I believe that photographs have the power to change people’s perceptions .You have to feel very strongly and be motivated, as a human being, to change the world. Of course, strong and powerful pictures like Vietnam one, can leave a long lasting impression on people. Therefore, I think that, that’s what causes us to want to change the world. It cannot be done without being in a certain mind-set, which photographs ignite in us. As Lewis Bush says: ‘These things (photographs) can’t change the world, but they can change people, and people can change the world’.To conclude, pictures have the power to change our views, in result we act to change the world.