How Images (And Hugs) Can Change the World

How Images (And Hugs) Can Change the World

12-year-old Devonte Hart, Sgt. Bret Barnum share hug at Ferguson rallyIn 1604 Christopher Marlowe wrote these lines about Helen of Troy: “was this the face that launch’d a thousand ships and burnt the topless towers of Ilium?” The power of an image and its ability to evoke passion and emotion is ingrained in our history and social consciousness. This picture – and the story behind it – evoked so many personal feelings and emotions that I have had to sit quietly and alone for quite a while this Thanksgiving weekend determining what it was I wanted to share.

The photo above was caught by Johnny Nguyen at the start of a Ferguson rally being held in Portland, Oregon last Tuesday. Twelve-year-old Devonte Hart was holding a “Free Hugs” sign (more on that below) as he stood in front of a police barricade obviously upset.  Devonte’s mother, Jen Hart, is white, and she shared with reporters how her son has been struggling terribly to understand and reconcile his perceptions and understanding of what happened in Ferguson – and how race relations in his country will affect him as he grows into a man.

The officer pictured above, Sgt. Bret Barnum, works in the traffic division of the Portland police department and was at the site of the rally for crowd control. Standing about 10 feet from Devonte, officer Barnum noticed he was upset and called him over. They shook hands, chatted politely, Barnum expressing an interest in where Devonte went to school and what he had done this past summer. When asked why he was crying Devonte shared his concerns with the officer who empathized with those concerns. After they were done Barnum asked whether he might get one of the free hugs being offered. And thus be to infamy – maybe.

There was another time in our history when the camera captured an image that made a tremendous impact on the perception of race relations, but according to most accounts that image was not what it appeared to be. In his latest book, David & Goliath, Malcolm Gladwell relates the story behind this famous photograph of the civil rights movement in Birmingham, Alabama. The picture was taken by Bill Hudson of the Associated Press and shows 15-year-old Walter Gasden apparently being attacked by two police dogs during a May 3, 1963 protest in Birmingham.

But Walter Gasden was not a protester – he was a bystander who had been arrested by the officer in the photograph (Dick Middleton) for refusing an order to leave the street. It is believed that the police in the photograph are actually trying to hold the dogs back as Gasden strikes the dog with his left knee, causing it injury that required treatment by a veterinarian.

Diane McWhorter related this story in her book, Carry Me Home. Gladwell relied in part upon McWhoter’s account to relate how Wyatt Walker – an African American pastor and civil rights leader – had worked to confuse local authorities from being unable to distinguish protestors from bystanders in order to create chaos and a picture-perfect moment that had the purpose and effect Walker had hoped: it was printed in newspapers across the country with the understandable byline imagery of police using German Shepherds to attack a peaceful civil rights protestor.

Images can be incredibly powerful even when perception may not match reality (as in, perception is reality). A solitary image can profoundly impact a national cause just as a face can launch a thousand ships. Just as the image of a police officer accepting a free hug from a confused, scared and innocent youth can hopefully reset the dialogue we still desperately need to continue in this country on race relations, away from the hateful and destructive images of Ferguson that have perceptually hijacked that dialogue.

And what about those free hugs? The Free Hugs Campaign was started in 2004 by an Australian known under the pseudonym of Juan Mann (i.e., one man) in the Pitt Street Mall of Sydney.

imageI was first introduced to Free Hugs in 2010 when Sister Jill Bond of Catholic Health Service of Miami shared this 2006 video of the campaign shot in Hollywood, California (click on picture for link to the video). Set to the music of the late Israel Kamakawiwo’ole’s version of Over the Rainbow, it is one of the most captivating, inspiring and thought-provoking videos I have ever seen, and I have used it multiple times since in client workshops.

That it serves as an underpinning of the story behind the image of Devonte and Officer Barnum is emotionally compelling to me on multiple levels. In a time when technology has done so much to keep us connected it truly amazes – and depresses – me to realize just how disconnected we have become. And how way too often it seems our preference is to remain that way unless someone – like an innocent 12-year-old boy whose heart is full of love and wonder – has the courage to help us understand how simply powerful one hug can be – especially when it’s captured as an image that can be shared with others.

Cheers,
  Sparky

The Racial Tipping Point?

This past Friday Rush Limbaugh took marked exception – yes, even for him – to Oprah Winfrey’s comments made during an interview with BBC Arts Editor Will Gompertz discussing a new film she stars in: The Butler. Oprah was responding to a line of questioning that was seeking to understand from her perspective whether and to what extent the race issues addressed in the movie were historic versus contemporary (that’s a bit of context that most of the popular media has left out of this story from what I’ve read).

Within this context, and in response to Gompertz’s question regarding whether or not President Obama has faced race-related challenges, Winfrey made the assertion that the president is disrespected in “many cases” because of his race. She said that, “just the level of disrespect, when the senator <sic> yelled out, ‘You’re a liar!’ Remember that? Yeah, I think that there’s a level of disrespect for the office that occurs, and that occurs in some cases and maybe even many cases because he’s African-American … there’s no question about that. And it’s the kind of thing that nobody ever says but everybody’s thinking it.”

Well, love him or hate him, Mr. Limbaugh has never been in the camp of not saying what he’s thinking. And so he did, rhetorically asking of Oprah on his radio show, “then how the hell did you become who you are?” and, “why hasn’t anybody in your audience, Oprah, ever said, ‘You lie!’? Because you have. It wasn’t a senator, Oprah. It was a congressman by the name of Joe Wilson, and he was right. Obama was lying.”

Limbaugh admitted that he had to be “really careful” because Oprah is seen as a “goddess to a lot of people,” but went on to add that, “these people are not nearly as smart as they think they are, and they don’t know nearly what they think they know,” he continued. “They are embarrassingly ignorant. It wasn’t a senator. It was a congressman. And it’s not because he was black. It’s because he was lying, Oprah! He’s lying now!”

As often happens, Rush Limbaugh seized upon a particular aspect of a news story that he could effectively carve out of and away from a much more complex issue – and in so doing make it appear that his ability to attack that aspect is the same as attacking the broader issue. Of course it is not, but then I think his remarks regarding Oprah’s audience could just as easily be applied to his own.

The underlying point that I think Limbaugh could have made – maybe really wanted to make – is becoming an increasingly relevant and legitimate question: are we nearing, or have we reached, the tipping point where our collective sensibilities to racism are doing more to hinder the advancement of civil rights than help? Let me put it another, more direct way. Is the fear of being called a racist – and everything that entails – becoming an albatross around the neck of society to the point where there is today more concern about being called a racist than being racist?

I imagine Ms. Winfrey would respond that as long as racism exists – which most certainly it still does – the risk of her offending those who are not racist is far outweighed by the need to continue communicating its prevalence. I have no way of knowing whether or not that would be her perspective, but I would find it hard to argue with. I’m not sure Mr. Limbaugh looks at the world that way because if he did, I think he might not have taken such vociferous exception to Oprah’s comments. He might instead have asked the questions that I have above.

What do you think?

Cheers,
  Sparky