According to a recent Yahoo article, Shelbyville, Indiana based photographer Amy Haehl is drawing ire for including a replica gun in a recently released infant photo inspired by the perennial film A Christmas Story.
The photo features some of the most iconic props from the popular holiday film, including glasses, the pink bunny costume, and the leg lamp, but it was the baby-sized wooden gun replica that created the initial controversy. In a Facebook post, Haehl, who runs Coffee Creek Studios, wrote that she'd long wanted to create a photograph inspired by the beloved movie, and that staying true to the movie meant including the object of Ralphie's feverish Christmas desires.
“This photo is not about a baby posed with a 'gun'… it is about love, tradition, family, and happiness,” Haehl wrote on her Facebook page. “['A Christmas Story'] has encouraged smiles, laughter, and happiness for 35 years. It also happened to be filmed right here in the Midwest where I was born and raised."
Not all commenters agreed with Haehl's sentiments, however. According to a Fox News article, the following comments, left on the original Facebook post by unhappy users, have since been deleted.
Some Yahoo commenters also wondered whether the photo was in good taste considering the current political climate around firearms.
"I don't know. How can we think this is cute when again there is a massacre with kids involved. I just can't think this is cute."
After searching through comments sections on the news articles and original post, though, most comments seem to be highly supportive and encouraging. Even Haehl herself said, in her Facebook statement, "other than a few negative comments which is to be expected, there has been an overwhelmingly positive response to this photo and loved by many."
One wonders whether a few negative comments were worthy of the original article, and if articles of this kind are being written merely to create and take advantage of online knee-jerk outrage. What will this trend mean for photographers in the future, when a few negative comments can spawn several articles on large media outlets looking to take advantage of potential outrage? In this instance, it looks like a talented photographer is benefiting from the coverage and receiving loads of support, but how will such a trend affect photographers in the future? Will we see efforts at causing controversy merely for the potential press, or will photographers hold back from sharing images in fear of online reprisals?
Do you think the content of the photograph deserves critique? Do photographers have a responsibility to tip-toe around emotionally charged issues, or is our first duty to our own creative impulses whether it offends others or not? Sound off below.
Lead image used with permission of Amy Haehl
Having had some pretty awful experiences with gun violence, I'm strongly anti-gun, but I'm going to venture a guess that anyone outraged at this doesn't get the reference, which is actually really well done here. I think it's a great photo, and it doesn't bother me.
There is no such thing as "gun violence".
I doubt the family friend murdered with a gun on my family's property or the three kids we used to coach in little league murdered and the kid paralyzed from the neck down in my town's high school cafeteria thanks to a gun would care for whatever semantic game you're playing. I know I don't.
Not saying anything negative about those individuals or you but, it's difficult (and foolish) to attempt an objective conversation like this with people who've suffered in that way. That's not to say I'm a fan of semantics, mind you.
So, you’re saying we should ignore the people guns have had the worst effects on because they’ve been affected by guns and that has unsurprisingly affected their views on guns. Sorry, not a fan of that. I’m a highly objective and rational person, and my firsthand experience with the effects of gun violence acts as evidence that supports my views.
No. I'm saying by virtue of your, and others, firsthand experiences, it would be difficult to maintain that objectivity. To come out of something like that, unaffected, would make you less than human.
I know of a few people who have used guns to stop violence; the elderly gentleman who used a gun to put the halt on a home invasion, the young woman who put the kibosh on an attempted carjacking/kidnapping.
What do we call that? Gun violence prevention?
Most instances in which someone has prevented an act of violence goes unreported so it's difficult to draw a quantitative comparison.
To be sure, I'm not trying to marginalize anyone who has been a victim of violence. But at the end of the day, violence is violence.
I don’t want to get into a debate about gun control on this article. My original point was simply that I don’t think there’s cause for outrage at this photo.
Without gun there could have been far less home invasion, hijacking, murdering etc...If police force can't even protect the citizens and civilians must carry guns to keep themselves safe, then there's something seriously wrong with the country.
"Without gun there could have been far less home invasion, hijacking, murdering etc"
Source?
Do you call people stabbed with Knife "Knife Violence"? Or call people run down with a car on purpose " Car Violence"? Its just violence. Blaming an object for the crime and not the person using it makes you look stupid.
It's amazing how we can disagree and not be outraged.
It's amazing what respect for the good intentions of others who disagree with you can do, right?
I'm in that boat with you. I'm pretty sure people are being upset because they like to have something to scoff at. I personally don't love guns but don't see any issues with the photography here. Some people don't care about context.
In my opinion, which everyone has one of their own. I think this world has gotten too soft. I mean its a toy gun! Have any of them never ever played with a toy gun before? What if the baby was holding LEGO toy gun? Don't tell me that I am too brutal due to what has happened lately, but this is a photograph. Nothing happened! If the client want to have a photo of their baby or whoever like it, let them be. Whatever happened to freedom? So I guess Hollywood stars cannot pose for any billboards/posters with them holding any gun, or are they exception because they're Hollywood? That photo is cute!
All this sniffling about parody or artistic photo from my perspective is self-righteousness run amuck. Being offended is part of life. I don't like to be offended, but I grow out of it. So many "overly" sensitive folks. This is the dark side of social media. Anyone can express a view and see their view as "truth". Grow up, folks. I know, It was painful to grow up as a self-absorbed man.
Would call it a cute photo. I would call it a good image in that it stirs up discussion. To me it speaks volumes to the culture when people can call this cute.
I agree it speaks volumes but we'll probably disagree regarding the content.
Too many assertions are made nowdays but my belief whether u r from an R and D, male female on the whole people have the same goal, fear of the other side is what knocks us off course. To your last comment i would say "dont judge the book by its cover" as to the producer of the image the photographer is doing what most media do today Shock and get noticed. Thats what i meant by "it speaks volumes".
Oh. I don't see how your original comment relates to this explanation but, okay.
Why are you asking a question in your hed? The photographer either is or isn't under fire for this shoot.
It implies a sarcastic, questioning tone, as in: "this photographer is under fire for this? Really?"
Yes, I know. It's fine for op ed or blog pieces. This appears to be an attempt at reporting, though.
I'm as sick as anyone about America's unhealthy gun addiction, but this is stupid. No one was massacred with a BB gun.
I don't like replying to you but that was funny! :-)
:-)
But but you could shoot someone's eye out!
I used to own several firearms. Not only that, but reloaded my own ammunition. I did a LOT of target and competition shooting. Then I met my wife.
When she was 13, she lost her left eye from an errant pellet. Then, her brother committed suicide with her Dad's shotgun. My wife is very anti gun. So my sacrifice to her was to sell all of my firearms and equipment. However....
I am still very much a Second Amendment supporter. Here's a thought:
Why is it that when a drunk kills 5 or 6 people, we never hear the words, 'darned car' or 'darned alcohol'. It's always 'drunk driver'.
Or when a suicide bomber blows up a market, we don't hear 'darned bomb'.
But when someone shoots up a place, it's 'darned guns'. Of course, it's rhetorical because there is an agenda involved.
That was a play on the mom's quote in the Christmas Story. When Ralphie says he wants a BB gun, she says "No, you'll shoot your eye out." This and the bunny suit are the only parts I remember.
Sorry to about your wife, though.
I apologize. My comment was not meant toward you. It was just that your comment dovetailed with my wife's misfortune. I should have clarified that from the start.
To be completely fair, while some drivers intentionally try to harm or kill people with their vehicle, the percentage is much smaller than those trying to harm or kill people with guns. I am NOT saying the second percentage is high, just that whatever it is, the former is much smaller.
My point is that in EVERY scenario I posted, at least one person is killed, yet only in the case of a firearm related death does the blame rest on the gun. 'Gun violence' is a favored term. The gun isn't violent unless somehow, the gun fires, an idiot is cleaning a gun that he/she thought was unloaded, or a youngster finds a gun that an idiot left unlocked or unattended and is killed.
As I said in my earlier post, I used to be heavily involved with firearms and people that were of like mind. Not one of those people had any sort of death associated with their firearms. I went to competitions where there were dozens of people carrying all sorts of weapons from black powder flint locks to 375 H&H magnums. The only thing that saw any sort of damage was a paper target or a clay pigeon.
I understood your point perfectly. My point, although not stated, was that unless you can understand someone else's point of view, you can't effectively persuade them of the validity of yours. When I took Freshman English, in college, a VERY long time ago, my professor said you shouldn't consider opposing arguments in an argumentative essay. I disagreed completely. Partly because he used to teach at Berkley! ;-)
Great concept and final result. I am so tired of hearing the shocked gasps, listening to the judging, and seeing the holier than thou shaming...
Aweee poor babies....I mean the snowflakes, not this infant. Bunch of whiny self indulged people who think their opinions actually matter lol
1. If this was the photo the parents wanted to have taken, then what's the problem? You have a paying client? You take the photo they want to have taken?
2. Would I put the photo of a baby with a fake gun in my online portfolio? No, the potential backlash is obvious, predictable and utterly avoidable.
...unless of course you're itching for the debate.
I would not be surprised if the photographer made a calculated decision to post this -- the engagement alone helps her site improve the search engine ranking. I'm unsure FB's algorithms work the same way, but it likely does have an impact, too.
I wonder what it’s like to literally never enjoy anything anymore. Instead, to spend your day searching and basking in the outrage of others by by posting bait like this. The web has become a battleground for politically correct flamewars. News and blog outlets are just as guilty, for taking part in popularizing these topics and spreading the wildfire.
To quote one of my favorite lines from Rod Serling: " There are weapons that are simply thoughts, attitudes, prejudices, to be found only in the minds of men. For the record, prejudices can kill, and suspicion can destroy, and a thoughtless frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all of its own for the children, and the children yet unborn. And the pity of it is, that these things cannot be confined to the Twilight Zone."
Are people upset about guns? absolutely & they have the right to because of everything that has been going. However, this image is replicating a movie and it is well done. The image is creative and cute. Plus I am sure the parents wanted this image, so what is the problem? I think people are to sensitive, while i can understand that, we can't take everything to heart and start huge arguments over it.
"Be vewy vewy quiet, I'm hunting wabbits" lol.
What will Looney Tunes mean without Elmer Fudd?
Not touching this one. Someone might shoot me.
Finally! A photo of you. It is you, right?
A Christmas Story is a fave of mine, and this is just so darn cute. I went thru the comments and didn't find the negatives, and she only had 6 'angry' faces. Quite interesting....
Should we tip toe around issues? Nope. Art is meant to be subjective and thought provoking. One should not give up their freedom of artistic expression because the current political climate may find it offensive. As long as you're not hurting anyone, or doing something illegal you shouldn't be censored.
Guns will not be banned or regulated any more than they already are this century. Some people think that's bad. Some don't.
The strong majority of people use guns for things other than violence on other people.
Some people will always blame guns and not evil people. Some won't.
Some people care about anti-gun peoples opinions about guns. A lot don't.
Some people think the comment section will change people's minds about guns or gun laws. Some don't.
Some people think their experience with guns, good or bad, make their voice important or worthy of listening to. Some don't.
Some people have trouble understanding how unimportant their opinion is. They are one opinion in a sea of 8 billion people.
I see nothing wrong. Should we also get triggered over photos of cars and knives?
Knives? You might want to ask the people in London, England about that. There is talk of some sort of 'knife control' there.
See what happens when you ban guns? Criminals will always find or make something else to use in their place. It's not the gun that's the problem, it's the person holding the gun.
I'm as left-wing as it gets on gun control ---and I think this is ridiculous. It's a wooden prop directly referencing a classic Christmas film.
Some people are insane.
#ammophobic is stupid.