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
People who intend to cause harm WILL cause harm. School boys can steal guns from family and do silly things. Cars can be easily stopped and have no bullets that travels far distance.
If the scope of crime is limited people don’t have the need to defend themselves. If ordinary citizens are not allowed to carry guns there will be less kidnapping on the street or robberies (where guns are used to threaten).
When you are a weaker person you don’t blooody fight back, you escape the situation and call the police. Criminals who use gun on frequent basis will always shoot better than your average housewife so the chances of you taking down a criminal is slim anyway. If only police force are equipped with guns and out number criminals people will think twice before committing a crime. On the other hand, police should always respond in time (should be their target to do so).
Oh I get it. Maybe guns are not great equaliser, nuclear is after all according to your logic. But I wonder why the US was trying to meddle N Korea’s nuclear business.
I am not anti American or irrational. Don’t put hats on people who disagree with you. I am just using obvious example to counter your argument about how effective guns are.
In North Korea example, US was trying to have them “denuked” because everyone knows when they have nuke power they become a great threat. Same is allowing guns in the hands of criminals. They too become a great threat.
Allowing citizens to own gun is a problem in any country.
If guns are legal and easily accessible, criminals will have a greater success in committing a crime because of this “dangerous advantage”. On the other hand, In a hijack situation if the criminal have no gun he can be easily raided by armed police because he can’t deal deadly harm on hostages or anyone. Or for you people who find peace in owning guns, do you expect an average untrained person to risk his or her life and the lives of surrounding people to initiate and engage a gunshoot with the criminals? Any miscalculation there will be innocent blood in your hands.
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?
Possibly, not sure. You’d have to ask Nicole.
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.
When has anyone used "creative" as an insult?
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! ;-)
Not fear of guns, she used to shoot. Her hatred of guns and frankly, I don't blame her. It was my love for her that is greater than my enjoyment of firearms. You may thing that folly, and that's fine. I don't think so.
I know you'll disagree but marriage can only stand so much rationality. And in this case, it really doesn't matter.
Your reply doesn't surprise me. ;-)
We've been together for 27 years and other than one of us assuming room temperature, it will continue just fine.
For cryin' out loud....give it a rest!
Exactly what I did when I said to give it a rest. Couldn't be more succinct.
My point is this; don't play marriage counselor when you haven't any notion of what my relationship is like. You decided to give me an unsolicited lesson in psychology because you disagreed with the course I decided to take. I will assume that you're a clinical psychologist. You should know better than to give advice to a total stranger.
And, you did it not once, but twice. Of course, your 'advice' is worth what I paid for it. And with that, I bid you adieu.
Not upset, How about disgusted? Do you give people camera advice the same way? "You SHOULD have purchased 'camera X'" without having a clue as to how they shoot or what they shoot? My guess is you probably ask things like budget, shooting habits, subjects they shoot, THEN you tell them what you think would be a good camera choice.
If so, then why did you decide to give me marital advice without having ANY information? That's the whole point. You don't tell a guy he should have bought a Cooper Mini before you knew that he was going to haul lawn mowers or lumber. Am I right? Or do you express your opinion before you know what it is that the person you're claiming to advise has in mind?
And I forgot; respect? How about you respecting the path I took? You could have left it alone, but noooooooo! You had to show me that I was off the rails with my choice. Respect; a two way street.
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.
He's gross! >.<
I don't post photos and also have a big mouth. There're lots of reasons to post or to not post. My only excuse for having a big mouth is being the baby of a rather large family. ;-)
I used up my life's allotment of insults a very long time ago! ;-)
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.
Listen, I am a gun owner so I have different views. I am just saying that people are upset over guns and they do have solid reasons. I personally believe a person's right to bear arms. I am not one of those people upset with guns, people kill people, not guns. But I do understand where the fear comes from. Doesn't mean I agree with it.
You doubt I am a gun owner? Do you personally know me?? I am a gun owner and actually I have been hunting with my father for over 15 years. So how about you don't make assumptions about me over a 3 sentence comment that I made. Get over yourself. I am not going to argue with you! Just because I disagree with other people's opinions and thoughts doesn't mean that I don't try to understand where they are coming from. It's called being open minded and trying to understand why others feel the way they do. It doesn't mean I agree with them, it means I am trying to understand them.
"The fear is irrational, and you're encouraging that irrational fear"
How am I encouraging their fear?? By posting a comment on FStoppers? Wow, I can sure see how that is encouragement.
My original comment states that I believe the image is well done and that people are too sensative over things, so please tell me how that is encouraging their fear??
You just want/like to argue apparently. I don't agree with alot of people are their opinions, but that doesn't mean that I won't try to understand why they feel that way and try to understand their point of view.
If you wanted to have a discussing I would be more than happy to do so, but maybe watch how you speak to people because how you come across is super aggressive and I don't have discussions with aggressive people. Have a great day!