Placebo
by meyers

Comment by Sand-Strider:

Originally posted by OmanOtter: Had this photo included symbols of other religions alongside the Bible (e.g. Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddist and Hindu symbols together) it would have communicated the inoffensive opinion that religion is a placebo without singling-out a particular group.

It also would have been horribly cluttered and lacked the emphasis it had, I think it is trying to show prayer and the most generally seen view of prayer is Christianity, which is a known majority. This picture should be judged purely on composition, lighting, and such. It should not be judged by your personal political standpoint, and even if it does offend you, doesn't that make it all the more powerful. We should not hide what we disagree with, but see it with open eyes, judge it fairly as a child would, and then reflect on it.

Despite what other people say I think lighting is good, the subject is clear, and the book is more of a background to set the mood and augment the overall meaning of the image. This one was my favorite in the challenge. The shadow on the Bible adds a beautiful finishing effect.

Placebo
by meyers

Comment by OmanOtter:
I'm not here to argue whether prayer is a placebo or not, but I will say that THAT message would not have been so offensive and could have been communicated by including other religious symbols in the picture as well. I got pissed because you singled-out one group for ridicule. It strikes me as hateful. Trying the same with some of the others I mentioned would bring a powerful social condemnation that I think you fear. You might not be gutless, but you sure picked the easy target.

You have an America-centric bias. The world is full of Christians. Ann Coulter and the American Republican Party do not speak for or represent us all. There are also many American Democrats who are Christians and lot's of people who are neither Republicans, Democrats, conservatives or Americans either.

I've said enough. You're probably a decent person who I'd regret arguing with if I met. But you sure pissed me off. I'll try to keep further argument/debate between you and me by private message.

Message edited by author 2007-03-14 15:55:35.

Placebo
by meyers

Comment by meyers:
I'd like to respond to OmanOtter's accusations that my image constitutes "hate speech."

The subject, and title, refer to prayer being a placebo. Studies, such as the one by the American Heart Journal have shown at best there is no correlation between a patient knowing others are praying for them and a speedy recovery, and at worse some found that those patients fare worse on average. A common response to this finding is "God helps those who help themselves," thus giving further support to prayer not being a substitute for actual medical care.

The idea that using a Christian book is gutless, as opposed to attacking one of the other groups Mr OmarOtter lists, is laughable. It would be gutless to attack a group which does not have the power to defend itself. Christians, in the western world, have incredible political power. For example, the House of Representatives passed bill HR 2679, which does not allow a plaintiff to recover their legal costs when attempting to stop government displays of Christianity. Ann Coulter, in front of the Conservative Political Action Conference, called John Edwards a faggot, and received applause. This behavior was not out of character for her, and she will continue to be a prominent part of Republican punditry. Clearly, this shows it is acceptable to attack gay people. There are still parts of this country where being openly gay can get you beaten to death.

On to the specific charge that this image, by not including references to several religions, is "hate speech." In the context of the challenge, "Alternative Medicine," I express the idea that prayer is not an effective substitute for real medical care. It can make some people feel better though, just like a placebo. In a larger sense, however, it is important to note that criticism by itself is not intolerance. My image does nothing to expressly or implicitly imply violence or prejudicial action against Christians.

I have no problem with the fact that some people, Mr OmanOtter included, found this image offensive. I do take issue with some of his comments directed at me.

Day 12 - North Pond
by meyers

Comment by PHOTOKID:
The fog over the buildings in this photo is what first catches my eye, It is very thick and dense. Not to say this is a bad thing, but I wonder how it would look without so much denseness to it and we could see a silohuette or outline of the entire buildings. The imcompleteness of the building got my mind wandering up in the sky instead of leading into the frame

As for the scene before me, I think you did a good job capturing the wither solitude of this place, the white balance is nice, I love how some of the trees have the snow still in the branches. However, I wish there had been a bit more contrast in the sky.

I wonder also what this would look like in portrait mode? I think a bit of a crop off the left and the bottom may help a bit in lanscape mode. IMO, the thing that is missing for me in this shot that was in the fall one is the foreground subject.

Hope this helps.
Rich

Placebo
by meyers

Comment by OmanOtter:
Had this photo included symbols of other religions alongside the Bible (e.g. Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddist and Hindu symbols together) it would have communicated the inoffensive opinion that religion is a placebo without singling-out a particular group. But, by singling-out one specific group, the photographer has submitted hate speech. Imagine the uproar had he used a symbol of another religion instead of the Bible -- a Jewish Woody with a yarmulka or Torah, a Muslim Woody with a beard and a Qur'an, a Native American Woody with feathers and a bud of peyote. I called this cowardly because this photo singles-out the only group that one can safely single-out in the Western world. It's safe to single-out Christians for ridicule. Try it with someone else and you'll lose your job, or worse. Finally, Christians are not synonymous with Bible Thumpers.

Message edited by author 2007-03-14 02:50:07.

Placebo
by meyers

Comment by boxImmortal:
interesting choice of title. A rare instance (for dpc, at least, imo) where the title improves the photo.

Placebo
by meyers

Comment by karmat:
maybe, maybe not.

because it is a black book on a black background, it took me minute to distinguish exactly what I was looking at -- i thought the woody was begging for something. maybe a touch more light on the Bible would make the message a bit more distinguishable, quicker.

Placebo
by meyers

Comment by steez6:
nice title i agree

Placebo
by meyers

Comment by Dirt_Diver:
I don't care for the woodie's anymore.

Placebo
by meyers

Comment by littlegett:
Now thats funny. Very nice lighting and love the shadow. However, there is just something about this image that isn't as crystal clear as I would have liked to see. There is a missing element, But very nice.