News

An interview with Nina Berman

Nina Berman, whose work has appeared in National Geographic, Time and the New York Times, says "I've been a documentary photographer since 1987 working in a dozen countries including Afghanistan, Bosnia, India and Vietnam. But most of my time has been spent traveling the U.S.A. trying to understand the American Way of Life." Here, she answers some questions about the Purple Hearts project by phone and e-mail from Times Perspective editor Jim Verhulst.

Published September 2, 2007

---

ADVERTISEMENT Related links Portraits from Nina Berman's Purple Hearts project An interview with Nina Berman Special report: Our casualties of war

Question: Nina, how does making portraits of severely wounded soldiers help us "to understand the American Way of Life"?

War has become an accepted way of life. After World War II, there was Korea, then Vietnam, then Grenada and Panama and the first Gulf War, and the continued bombing of Iraq and now this new war which began in 2003, and there is evidence of these wars and the human toll of war, all across the United States, as seen in its veterans. Also, in these portraits and interviews, there is evidence of our priorities as a nation.

 

The New York Times, in reviewing your exhibit, called "Marine Wedding" "one of the more shocking photographs to emerge from the current Iraq war." Tell us a bit about how you came to make that portrait, the subjects themselves, your relationship with them, and how you feel about the Times' assessment.

I was on assignment for People magazine to follow this couple over a period of time. The magazine wanted to profile a wounded Marine and found Ty and knew he would be marrying Renee, his high school sweetheart. They hired me because I had for the last previous years been photographing wounded veterans. I spent a total of 10 days with them spaced out over three trips, the last of which was the weekend of their wedding and I went with them as they had their wedding portraits taken.

The photo is not shocking to me, but I can see why the Times and many others are shocked by it. The public doesn't often see someone burned so badly who has survived and able to carry on with life, much less someone in uniform. Then there is the bride's expression, which is stark and completely different than what usually comes out of a wedding portrait session.

And there is the discrepancy between my picture and most people's image of the wounded soldier/Marine. In most people's minds, if you asked them to picture what a wounded GI looks like, they would describe a battle scene with other military members helping the wounded, or an image from a hospital operating room, or of a doctor fitting a soldier/Marine with a prosthetic. But in the Marine wedding photo and all of my portraits, the subject is posthospital and so the reality sets in that this is it. This is as best as the fixing gets and for people not used to seeing the reality of war, seeing Ty is shocking.

 

Have you stayed in contact with Ty Ziegel and Renee Kline since last fall's wedding? How are they doing?

I stayed in contact with the family a bit after the People story came out but mainly as a go-between for all the media requests they were receiving and were getting very tired of. Sometimes I speak to their moms.

 

Let's back up a bit. What prompted you to chronicle wounded troops in the first place?

I was watching the war unfold from my TV in New York City and wondered how come I wasn't seeing any images of wounded U.S. troops or wounded Iraqis. I felt that a huge reality of war was being ignored, so I decided to find out for myself what it means to be wounded in this war and who were these people who had volunteered to join.

 

How did you find your subjects?

I mainly found them on Google, but plugging in words like amputee, brain damage, arm, leg, hero, which would point me to local newspaper accounts of wounded servicemen and women. I would track people down from there. Later on a doctor helped me find one.

 

What surprised you in talking with them and making their portraits?

I didn't realize how physically damaged they would be and the number of surgeries many of them endured.

In speaking with them, I expected more anger but felt instead alienation. Some of them were idealists and had joined the military so they could do something great in their lives and being wounded was a huge letdown as they felt that this hope was now gone and they were stuck living banal lives.

Some were extremely naive about what war was really like. One soldier said he thought it would be fun. Another joined because the uniform was cool. I was surprised at how big an experience watching the first Gulf War was for them as children.

Sometimes there was a disconnect as to what they stated was their mission as soldiers - to bring freedom and democracy to the Iraqi people - and how they viewed their own freedom and democracy. I asked one soldier if he planned on voting in the presidential election and he looked at me like I was crazy. His mom, who had signed his enlistment papers, told me they never vote. Another compared freedom to the ability to go see movies and have PlayStations.

 

Your book was published in 2004. What was the initial reaction from the public, from troops, from military families, from veterans, from others?

People are as shocked now as they were then. Vietnam veterans are very moved by it. Some people see it as an antiwar statement, some see it as prowar. Some of the subjects of my book contacted me and thanked me and told people that they were proud to be in the book. Others I never heard from.

 

How have your own feelings toward the war and the wounded evolved since you started this project?

My feelings about the war are the same as they always were and are my private feelings. My feelings about the wounded have evolved in that I have come to realize that while the physical injuries can be huge, sometimes it is the psychological distress that is more difficult for the veteran. I have also become more enraged at how poorly the veterans are treated - and I'm not talking about the Walter Reed scandal which is really minor compared to all the other stuff that has been going on for years. Journalists like Mark Benjamin, first with UPI and now with Salon, have been banging the drum on this since 2003.

Not only is the VA underfunded and the whole system fundamentally broken - is it fair to make a veteran travel four hours to a VA hospital to be treated? - but despite promises, the military and civilian leadership continues to minimize the psychological suffering of veterans and active duty personnel and in many cases seeks to punish soldiers and Marines who cry out for help.

 

You made the "Marine Wedding" portrait a few years after your book was published. Why are you continuing the project?

The subject isn't going away and I still find it interesting.

 

The troop surge started early this year, and in the middle of this month, the commanders are supposed to give the American people an assessment of how things are going - a very macro view. From your micro view of making portraits of individual troops, what do you hope your portraits do for the debate? Or are geopolitics no part of your goal?

Geopolitics are not part of my goal and I don't expect or want my pictures to be part of that debate. What I would hope is that people would look at my portraits and say, this is a great human tragedy for us as a nation and for our individual veterans and their families and communities. I also hope that this opens people's hearts to a discussion and understanding of all casualties of war including the plight of the Iraqi people who are being killed and maimed at a much higher rate than our troops and have no medical care.

 

In the introduction to your book, Verlyn Klinkenborg, a member of the New York Times editorial board, writes "it's hard to say just when the word 'hero' went bankrupt. But in the aftermath of 9/11, America became, to its own mind, a nation of heroes. We spread the word around like butter on toast." He goes on to say "no one has the right to say that these soldiers are not heroes. But I also suspect that few people understand the contemporary hollowness of that word better than they do." You've spent a great deal of time with these wounded troops. Care to comment about the word "hero," your view of it and theirs?

I asked some of them if they felt they were heroes. Some said that they appreciated it when someone called them heroes. Others rejected the word. Myself, I don't believe that joining the military automatically turns someone into a hero, or that getting wounded automatically turns someone into a hero. But to survive and be willing to continue in life enough to share your story is heroic to me.

 

After seeing these portraits and the stories behind them, what do you want people to take away from the experience?

That war is deeply personal and doesn't end when the politicians declare a ceasefire. That the damage lives on sometimes for generations.

[Last modified September 12, 2007, 16:38:30]