Witnesses to Radioactive Contamination 179
Matsushige’s photograph is faithful to the original, not cropped. The black
edge indicates that it was a full-format image. Defects of the image are clearly
visible, 17 showing that the material of the negative must have been badly
affected by external conditions. In the view of the art historian Michael
Lucken, these images 18 do not fundamentally differ from ordinary propaganda photography, which is essentially distinguished by having to uphold
the state-decreed, heroic doctrine of the gaze. Thus, Lucken writes: “One
can therefore say that the photographs he took do not show the catastrophe,
but rather that they depict in a new order of things the trace of the rules that
were previously relevant for him.” 19
Indeed, the full extent of the catastrophe is not conveyed by the motif, since
the people in the images have already been helped, which was intended to
suggest that the Japanese military had brought the situation “under control.”
Nevertheless, the actual uncontrollability of the situation – in this surprising
first atomic bomb attack – is evident, since it is conveyed quite fundamentally
by the flawed elements of the picture: the streaks, dots, splashes, areas out of
focus, and cloud-like overexposures.
In an interview by the artist and photographer Robert del Tredici, 20
Matsushige describes his situation as follows: “I went into the field holding my
wife’s hand, but I couldn’t see her face because of the blast and the uranium
dust. Everywhere there was dust; it made a grayish darkness over everything.” 21
Matsushige’s description of the radioactive fallout to which he and his wife
were exposed and his time spent near the hypocenter makes it distressingly clear
how much he was physically exposed to the toxic radiation. Though he ultimately says little about the health consequences he suffered, he offers clear comments on the damaged state of the negatives, which were restored in the 1970s.
The author Greg Mitchell points out that Matsushige developed his photographs in the toxic environment shortly after taking them: “When he was
done he returned to his home and developed the pictures in the most primitive way, since every dark room in the city, including his own, had been
destroyed.” 22 This opens up speculation about whether the primitive situation under which they were developed was the cause of the visible defects. 23
It is, in any case, clear that the invisible danger is implemented, in a sense,
in the message of the photographs by the various indexical overwritings in
the images. The events during which they were taken and the circumstances
under which they were developed are encoded in the material, which both
endures within and testifies to the catastrophe.
Radiation of April 26, 1986 (Igor Kostin)
The photographer Igor Kostin worked for the Soviet news agency Novosti
(Agenstvo Pechati Novosti, APN). Shortly after the catastrophe in Chernobyl
on April 26, 1986, Kostin documented the damaged nuclear power plant,
of which the fourth reactor was completely destroyed in the explosion.
He had been called that night by a friend who was a helicopter pilot and
Matsushige’s photograph is faithful to the original, not cropped. The black
edge indicates that it was a full-format image. Defects of the image are clearly
visible, 17 showing that the material of the negative must have been badly
affected by external conditions. In the view of the art historian Michael
Lucken, these images 18 do not fundamentally differ from ordinary propaganda photography, which is essentially distinguished by having to uphold
the state-decreed, heroic doctrine of the gaze. Thus, Lucken writes: “One
can therefore say that the photographs he took do not show the catastrophe,
but rather that they depict in a new order of things the trace of the rules that
were previously relevant for him.” 19
Indeed, the full extent of the catastrophe is not conveyed by the motif, since
the people in the images have already been helped, which was intended to
suggest that the Japanese military had brought the situation “under control.”
Nevertheless, the actual uncontrollability of the situation – in this surprising
first atomic bomb attack – is evident, since it is conveyed quite fundamentally
by the flawed elements of the picture: the streaks, dots, splashes, areas out of
focus, and cloud-like overexposures.
In an interview by the artist and photographer Robert del Tredici, 20
Matsushige describes his situation as follows: “I went into the field holding my
wife’s hand, but I couldn’t see her face because of the blast and the uranium
dust. Everywhere there was dust; it made a grayish darkness over everything.” 21
Matsushige’s description of the radioactive fallout to which he and his wife
were exposed and his time spent near the hypocenter makes it distressingly clear
how much he was physically exposed to the toxic radiation. Though he ultimately says little about the health consequences he suffered, he offers clear comments on the damaged state of the negatives, which were restored in the 1970s.
The author Greg Mitchell points out that Matsushige developed his photographs in the toxic environment shortly after taking them: “When he was
done he returned to his home and developed the pictures in the most primitive way, since every dark room in the city, including his own, had been
destroyed.” 22 This opens up speculation about whether the primitive situation under which they were developed was the cause of the visible defects. 23
It is, in any case, clear that the invisible danger is implemented, in a sense,
in the message of the photographs by the various indexical overwritings in
the images. The events during which they were taken and the circumstances
under which they were developed are encoded in the material, which both
endures within and testifies to the catastrophe.
Radiation of April 26, 1986 (Igor Kostin)
The photographer Igor Kostin worked for the Soviet news agency Novosti
(Agenstvo Pechati Novosti, APN). Shortly after the catastrophe in Chernobyl
on April 26, 1986, Kostin documented the damaged nuclear power plant,
of which the fourth reactor was completely destroyed in the explosion.
He had been called that night by a friend who was a helicopter pilot and