Case Study: The Vulture & The Little Girl by Kevin Carter

The Vulture & The Little Girl

By Kevin Carter

In this case study, the impact that this photograph had on so many individuals is paramount to emphasise. The way a single image could cause the drastic alteration to so many lives manifested the significance of photographic media in the world.

Introduction

Kevin Carter’s image, ‘The Vulture and the Little Girl’, depicting an impoverished, starving Sudanese girl being stalked by a predatory bird, was featured in The New York Times on 26th March 1993. This harrowing image was featured in an article discussing how the United States were accusing Sudan of “trying to placate the west” (Lorch, 1993) following rumours that the United States were seeking to add Sudan to a list of countries that were prone to inciting terrorism (Lorch,1993). This image had a revelatory impact on the world as well as the photographer, Kevin Carter; for the common viewer of the New York Times who saw this article; the ramifications it had on the rest of society from just one picture; and other ways in which this heart-breaking photograph resonated with such a widespread demographic.

The Impact of the Image and Article

This photograph was noted to have triggered a “sensation” in the public sphere by “being used in posters for raising funds for aid organisations” as well as the “immediate public reaction was to send money to any humanitarian organisation that had an operation in Sudan” (Marinovich & Silva, p.151, 2000). The article sparked the beginning of a great charitable movement and had a positive ethical benefit hard to achieve by other means.    

Many people were more associated with wanting to know what happened to the little girl after this picture was taken. The New York Times released a special editorial and revealed that “the photographer reports that [the girl] recovered enough to resume her trek after the vulture was chased away. It is not known whether she reached the centre” (NY Times, 1993). It was also disclosed by Carter to João Silva that he had scared off the vulture to give the lgirl an opportunity to get away (Marinovich & Silva, p.117, 2000). Sadly her fate is unknown.

The caption beneath the photograph in The New York Times describes the image as featuring "a little girl, weakened from hunger, collapsed recently along the trail to a feeding centre in Ayod. Nearby, a vulture waited." (Lorch, 1993) When travelling to Ayod, Carter was accompanied by João Silva, a South African war photographer, and they both were tasked with capturing imagery representing the famine in Sudan. Silva has retold the conversation following Carter taking this photograph regarding that Carter came to him and said that he was “shooting this kid on her knees, and then changed my angle, and suddenly there was this vulture right behind her.” (Marinovich & Silva, p.117, 2000) One can see that Kevin Carter did not fabricate any part of this photograph, in keeping with the ethical standard of honest work. It is an authentic image that resonated so powerfully with the world, that it kickstarted a conversation in society that something needed to be done.

The Photographer

As previously mentioned, Kevin Carter, in 1993, created this harrowing image of a young, Sudanese girl. It is a powerful image with so much to unpack and delve into. However, the story surrounding what stemmed from the distribution of this photograph is one of many chapters.

Carter received great recognition for his work. He was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for Feature Photography, in 1994, because of his work in Ayod (The Pulitzer Prizes, 2022). When released to the public, in the article, the public perception of both the image and Carter came to be reviewed in various interpretations. Although recognised as a great photographer for his contributions to the craft for images like the aforementioned, Carter bore the heavy toll of capturing such devastation and felt great remorse for what was happening to these innocent souls.

Another noteworthy impact that this photograph had though was one of great scrutiny towards Carter regarding why he just took the picture. Public outcry deemed it was immoral to walk away. These criticisms weighed on Carter’s mind and were factors that were relevant to his ultimate, suicidal demise (Keller, 1994). There were ideas then put forth discussing whether one should claim responsibility for ethical behaviours as a photographer. Social writer, Susan Sontag released a book-length paper exploring these themes in her essay entitled ‘Regarding the Pain of Others’. She mentioned that “perhaps the only people with the right to look at images of suffering of this extreme order are those who could do something to alleviate it … or those who could learn from it. The rest of us are voyeurs, whether or not we mean to be.” (Sontag, 2003) Released a decade after the publication of Carter’s image, Sontag’s paper had great relevance. As a photographer, capturing such haunting imagery, should one not also do one’s part to be more than just an observer or a bystander.

Just a matter of months following him being awarded his Pulitzer Prize, Carter met his demise by committing suicide by carbon monoxide poisoning at the age of 33 on 27th July 1994 (Carlin, 1994 & Keller, 1994). Having witnessed such tragedy, Carter was overwhelmed by trauma. It may have made his name well regarded as a prominent photographer of his time, but his mental capacity to withstand such harrowing scenes evidently proved too much for him to suffer any longer (Carlin, 1994).  

The Article

The New York Times published this article that would be distributed to in the public sphere about the conditions of Sudan and where their loyalties would lie in relation to the United States of America. The article was a plea to the readers to raise awareness of the struggles such as famine, terrorism, and other worldly affliction that the people of Sudan were facing (Lorch, 1993). Looking at the layout of this article, it is curious and odd to have a piece about poverty placed next to an advertisement for a trinket sold by Tiffany & Co. Does this not seem inconsistent with the message that is trying to be conveyed by Lorch in her article? Do these capitalist, commercial advertisements for commodities really belong next to Carter’s image?

The New York Times – Article in print

It shows a lack of awareness of the editor; unable to recognise the poignancy of Lorch’s article. The tensions were so high in Sudan at the time that the government began to grant journalists, and photojournalists, short term visas to visit the country, take their images or get their stories, and then leave straight away, all whilst being under constant supervision by government officials (Lorch, 1993). If that, alone, does not give a slight indication of the strain and anxiety that the entire nation of Sudan was under during this civil war, then what could ever invoke such empathy from the editor of The New. York Times in 1993? Kevin Carter was one of these practitioners that was granted access to Ayod, Sudan, now known as South Sudan (Witko, (n.d.)). Many things came from this image; far more vastly than anyone, including Carter, would have ever fathomed could ensue. 

Summary

In summary, Kevin Carter’s image brought a lot of concepts to the surface of human discussion about the world. Preceding this article, society elected to ignore what was happening abroad almost in an ‘out of sight, out mind’ mentality. With such bold topics being exposed to these viewers, it is almost as if to ignore it then would be in vain, a sign of arrogance. This could insinuate that a photograph holds more power, more influence, and more finesse than most would give credit for.