Summary and Response to “Strangers with Cameras”

In the documentary directed by Elizabeth Barret titled “Stranger with a Camera” Barret documents the story and events leading to the murder of Hugh O’Connor a Canadian filmmaker in 1967, which took place in Lecher County, Kentucky in the Appalachian Mountains. “Stranger with a Camera” not only shows the context for which the murder of Hugh O’Connor was killed, but shows how communities of the rural Appalachian were affected by the coal mining industry, and the subsequent media inundation of their communities

In 1964 President Johnson declared a “war on poverty” in America, and the rural Appalachian region became the poster with which was shown, the poverty in America. Most of the region and its inhabitants were there to mine the vast amount of coal in the mountains. As the mining become more industrialized, the “area went into disrepair and poverty [and] coal miners were replaced by machinery.” As most of the region’s economy was based on the coal mines, and coal being the main resource in the area, many of the workers became unemployed. Of the workers that still worked for the mining companies, many felt they were being exploited by the industry working in poor conditions and for little pay.

The area had “become a metaphor for all that was wrong with the American dream.” This depiction was seen by media as something that needed to be shown to America. Media began pouring into the area to document the social issues taking place in the area. People in the region mixed feelings about the attention that their communities were receiving. Some were glad that area was being shown, as it could help with social injustices that were taking place there. Others though, like Hobart Ison, were outraged by the depiction of their communities as people who needed saving, and saw reporters and documentarians as “outsiders and agitators.” Hobart Ison, a landlord in the area, did not care for presence of filmmakers on his land. As Hugh O’Connor was filming one of his tenants, (a local coal miner) Ison became enraged, and confronted O’Connor, and as his film crew was leaving, O’Connor was shot and killed by Ison. Ison later stated that he acted in self defense stating that “[I[ had to do it. What would he have done to me picture-wise and all?” Larry Daressa wrote in a review of “Stranger with a Camera”[Ison] clearly believed that he owned what was said about [his land] and about the people that lived on it.” Implying, that he didn’t want his life and those in the community to be portrayed in light that may not be accurate with what he thought of his own community.

Elizabeth Barret brings up very interesting ideas on the effect of media portrayal of that which they are documenting. Do cameras show the whole story of a community when they show people in a social standing. When media is trying to depict a society in a certain light of being different from other societies is the media portraying every part the community. A picture a supposed to show a thousand words, but what if that is not all the words of that community, is that what the people being portrayed would say? What about the pictures that are not being shown? I believe that media needs to be objective in their portrayals of people, media needs to try to see things for all aspects of which their showing. It can be hard thing to do when most of the media have an agenda, showing things in a certain light that best suits their story, makes it hard to be objectionable. That is why Barret has documented the story of this society, to bring into view media’s role in what happened in Lecher County in 1967. Barret as a member and having grown up in the area is able to look at the situation more objectionably, and let you look at all areas of the communities in Appalachia, not just the poverty issues there, but deeper into the actual lives of the people there. Barret does so in a way that makes you able to make your own thoughts on why Hugh O’Connor was killed.