Tomb (anonymously) a king of Albania in the Parisian cemetery of Thiais: a photo prohibited?
It is no secret for anyone with digital photography, the shooting has experienced tremendous growth. Now, everyone takes pictures in the most varied circumstances and with what devices, the tech can be simple, such as mobile phones, the most advanced. Without judging by the technical quality or artistic, we can say that most people can easily indulge in photography. Either. But another question arises: Can we photograph everything? There are still a few years, it was almost impossible for example to include on the film remember a concert we attended, and now we wonder sometimes if the audience do not look over their mobile device or the scene ... Similarly, government buildings are to my knowledge quite easily photograph while in contrast, in Albania, it was impossible to photograph the presidential palace or seat of the Prime Minister without seeing a policeman or a soldier tell me it was not allowed.
I would like to stop a ban on the existence of which, I think, goes beyond the simple issue of right to photograph. I remember a few years ago, when I identified the ancient tombs in the cemetery of a village of Seine-et-Marne, a photographer friend who helped me to occasionally warned me to photograph in a cemetery was forbidden. So I asked what it was today.
One thing first: the photographs of graves or cemeteries are many on the Internet. Taking as an example Flickr and seize as they keyword "cemetery" is located about 84 000 elements and about 22,000 for "fall". The choice of theme cemetery shooting is so good.
Yet a quick look at some cemetery regulations reveals the illegality of most of these photos.
Thus, for the cemetery Bourges, it is stated that "it is forbidden to take pictures in cemeteries without permission", as in Belfort where it is forbidden "to photograph the monuments without the permission of the municipal administration. "
For those of Brest, the text contained in Article 83 is more explicit, especially when one considers the title of the article ("Obligation of decency"):
"It is forbidden to hold meetings in cemeteries other than those exclusively devoted to the worship and remembrance of the dead to affix to the inside or outside its premises signs or billboards or other, to visitors or people who follow the convoys of service offerings or discount cards or addresses, and parking for this purpose is the gateway to the cemetery in the outskirts of the graves and in the aisles.
It is also prohibited from engaging in the cemetery for photographic or cinematographic work, unless authorized by the mayor, and perform quests or collection. "
A Sélestat ," he is expressly forbidden to indulge in them without authorization operations photographic or video and usually commit any act contrary to due respect for the dead "(art. 7).
A Jouy-en-Josas , section 13 moves the problem of decency to the image rights:
"The activity of filmmakers and photographers is subject to authorization when exercised in a professional or commercial."
Like to Paris where
"The activity of photographers and filmmakers is subject to authorization when exercised in a professional or commercial. "
could multiply examples, but I have quoted here the different types of prohibition, the regulations often involving the same terms. Note that these regulations have the status of police orders issued by the Mayor after approval by the council, which is why it is not a model regulation for all municipalities. Some municipalities, like Castres have to also chosen not to regulate photography in their cemetery. Finally, in some cases, the authorization of the family is necessary.
Several witnesses attested to the application of these regulations. Thus, a forum devoted to the First World War, tells a visitor:
"I walk frequently in municipal cemeteries especially, and make photos of graves (mostly civilian) of soldiers of GG.
In a large civil cemetery, a cemetery employee 'm politely informed that he was forbidden to photograph, my camera equipment was confiscated myself ... that permission was needed to make images.
write suitable to serve the city for permission, a politician told me that the family agreement was necessary. "
A reading of the regulations, it can happen to identify three main scenarios:
- the ban is not motivated
- the ban is justified for reasons of decency
- ban, reserved for professionals, motivated by an interest in the image
In the non-justification of the ban, we can not infer much, except perhaps that the ban will be obvious to the editor of Regulation. For cons, the latter two are each interesting and deserve a small development
.
ban for reasons of decency partly illuminates the relationship of death with our contemporary societies. The dead here are kept at bay and may even be recipient of a cult. It is striking example reading in the internal regulations of the cemetery in Brest that meetings are allowed "those devoted exclusively to the worship and remembrance of the dead." Michel Lauwers, in his book Birth Cemetery. Sacred places and lands of the dead in the Medieval West " (Aubier, 2005) has shown how the High Middle Ages to the twelfth century, the cemetery is a place of life where men gather to market or dispense justice. The appearance of a pastoral death in the twelfth to thirteenth century s gradually changing the deal just to make a place devoted to the dead and dedicated. Finally, the settlement of Brest is still an heir to this transformation. In this context, the cemetery is the place of the dead, mourning, contemplation and the tributes to the deceased. Placed away from the town or behind high walls, it is a separate world from that of living in which only penetrates to contact the dead through prayer and respect. Therefore, it falls to photograph a disturbing the peace of death, it does not show him respect. And report to the afterlife, it is also probably take away from the point of death does not publish the image.
The publication of this picture leads us to the latter. In a number of example, the prohibition is for professionals, that is to say to those who publish or sell the photographs of graves. Thus the association and Real Chef'op offering up the implementation of short films, said in its listing permissions need to seek to obtain the agreement of the Town Hall before a shoot in a cemetery and "preserve the anonymity of the graves, or do with the families of the deceased." He added: "Attention, some burials may also be protected as artistic works." One key here clearly the legal status of graves and the dead. First, the tomb contains private information (dates of birth and death but also other possible endorsements on plates tributes). As the living, the dead would therefore entitled to respect for privacy. This brings us the question of the communicability of archives containing personal data ... The rights of the heirs are in turn protected by law. Indeed, the French courts qualifies Fallen "Joint family" and under the law, "the burial of the corpse is the accessory which it is based on the legal regime for ensure their protection, "in the words of motivation for bill cons breaches of respect for the dead. The grave is in fact private property can not be photographed without permission. Finally, the argument of protecting the tomb as artistic refers to copyright and to the possible exploitation of cultural heritage. In these last two points, it follows therefore that this is not the law of the dead which is protected but those of copyright holders. However, one might wonder whether the legal protections mentioned in these points have not been put forward to ensure legal protection of decency, which itself may be blurred. The sanctity of the dead will then join the sanctity and inviolability of property prohibited by the legislature.
Despite shifts to the right of ownership or right of publicity, the ban on photographing in cemeteries appears to be essentially, that is to say, in essence, a religious . This is to ensure non-violation of the repose of the dead and by extension respect the separation between the world of the living and the dead. If in some cities, like Paris, the cemetery can become a place of cultural trip, we noticed that in almost all municipalities - and perhaps even more so in rural communes - the cemetery is a sacred place, separated from home and daily life, in which one enters to honor the dead even, according to the types beliefs, connect with them. Y photograph would perhaps disturb this balance built up gradually over the past centuries and remains in a republic, albeit secular, but in which the cult of the dead remains very much alive.
Another question might now arise: why do we photograph in a cemetery? This may be the subject of another text ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment