though his career began years prior to the AIDS crisis , his photos of patients are the most memorable , for which he received numerous honours such as “ the UN World Health Organization ' All for Health , Health for All ' award in 1987 , and the Kodak Crystal Eagle Award in 1990 for Impact in Photo journalism ” ( WorldPressPhoto . org , n . d .).
Fig 1 , Ken Meeks Obituary in the New York Times 1986
The man in the photograph is Ken Meeks , aged 45 , who passed away days after his picture was taken due to complications caused by AIDS . Ken held a doctorate in social science and was an activist for the victims of AIDS as a member of the board of directors of GMHC ( Gay Men ’ s Health Crisis ), as stated in ( Fig . 1 ). Meeks who had previously travelled across America advocating for the cause , was staying at a friend ’ s house in San Francisco , when his partner phoned Reininger to inform him of Meek ’ s precarious situation and his lack of time for future portraits
( Walker , 2006 ).
At first level , the photograph has an overall dark background ( although not empty or invisible ), performing almost as a vignette . With a brighter ‘ look ’, there is the main subject , Ken Meeks . Even without knowing the story behind the photograph , there are plenty of semiotic ‘ signs ’ that give us indication of the unhealthy situation Ken finds himself in . The bright hospital gown , draws attention to his body covered in wounds , in the shape of purple patches ( his Karposi ' s sarcoma ). His face is a few tones darker than the rest of his body , although still brighter than the background , and deeply expresses personal feelings , especially in his eyes . A small detail , that is worth drawing attention to is the silver / gold coloured watch on his arms , that may indicate class and social status . Ken occupies half of the image and faces the left border , having his back turned to the other half . On the right half there is not much to see but a man siting in a couch , reading what seems to be a newspaper , with his feet up , fading into the background which help us locate the image in a domiciliary space , contrasted by the hospital gown worn by Meeks .
Personally , I had quite a strong connection with this image from the very first time I saw it . Many were the feelings I initially had : discomfort , uneasiness , guilt just to name a few . One however seemed to be consistent . The more I stared at Ken Meeks in his wheelchair , the more I felt like he was staring at me back . A constant friction between our gazes , seemed to be continual . It was very emotionally challenging to understand this connection established between me and the photographic subject . It was precisely what Barthes described as a matter of affection , ‘[ an ] internal agitation , a certain labor too , the pressure of the unspeakable which wants to be spoken ’ ( 1980 : 19 ). Being part of the queer community myself , I could not help but to
JOĀO SANTOS
44