Photojournalist or Voyeur? 

When does the photographer cross the line?

voyeur 
noun 
2. a person who watches other people's private lives. Cambridge Dictionaries Online

Main Entry: voy·eur
Pronunciation: vwä-'y&r, voi-'&r
Function: noun
Etymology: French, literally, one who sees, from Middle French, from voir to see, from Latin vidEre
2 : a prying observer who is usually seeking the sordid or the scandalous. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

If I walk past a house in the evening and the curtains are not yet drawn, I can look into the front room to observe the occupants. They are probably sitting on the sofa watching the news, maybe eating a meal. I look away, disinterested, and carry on walking. 

Suppose, however, the people inside the house were engaged in more intimate activities. Instead of walking by, I pause to watch. I raise my camera and steal a shot.

Is this voyeuristic? Undoubtedly so, but why? If one of the characteristics of voyeurism is that it is non-consensual, then watching other people who are unaware of one's presence is certainly voyeuristic.  But supposing one of the people was a famous politician and the other a gentleman who was not her known partner. Would taking the shot still be voyeuristic, or astute photojournalism? Does it make a difference if the people involved are in the public eye? 

As a street photographer this issue is important, and it has given me much cause for reflection.  In order to explore my own motives for wanting to document the lives of other people, I decided to take some shots which were on the boundaries of my own comfort zone. The series, called Space Invaders, is documented here.

(C) Helen Williams 2006