Imagine being a photojournalist, standing in the midst of a violent event, guns blazing all around you, people screaming and running. Now pause and watch how your body is reacting. Your adrenaline is pumping, you heart is pounding, sweat is squeezing out of all available pores, all the predicable flight or fight survival symptoms are exerting their toll on your physical wellbeing. People are shouting at you to take cover, to get in the jeep, helicopter, whatever, to escape. Instead, you lift the camera hanging round your neck to your eye, and press the shutter. Then you get the hell out of there.

There are photographs that depict some of history's most horrendous events, capturing incredible moments of violence. Who are the people standing behind the camera? What is their attraction to violent events? Is it the quest for immortality, a deep need to communicate the reality of the violent occurrences around the world, or an unhealthy obsession with adrenaline? Is the publication of such images sensationalism?

These were just some of the questions flowing through my head last night during Dave Gilligan's cool talk on "Shoot: Photojournalism: The history of the gun and the camera" in Bar No 8 in Galway.



Dave reminded us that photojournalism has three important aspects:

• 1. Timelessness
• 2. Narrative: that the image tells a story
• 3. Objectivity: of the person taking the photograph

Starting with a striking 1930's image taken by Robert Capa, of a loyalist militia man at the moment of death, Dave told us how there was a long investigation into whether this image was real or fake. He pointed out that the hand behind the falling man wasn't extended to shield his fall, and this was the key to determining its legitimacy, evidence to show the man was indeed dead as he was falling.



The final image of a "terrorist" gunman at a train station in Mumbai in 2008, was the emotional highlight of the evening. Seeing the cercanity of the photographer to the plain clothed man, it was intense to imagine being in his shoes, behind the camera. In the silent grey gloom of Bar No 8, surrounded by 30 fellow enthusiasts, primed by the violence in previous images, and the topic of terrorists, IRA murals and militiamen, and the photographs of war, the captivated silence only deepened with this image. The inadequacy of the photographer to do more than capture the event was apparent, as he wished at that moment that he had a gun to shoot him with, instead of a camera.

In the discussion afterward, the idea of "what is your definition of a terrorist" was raised and it's interesting to note that throughout the events surrounding Mumbai, in the Arab world, the perpetrators were referred to as 'gunmen', 'attackers' and 'insurgents', "all labels which could be positive, depending on whose side you're on; 'terrorist' carries only negative connotations. In the west, these innocuous attackers are terrorists." It was a conversation topic that was quickly put to bed by Dave, but it was an interesting end to an intriguing talk.

Afterwards, we had two brave photographers show us their work, and we ended with our usual PLAY with meeting new people, the most fun part of meetforeal events!

A huge thanks to Dave Gilligan who researched tirelessly on the subject matter, and came all the way from Limerick to share his ideas; to Paul and Sarah who showed us their own photographs of Galway and Shangri-La, and to everyone who came last night, participating in their own way to make the evening special.