For 2024 Pilgrims: €50,- donation = 1 year with no ads on the forum + 90% off any 2024 Guide. More here. (Discount code sent to you by Private Message after your donation) |
---|
Are you saying that no one in the past ever had their picture taken with the statue?In Santiago Cathedral yesterday I noticed a most regrettable phenomenon - tourists taking selfies with the statue of St James. As readers may know, it is customary to ascend the gilded statue of the saint on the baroque altar from behind and give it a hug. Thence one descends to the crypt where the ornate casket containing (allegedly) his remains is located. I was shocked to see several people when they reached the point where it is traditional to give the hug, whip out their phones and take selfies with the Great Man. How utterly crass!
Are you saying that no one in the past ever had their picture taken with the statue?
Honestly, I don't see the difference between asking a stranger to take a picture or doing a "self portrait". Perhaps photographs were considered vulgar when the technology was new, because the only right way to have a portrait done was to have it painted.Well of course they had but to my mind there is something decidedly vulgar in taking a selfie with it.
Honestly, I don't see the difference between asking a stranger to take a picture or doing a "self portrait".
As long as photography isn't prohibited and they didn't hit anyone with their selfie-stick, I'm ok with it.
Well, you didn't say that in your first post. If it's prohibited it's not okay!It is prohibited.
I completely agree with observing the restriction. Whether it is a selfie or not is irrelevant.one should have the good manners to observe the restriction on photography that applies.
But it is. It's written right there on a plaque. Sorry, I don't have a picture of the plaqueAs long as photography isn't prohibited and they didn't hit anyone with their selfie-stick, I'm ok with it.
I think that all of us who have been there know it is prohibited.Well, you didn't say that in your first post. If it's prohibited it's not okay!
I haven't been there.I think that all of us who have been there know it is prohibited.
That really illustrates how arbritrary some of these rules and acceptable customs are!but hugging the statue is an accepted thing??? I think that would throw me for a loop too.
I agree that taking selfies in a Church is pretty crass ... but hugging the statue is an accepted thing??? I think that would throw me for a loop too.
In Santiago Cathedral yesterday I noticed a most regrettable phenomenon - tourists taking selfies with the statue of St James. As readers may know, it is customary to ascend the gilded statue of the saint on the baroque altar from behind and give it a hug. Thence one descends to the crypt where the ornate casket containing (allegedly) his remains is located. I was shocked to see several people when they reached the point where it is traditional to give the hug, whip out their phones and take selfies with the Great Man. How utterly crass!
I think that all of us who have been there know it is prohibited.
They don't make selfies!!Definitely prohibited...unless you're the Pope or King or Queen of Spain apparently
I was referring to selfie sticks in general; not necessarily in Santiago. I can't imagine they would be allowed there.They don't make selfies!!
Wish you well,Peter.
But, I'm sure that many people are hesitant to hand over an expensive phone or camera to a complete stranger.Side note, I realized what bothers me about selfie sticks is how it allows us to be more isolated from each other. We don't need to ask someone else (a local perhaps) to take our picture and lose the chance to talk to a stranger for a moment.
I wouldn't hesitate in the least....I think NorthernLaurie's point about friendly interaction having gone by the wayside, was well taken; just as I heard some Hospitaleras and owners mention that they miss the days when pilgrims socialized, rather than being attached to their phones, tablets, et al. I'm certainly no one to judge; I'm on my computer now - and a desktop one at thatBut, I'm sure that many people are hesitant to hand over an expensive phone or camera to a complete stranger.
But, I'm sure that many people are hesitant to hand over an expensive phone or camera to a complete stranger.
I just don't get this. There are a million ways to interact with strangers and there is no need to do them all. Why not leave your guide book at home so you have to ask people more often? Or leave your dictionary so you must engage in charades!Side note, I realized what bothers me about selfie sticks is how it allows us to be more isolated from each other. We don't need to ask someone else (a local perhaps) to take our picture and lose the chance to talk to a stranger for a moment.
I wouldn't hesitate in the least....I think NorthernLaurie's point about friendly interaction having gone by the wayside, was well taken; just as I heard some Hospitaleras and owners mention that they miss the days when pilgrims socialized, rather than being attached to their phones, tablets, et al. I'm certainly no one to judge; I'm on my computer now - and a desktop one at that
Too much nose.This is one of my favourite photos from my last camino. What on earth is bad about it?
Good point. There is an important difference between "turning up one's nose at selfies" and "turning up one's nose in selfies!"Too much nose.
In Santiago Cathedral yesterday I noticed a most regrettable phenomenon - tourists taking selfies with the statue of St James. As readers may know, it is customary to ascend the gilded statue of the saint on the baroque altar from behind and give it a hug. Thence one descends to the crypt where the ornate casket containing (allegedly) his remains is located. I was shocked to see several people when they reached the point where it is traditional to give the hug, whip out their phones and take selfies with the Great Man. How utterly crass!
It depends on the location. The cathedral is a sacred place and regardless of one's beliefs one should have the good manners to observe the restriction on photography that applies. People such as Pope John Paul II and the King and Queen of Spain have been photographed behind the statue by professional photographers as part of the coverage of their visits to the cathedral. It would be very difficult for ordinary people to be thus photographed - it would require the photographer to be aware of just when the subject is at the statue which is not easy given that there is a constant stream of people and only their heads are visible. The photographer would also require a telephoto lens and have access to the front of the altar which is out of bounds. Not impossible perhaps, but very difficult to achieve, and thus likely to have been effected only on rare occasions.
This is one of my favourite photos from my last camino. What on earth is bad about it?
Too much nose.
Are photos simply wrong, or just selfies which tend to be happy poses?I see people taking photos and selfies at the 9/11 memorial in NYC
Unbelievable
I was in Santiago in September. There was a guard at the top of the stairs forcing everyone to put their cell phones away. Maybe something changed in the past few months, or perhaps an oversight by the guard on duty??
It's very subjective butAre photos simply wrong, or just selfies which tend to be happy poses?
It's very subjective but
I would say any photo of a person with the memorial as the main background. Everyone I ever witnessed was the happy pose.
I don't think anyone sees a problem with photos of the new tower or surrounding neighborhood.
Also some people are taking photos of loved ones names inscribed on the memorial. Obviously there's nothing wrong with that.
It is a statue! Don't you think the cathedral in Santiago (as well as many others throughout other countries) profit from the pilgrims? I was sickened more by the fact you have to pay the church somewhere around $500 euros to have the incense swung at mass. And I wasnt happy that the original St. James statue (that for years Pilgrims were allowed to touch) is locked up.
It is a statue! Don't you think the cathedral in Santiago (as well as many others throughout other countries) profit from the pilgrims? I was sickened more by the fact you have to pay the church somewhere around $500 euros to have the incense swung at mass. And I wasnt happy that the original St. James statue (that for years Pilgrims were allowed to touch) is locked up.
I took photos in Santiago Cathedral as did many other people. The security people asked many of us not to take photos then walked away and never followed up. I got the strong impression that they didn't enjoy trying to enforce this rule as it was clearly a futile exercise. I didn't shoot in the central area of the cathedral during mass but did shoot during the botafumeiro "show". I find that camera phones are extremely distracting in a public, crowded place as the screens are so bright, especially when held at arms length above the head. Some people actually shoot with tablets which are huge. Cameras don't light up like that, my back screen tilts downwards towards me, it isn't visible from a distance. I put black tape on some bits of my camera, particularly the white lettering on the front which is designed to be highly visible.I'm fine with selfies. I very much like C Clearly's selfie. My photo that you see here is a selfie. I prefer to travel alone, and I prefer not to ask people to photograph me (no selfie, no photos). I always photograph my family, and have almost no photos of myself at family events because I am often left out of photos (married, step kids, no kids of my own, I take the photos).
Selfie sticks are annoying.
I don't think it's wise to breach protocol regarding photos in church, but I've done it. Probably won't do it again, but it may be worth considering that the whole Santiago de Compostela town and Cathedral have become a world-wide destination, and people do like to capture experiences on film. Also, have a look at youtube for all of the swinging botafumeiro videos. I am quite sure that if the church didn't want cameras / phones in church, they could effectively eliminate them.
Short shorts in church is very disrespectful, and I have seen people from all cultures commit similar sins.
In Cambodia, monks smoked, drank, and played cards. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
And that's all I'm going to say about that!
..., just wait for selfie-drones! Some drones are getting to be very small and much cheaper. Soon they will be everywhere and VERY irritating. I've written comments on a couple of photography blogs about these new tiny drones. They will become so numerous and intrusive (and dangerous and noisy) that regulations will tighten and they will become more strictly controlled. I hope. ...
They'll be too noisy to use indoors. Also they would all appear in everyone's shots which I think will be a major problem when they are used outdoors, especially at major tourist sites. I saw a video on the forum a few weeks ago which was shot inside the cathedral - obviously by a drone! Cathedral was empty and lights were on, windows dark so shoot was at night. It would have been a fairly big drone so pretty noisy. I was surprised that permission was granted to fly a drone inside the cathedral. It seems there's always a danger of failure and a crash, so what potential damage to the cathedral interior bits and bobs? I wonder if the videographers were insured.Now how do I get that mental picture of flocks of mini-drones flying through the cathedral like noisy birds out of my mind? BC SY
Now how do I get that mental picture of flocks of mini-drones flying through the cathedral like noisy birds out of my mind? BC SY
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?