The H Line

On the way back from Jersey today, I snapped these photos of the Christopher Street PATH station.

I was excited about this opp. I’ve always been attracted to and intrigued by vacant spaces. Plus, there’s something kind of adorable about how small everything is on the PATH. Smaller cars, lower ceilings at the stations. I just want to pinch its little silver cheeks.

As I was basking in the LCD glow of my recent captures, I was flagged down by two on-site cops who had apparently been telling me that I couldn’t take photos while I was in the process of snapping them (thank you iPod for blocking out unwanted interruptions).

I said, “Oh, OK,” and kept walking, which seemed satisfactory for them. A few paces later, I turned around and said, “Sorry, but can I ask why?” Male cop’s response: “You’re not allowed to. It’s on the sign,” as he pointed to a long list of rules and regulations in impossibly small font, posted on a column near the exit. “Is it just PATH?,” I asked. “It’s not the whole metro transport system, right? ” Visibly annoyed, he responded with a short, “Yeah, just PATH.” I thanked him and went on my way.

- - -

Curiosity unsatisfied, I looked up the full rules and regs when I got home, and discovered that the photography section is astoundingly detailed. The gist is this: you can’t take photos anywhere in the PATH system unless you have a permit and are supervised by a PATH employee, and even then that employee has the right to deny you access to certain areas if…

such representative advises that such photography is prohibited because it will create an image which could be used to aid in the planning of an attempt to disable, destroy, avoid or circumvent any operational, safety, security, evacuation or emergency response device, structure or procedure, or which could be used in the planning of an attempt to commit an act of violence or intentionally cause disruption of rail service or public panic within the PATH system or a part thereof. If possible, a suggestion for alternative photography in PATH which would not have such an effect shall be made by the PATH representative.

That’s an intense caveat, but I see where they’re coming from. After its cuteness, the second most striking thing about PATH is the exposure of its various electrical parts. Cables and pipes run in parallel on the exterior of its walls and ceilings, swerving around corners in disciplined lines as they make their way across the river.

Intriguing as I find it visually, it worries me. Presumably, photography is OK on the MTA and not PATH because its parts are less exposed. But even there, important-looking switches and breaker boxes are out in the open, with little more than Masterlocks to protect them. It wouldn’t take much for someone to disable the system for a bit if they wanted to. And that freaks me out. The “If You See Something, Say Something” motto has done its job.

- - -

Prohibiting photography isn’t the solution to that problem, though. If important electromechanical components are out in the open, there’s opportunity for them to be tampered with even without premeditation. And if I can get away with a response like “Oh, OK” when told not to take photos, then someone with ill intent could, too. Proof: about 5,000 other people have already posted their pics of PATH stations online.

If exposed cables are the issue, find a way to cover them up.

- - -

For me, this raises larger questions about the regulation of photography in the digital age.

Not long ago, a camera was something you carried around with intent. If you had it on you and were taking pictures, you were probably documenting something for a particular purpose. But with the drop in digital tech costs, if you’re well-off enough to own a cell phone, chances are either it or something else in your bag can take a picture. The camera comes with you whether or not you intend to use it.

Taking pictures is also an increasingly social activity. It’s less about the documentation of the object being captured, and more about the documentation of an experience. The type of photography normally reserved for vacations (”Look at where we ate,” “Look at where we slept,” “Look at me standing next to this weird fountain”) has crossed over into daily photographic exchanges of information. The “I was there” mentality is now the undertone for even comparatively mundane excursions at home. When we aren’t showing off, we’re just sharing for the sake of sharing, and building a visual log of our daily lives in the process.

It’s a change of use and intent on a massive scale, with effects already evident in the lax (maybe even too lax)  photography policy of museums, like MoMA. I imagine their meeting about photo regulations going something like…

Boardmember A: “Well, it’s almost impossible to stop now..”

Boardmember B: “Plus, it’s free PR.”

All Boardmembers: “Photography for everyone!”

After all, isn’t that what community content is all about? Free data, free press, free words and ideas.

- - -

The issue of free PR doesn’t much apply to governmental agencies like PATH, though there certainly could be economic benefits to eliminating the photography prohibition, i.e. law enforcement officers could devote more attention to truly nefarious activities, and potentially catch an actual crime.