I keep reading interviews in which photographers say that in order to become better photographers, they have to first become better human beings. In fact they claim that as they become better human beings, their photography improves dramatically. Sounds like a good approach, but the only hitch is to understand what good human being means. Does it imply rising above petty squabbles, both personal and professional? How come Magnum photographs are notorious for their bitching and ugly scenes which might put to any normal-semi-decent human being to shame? I am of course assuming we agree that most of the magnum photographers are damn good when it comes to their photography. Or is it some selective interest in a very narrow field of their work, like lets say, a photographer documenting drug addicts could be very sensitive to them, but in real life could an insecure and jealous wimp when it comes to competing with other photographers? Just an example. How many great photographers are also great human beings in real life? I am not talking about interns getting their first Digital SLR from their mentors to shoot an assignment and being eternally grateful to them. I am talking about their life itself. Like how they treat their spouse, the watchman, the maid, the dog etc. If we extend the definition of a photographer as an artist, can we not see a million example of great painters who in real life were really miserable human beings? Picasso come to mind.