The series of photographs, displayed in various rooms on the premises of Isolation, are the result of research projects realized by eight resident artists during their stay in Donetsk last summer. They were offered to study the “partly cloudy” landscapes of Donetsk; the notion of landscape here is very extensive and comprises geographical, social, and cultural aspects. Nuno Barroso (Portugal), Marina Black (Russia – Canada), Flavia Junqueira (Brazil), Homer (Sasha Kurmaz, Ukraine), Natalia Pavlovskaya (Russia – Hungary), Oleksandr Strynadko (Ukraine), Marco Citron (Italy), and Richard Ansett (UK) had been working under the outstanding Ukrainian photo artist Borys Mykhailov; he was also responsible for shortlisting the eight finalists out of 280 applicants from 40 countries. The artists stayed in Donetsk for four to six weeks. The Day will soon publish a detailed account of the exhibit. Meanwhile, we offer you a blitz interview with the participants of this project.
1. What interested you about the project “Partly Cloudy”?
Richard ANSETT:
“The support during the creation of the new series, when I was working outside of the usual environment, and also the opportunity to show my works to Borys Mykhailov and hear what he thinks of them.”
Homer (Sasha KURMAZ):
“The opportunity to find out more about the Donetsk region and its local youth milieu.”
Marco CITRON:
“The opportunity to cooperate with Borys Mykhailov.”
Marina BLACK:
“The opportunity to take a trip through space and time to the places where my father, born shortly before the World War Two, could have lived. My aspiration for photography stems from my childhood desire to make a time machine and alter history. Photography as expressive means is quite adequate to this goal.”
Natalia PAVLOVSKAYA:
“To work in Donetsk, the city which I had long been interested in. I was working on Missing Space project near Donetsk in 2010, and then I came across a variety of other themes and locations, where I would like to work. I was very happy and jumped at the opportunity to implement one of them.”
Nuno BARROSO:
“One of my old-time friends was born in Ukraine, so I had been hearing a lot of interesting things about this country all my life. A chance to take part in this project helped quench my childhood curiosity and create something new. And of course I was inspired by the cooperation with Isolation, meeting other artists, and having fun with Borys.”
Oleksandr STRYNADKO:
“First and foremost, I was interested because Borys Mykhailov had been announced as the curator. Besides, Donetsk as the venue of the project attracted me. If the event had been held elsewhere, I would have hardly agreed to take part in it.”
Flavia JUNQUEIRA:
“I was curious about the venue, which is very different from the reality that surrounds me in Brazil. I should also say that I was interested in the city’s esthetics and history. A very important factor, which prompted my decision to participate in the project, was the fact that the curator of residence program was an artist of this high level. I understood that I would learn a lot. What also seemed important was the opportunity to work on the draft of an organization which would support young photo artists.”
2. What did you find interesting about Donetsk as a visual object?
Richard ANSETT:
“A new environment is always taken as strange, but on the other hand, it gives you a free hand in a way. Our first impressions might be wrong, but I sensed a certain freedom from the boundaries I had built for my own life in London. My work is about general empathy, and I prefer to avoid crude stereotypes, which can obscure this phenomenon and the possibilities that it opens.”
Homer (Sasha KURMAZ):
“I was wondering what it means to be young in an industrial megalopolis.”
Marco CITRON:
“Donetsk seemed to me just the very place where you can see and understand what changes are under way in the country, and what antagonisms accompany them.”
Marina BLACK:
“Donetsk inspired me to create the series ‘14 meters to day surface.’ I would have hardly created these works in another city. I was immediately struck by how easy it was to enter a private territory, get an invitation to one’s personal universe, which most of us protect from trespassing.”
Natalia PAVLOVSKAYA:
“For me not only Donetsk, but also the entire region is a land full of drama. Physical labor on the brink of human ability, the traditional belief that labor will once change life for the better, and broken expectations and emotions, when this doesn’t happen. Besides, I always feel that this territory is lost; it is neither Ukraine nor Russia. I know that people of Donetsk resent when others take their city like that. With an understandable and touching pride they will show you around their rose gardens and Shakhtar Stadium. Yet for me this is a pink curtain before a Shakespearean tragedy. You wish it rose sooner and let you in the story.”
Nuno BARROSO:
“Today I heard someone say at a museum in Sao Paolo that beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder. It is a simple idea, I shared it with a group of kids that were there on an excursion, but it perfectly fits to describe my vision of Donetsk. At first you think you must look at it as at a post-industrial communist city, suffering from high social inequality, lack of opportunity, preponderance of oligarchs, epidemic of alcoholism, etc. But if you take a closer look, you can find in this city love, hope, and poetry, cloaked in twilight and nostalgia. For me it is indeed a vast resource of raw material, which is in line with my overall perception of present-day world. Now I am going back to Ukraine for a few weeks, and I am very happy for it.”
Oleksandr STRYNADKO:
“Donetsk is my home city, so it always inspires me!”
Flavia JUNQUEIRA:
“I think the esthetics of Donetsk is directly associated with my visual exploration of the city. The evidences of historical and cultural memory, left on the canvas of present-day existence, enabled me to correlate the conceptions of idealization and reality, which I had aspired to do in my creative study. Thus, not only did Donetsk inspire me, but it also helped me to find the theme of my work.”
3. What was working with Borys Mykhailov like?
Richard ANSETT:
“Meeting him was a precious experience, which prompted me to create works that would resound in unison with his work. This experience inspired me with courage to expand the limits of conventional practices. The meeting with Mykhailov, which happened at the closing of the residence program, was an outstanding event, which confirms that this project’s curator belongs among the greatest photo artists of the 20th century.”
Homer (Sasha KURMAZ):
“It was a brief but exciting experience.”
Marco CITRON:
“I got some useful tips from an expert in present-day photography.”
Marina BLACK:
“To say that I love his work would be to say nothing. The opportunity to meet him and correlate his personality with his creations is a unique chance.”
Natalia PAVLOVSKAYA:
“I can’t say that we worked a lot with him. It was just an acquaintance and a talk. He is a distinct, uncompromising artist, and a very approachable man. I think meeting him was a great event for all of us.”
Nuno BARROSO:
“I met Borys Mykhailov at the final stage of the residence program, when I had got some ideas and suggestions concerning what I saw in Ukraine in general, and in Donetsk in particular. It is very important, because you cannot talk about things you have no idea of.
“Besides, the understanding of Mykhailov’s work on some profound level lingers, you will not get there without actually talking.”
Oleksandr STRYNADKO:
“It was awesome. I have always been interested in his work, but live communication enriches perception.”
Flavia JUNQUEIRA:
“Today it’s hard to find a famous artist interested in educating young people who are only beginning to open the world of art for themselves. Borys helped me see my works from another perspective, he inspired me to take the pictures I made during residence. He suggested that I give up working after a certain plan and using assistants, and start acting on my own, without any interference. This man’s opinion is very valuable for me, so I stick to his advice even after I came back home from Ukraine.”
4. What do you think is the right balance of social and aesthetic compounds in photography? Which one should be represented more?
Richard ANSETT:
“One should know what is meant by ‘aesthetic’ before applying this term. My works have to be understandable, so I use traditional methods in order to establish a connection with the audience. On the other hand, one should not try to please the spectator too much, or our work will only reflect the existing models of perception. However, though I am neither a press, nor a documentary photographer, I work with real situations and real people. And my photos become emotional pictures that describe how many-sided the human nature is.”
Homer (Sasha KURMAZ):
“This is a very strange question. Does this ‘balance’ exist at all? Since both social and aesthetic tasks are equally important for an artist.”
Marco CITRON:
“The goal of photography is to create something that makes you think, but the created object has to be aesthetically acceptable. Modern art does not have to be a mere decoration, but at the same time, it does not have to be a pure concept without a pleasant visual appearance.”
Marina BLACK:
“My works are always based on personal emotions. That is why the word ‘balance’ cannot be applied to this type of art, it is rather an intimate connection. Usually you need to do something out of the ordinary to attract and keep the attention. People would rather give up their seat on the bus to a person who would say they had a heartache than to one complaining of being tired. An exaggeration is an attempt to interest someone, to be heard. I am always inspired when I know my works make people think. I like when my photos need to be interpreted, I need other people’s help to reveal the true meaning of my photographs, because when I start working on them, quite often I do not know what result I am going to get in the end. Since I am a part of the society, my work is on the border between personal and social, but I never tend to separate these two categories. I often mix them together subconsciously. The final version of my works is a temporarily optimal solution. Or at least, what it seems to be at the moment.”
Natalia PAVLOVSKAYA:
“I do not know. In my opinion, it is impossible to measure the percentage ratio of this balance in quality works of art. The answer is, the balance has to be just right.”
Nuno BARROSO:
“I think that in photography, just as in art in general, the feeling or the emotional effect caused by something you can see, hear, touch, taste, or smell, is the most important. The experience you get from interacting with an object changes something in our existence and the way we perceive life. In my opinion, this is the role of photography, as well as any other kind of art. Concepts of social and aesthetic photography differ ideologically. I did not ponder over it a lot, because it is a great responsibility. Therefore, I am just going to limit myself to conversations about my existentiality and the personal experience of perception of the world, even if I talk about the social and make aesthetic photographs.”
Oleksandr STRYNADKO:
“The more I work the less attention I pay to aesthetics in my creations. As for now, social compound is of higher priority: my attitude towards what is happening, the ambiance of a photo are more significant.”
Flavia JUNQUEIRA:
“Photography is a tool of bringing ideas into life, just as much as painting, sculpture, or drawing are. The aesthetics, conceptual and social meanings depend on the artist’s intention and vary from one work to another. What does an artist do to better express his ideas? Does he pay more attention to the conceptual compound? Or to the aesthetic one? I think that photography is a way to reflect the artist’s view of the world, and the balance depends solely on his/her intentions.”
5. Nowadays photography becomes a mass genre of art – almost everyone has a camera. How can photography maintain its status of a kind of art in this situation?
Richard ANSETT:
“Any artistic process leads to catharsis, and photography may bring a special kind of satisfaction. Anyone can photograph, this is a simple action, even a child can press the shutter button as easily as make some scribbles on a piece of paper. The art of photography, on the other hand, is not a simple action of shooting, its value depends on its importance for the wide audience beyond us. The process of democratization of photography should not be considered from the point of view of its place in the history of arts.”
Homer (Sasha KURMAZ):
“Modern world is so overfilled with visual information, and photography in particular, that one should think before pressing the shutter release button, ‘Should I do this at all?’ I think that the task of a photographer today is not creating new images, but working with the existing material, created by thousands and thousands of photographers and amateurs.”
Marco CITRON:
“Photography has a meaning if it is a worthy project and the author has something to share with the world.”
Marina BLACK:
“Photography is no different from any other kind of fine arts. Similar discussions have been going on for a very long time. Anyone can create a finely composed photo, this is as true as that anyone can draw as well as Malevich, or Miro, or Pollock. But not everyone becomes one of them. Actually, if you consult the history of arts, it turns out that this happens quite rarely, and there are not so many interesting and positive things in art at all. Often you feel how unfeasible this task is – to continue exploring your imagination. To continue in order to capture what the world is feeling. In real life the great part of all this is but fiction, though there is some magic that can make the fantasy come true. And this is what makes the metaphors of art so precious. Artists have freedom to be aware of the facts of existence of things which most people ignore because they think them to be ordinary. If an artist does everything right, the works often seem familiar and dear to a spectator. Everyone has a different understanding of this feeling of connection though. Perhaps, it has something to do with love and desire to be loved.”
Natalia PAVLOVSKAYA:
“In the same way as always, by pressing the shutter button sensibly, by building up a conversation with the audience, through choosing this or that shot as a part of the author’s vision.”
Nuno BARROSO:
“I think that the fact that so many people wish to have a camera and use it everywhere is beautiful, even though the value of photographs is decreased by their quantity. But photographers and photo artists use their cameras not for creating beautiful images only. Their role is to produce ideas, stories that might bring a change to people’s perception of the world. And this complex process goes far beyond the fact that you own a camera. In my opinion, the boom of digital photography has its good side too: people will start paying more attention to those who work with photographs, and the number of those who are trying to say something with the help of photos will increase too. As for me, I still work with the film that has a limited number of shots – 10. I think that such limitations help to choose something special that should be captured.”
Oleksandr STRYNADKO:
“In answer to this I want to quote the words of photographer and photography researcher Aleksandr Lapin, ‘Those who can take photos differ from a photographer as much as those who can write differ from writers.’ There are a lot of cameras in use now, but that does not make the number of good photo artists grow larger.”
Flavia JUNQUEIRA:
“Anyone can paint or shoot videos just as easily as they can photograph. I think that there are two factors that might help decide whether photography is a work of art in each separate case. The first one is the approach, the intention to consider what you are creating to be art. The second – a desire to demonstrate the results of your creative expression as art. The true art has to go beyond the boundaries of our houses and studios, it has to be shown.”
