Friday, 10 February 2012
This critique was written from my exhibition in Jyväskylä. It's always good to have been noticed in the newspapers. Keski-Suomalainen is the biggest newspaper of Central Finland, and they made two articles about the exhibition. This one is more critical. I find this text interesting and well thought. (Sorry for people who don't speak finnish)
I try to translate a bit later.
edit // a bit later
This is a summary from the text above, and my own marks on the critique. This summary doesn't fully reach the tone of the critique.
Writer is saying in the beginning that I am dealing with some big issues: how people influence on each other and how it is difficult with photography to express issues this big. Finding shelter from each other or expressing loneliness. He's writing it is a difficult task for a photographer. This is something everyone has to consider, because it is in our nature to begin with. How the identity forms. Taking photos of people, these questions rise to the surface, even if it is not meant to be in your focus. Especially if you "use" two people.
I had a text in the exhibition, artist statement for people to read. Writer is saying that it was too long, and too conceptual. And if I want to emphasize the power of photography, my photos seem to need help from the words. And that my words don't turn into photos that easily. I feel it is important to write about my photos, and in the exhibition I felt it necessary to make the statement, my own idea about the photos. Of course every viewer makes their own conception of the photos, but it is my only chance to talk about the thoughts I've had about the photos (if you don't count my website and this blog). So I really want to express myself also with words. I admit that for an artist statement it was long, but I still wanted to say every word. I feel for many people it opens up the exhibition, if they want to read what I was thinking, they can do it, if not, they can just look at the photos. And they can take the text with them (what I often do in exhibitions) and read afterwards. My statement doesn't reach photos fully, how could it, when photos are the ones I've been making for months, text only for days. Still I feel it is a necessary conversation to have. Photos and statement. It is a conversation, not a replica.
Most of the power is still with photos and a viewer is having influence from them surely more than from a text. But always, in an exhibition, I think my ideas about the photos are important. It is only time to speak, if you don't count, again, internet and occasional interviews.
Writer is saying good things, the tone of the critique I find more positive. My method is subtle, and that viewer can find peace from the photos, photos might stop and center thoughts.
At the end he is talking about Helsinki School, comparing my works with it, and the methods they use in their works. A comparison that is very difficult, almost impossible to avoid nowadays. It is such a big part of Finnish photography of today. I think it is important to look at these photos not from this point, but as their own series.