The
Dance of Politics
These are news photos. Taken by photojournalists as part of their jobs. These
particular photojournalists do not, I believe, see themselves as artists -
they are, for the most part, given their assignments - a speech or event to
cover - and they provide their newspaper or magazine with a usable image. They
are working within strict parameters- dictated by what is expected in daily
press coverage. A shot of 2 world leaders meeting, a controversial politician
making a point, a demonstration of a new technology. They've got deadlines
and many other pieces to file before the day's out. Self-expression and artistic
license are kept to a minimum. In this case, these limitations are good- because
the photographers have not, at least in an obvious way, inserted their personality
into the image - we receive a sort of purer, cleaner transmission of the events.
Although, to my eyes, these are beautiful - they are not taken with beauty
or aesthetics as a consideration.
The photos I have
chosen represent a documentation of a sort of choreographed
performance. A dance of politics. The photos reveal a grammar
of movement determined by an unseen choreographer. A master
who has worked out an elaborate modern or contemporary
dance performed by a dance company located all over the
globe. The piece takes place simultaneously in over 100
cites. Hands hold the head, the whole company then leans
to one side, quickly all glance briefly to the upper right
corner of the room, then a woman is dragged out from under
a tarpaulin, as if a giant creature were giving birth to
a full grown human being. It is a dance whose only documentation
is in the photos assembled here. The idea of a hidden choreographer
whose company is entirely politicians and newsmakers might
seem to be some ridiculous invention of mine, but maybe
there is another kind of truth revealed here. Maybe there
is a preferred set of gestures for use in politics - a
set of movements that are not written down or described
in any book, instruction manual or party pamphlet- but
are it nevertheless adopted by all who assign themselves
to this profession. A series of movements which have evolved
over the years, and continue evolving. Movements which
obscure, obstruct, disguise and distract from the subject,
from the text. Movements which say either what they mean,
of exactly the opposite - sometimes the movements are the
true content, and the speech or text is a mere distraction,
a diversion.
Just as singers
have stereotypical moves and gestures, so do those whose
profession is the art of politics. It is learned by studying
one's peers, one's predecessors and countless hours of
TV viewing. Viewing with a special eye - for the ordinary
member of the public seems to be completely unaware, at
least consciously, of the staging and work that has gone
into their news programs.
However, students
of quotidian movement, dysfunctional neurologically damaged
patients and now ourselves- are aware of the conspiracy.
An aesthetic conspiracy so vast that even it's originators
are no longer aware of its existence. The deception, if
that is what it is, has even deceived the deceivers. Perfect.
It is as it should be - even the choreographer, the artist,
is charmed by his or her own work.
Some technical
notes
All these images were taken with various kinds of cameras, a variety of film
stocks and digital technologies, which have been processed in a variety of
ways. Therefore, I have decided to put them all on a level playing field, so
to speak. They have all been printed in black and white - although not all
were originally taken that way. And they have all been printed, almost all
of them, as the same size prints by Pamplemouse, the better to reveal their
similarities rather than pointing out their differences. The differences are
a distraction, which has been surgically removed, but only temporarily.
As a side note
I must comment that these images, most of which were taken
over the last decade, reflect the transition from film
to digital imagery in news collecting. It is, at least
initially, a sad story. The rush to digital picture taking,
while convenient, cheap and transmittable, is aesthetically
inferior.
Although digital
film in a portable camera can take fairly high resolution
images these days, these possible hi-resolution images
take ages to process by the camera between shots - 45 seconds
at the minimum the photographer must wait between shots!
Not an option when a politician is gesturing or gunfire
is involved. So the photographers opt for a faster lower
resolution, more "compressed" image.
These look just
fine 4 x 5 inches in the daily paper, or in a website…but
when blown up they just fall to pieces, and not in an always
enjoyable pixel-like pattern. The prints made from 35mm
film is far superior, but maybe took an hour more, at least
to process, scan and transmit - so you do what you can,
you can't always take the scenic route.
To further accommodate
this variety in the images we decided to print on newsprint,
the same medium these pictures are intended to be viewed
on. The paper, like any newspaper, will yellow - probably
visibly by the end of this show. And soon after that will
crumble and turn to dust.
David Byrne
© March-April
2001 |
