I grinned ear to ear yesterday when Foto8 In & Out the Old Bailey ran Ben Graville‘s work of remand prisoners (and security guards) in reaction to the press camera up against reinforced glass. It is a novel, clear and entertaining project. Why did it take someone so long to put a series like this together?
If photography is – in cases – intended to plumb the human soul and aggressively seek out human frailty, pride, conversion, obstinacy, etc., then the back of a cop-van is probably a good place to start. Folk on their way to trial are going to have a lot to say about a) their charge b) their case c) everything else that the first two don’t cover.
James Luckett over at consumptive coined the term “Photo booth from Hell” and he’s right on the money. They sit in a big white box subject to a camera behind a small glass rectangle. The environment is claustrophobic, impersonal and germy.
If a prisoner has the forethought or experience they may ready him or herself for the photograph. If not they’ll be captured on film anyway.
How balanced is the interaction between camera and subject? The image will serve the media more than it will serve the balance or accuracy of the court case. But this is a truism.
Graville is interested in state enforced anonymity and the effect it has on mystifying and intensifying understanding;
It should be no shock that many prisoners perform, gurn and address Graville’s camera directly; they are – literally and legally – in a transitory, undecided state. If I was in this same situation, I think it would be a natural reflex-come-obligation to self-represent to the camera. These prisoners may not have chosen to have the camera in their space, but they have the choice of how to address it.
… and of course there’s always a security guard who gets in on the action.
7 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 13, 2009 at 6:13 pm
Brendan
I find myself agreeing with some of the comments on Foto8– I’m not sure it’s exactly okay to poke your camera in on someone going to trial or jail and snap away… They can’t avoid you, you can avoid them– they’ve already had all their choices stripped of them and now some dick’s taking their picture…
Some probably appreciate the attention, of course, but not everyone will and it’s hardly fair game when they’re locked in a box…
June 13, 2009 at 6:35 pm
petebrook
Thanks for the comment Brendan. I wasn’t aware comments were going at Foto8. I copy the same comment here as I did at Foto8. You can pick it apart at will!
I really enjoyed this series because to my mind the issue central in this work is the window. I think ethical concerns are valid, and yet I am not aware if prison transport management has discussed the removal of windows? It might be a negative policy for prisoners who want to see the outside for some relief, but implementation is an easy fix to these sorts of images.
As for Graville calling these “anonymous”! Well, I think he’s imposing a loose definition of the incarcerated class on to this set off images. But is does not apply; many of those faces are clearly identifiable.
@seven.sfoto
I think these images now being promoted to art circles is an inevitable by-product of photographers’ roles overlapping. Many photographers play multiple roles to find a balance of life and work that supports them. The thought of using prints from one photojournalist agenda for the purpose of something else doesn’t seem like stick I would beat Graville with for too long.
Outside of a legal definition these works are a theatre of contemporary life and the fact they exist and make folk uncomfortable should by high on our agenda. As Graville says, the police decision to use this particular vehicle ‘mystifies and intensifies’ situations.
June 18, 2009 at 4:57 am
colin
Hi Pete:
I don’t think the pictures are that interesting or that unethical as far as these things go – the rationalisation for them is a bit dishonest though.
But then again, perhaps Ben Graville is on the right track given the strange reactions to them – his critics are remarkably hostile and perhaps rather selective and lacking in self-awareness in their comments.
There are other things in photography we should consider and wonder at – its unthinking and neverending endorsement of commercialism and consumption, it’s willingness to be hijacked by whatever political interest for a very small price, its unceasing reinforcement of dumbass racial and gender stereotyping and so on.
June 18, 2009 at 10:44 am
petebrook
Thanks Colin.
I presume you’ve been following comments at Manchester Photography and Foto8 also. I think you bring up a wonderful point here that other photographic practices deserve more of our attentions. But then how good of a critique of work is it to conclude, “Well, it’s just not as bad as this … or that.”?
Ben has stated that he has made no money from this – which is what one would hope is the case. But people are still riled up. Some people are too riled up. Their consternation is understandable though; Gravilles’ work is easily read as that of exploitation and subjection to the camera without option. People are always keen to define power relationships as they see them, even when information is limited. The Abu Ghraib pictures stand as a wonderful example of how images are misread and those misreadings frequently given more significance. Misinformation follows.
This work seems to divide people into camps of support and dismissal. The majority of these positions are based on whether they think Graville’s behaviour morally correct or not. Given that I am used to seeing images of people incarcerated or under coercion I was not immediately concerned with judgements of morality. I was more impressed that a project could make visible the ridiculous phalanx of photographers we see chasing those vans on our nightly news.
In some ways, the project (which I agree has some very boring pictures) is simply another ridiculous manifest of our image obsessed society.
Perhaps the greatest value of Graville’s In & Out the Old Bailey is the debate following it’s publication.
June 18, 2009 at 11:46 am
colin
I’m not sure why the issue of making money from the series is an issue – is it an issue for somebody making money from pictures of war or famine, selling their pictures to newspapers and magazines. Is it an issue if someone sells anything to a gallery, is it an issue if you make commercial work for someone like Nike or Marlboro or VW, or do fashion work for an industry that brings with it all kinds of ethical issues that far outweigh this storm in a teacup.
I think people are incredibly selective in what they are critical of and perhaps slightly infantile in their romanticisation of certain kinds of photography and the altruistic and life changing possibilities of their work. It’s not that important, it really isn’t.
So I say good luck to Ben for making the work and getting it out there – it’s voyeuristic but in no way exploitative – not in the way that I understand it.
And that, as you say, is all to do with the power relationships within photography – but also outside photography. The latter gives the former context but we are so full of navel gazing we often forget the latter. Which is a bad thing.
Nice blog by the way.
June 18, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Alx
Good to see the Foto8 debate improving – at last.
Great blog too!
December 14, 2010 at 2:02 pm
Assange’s Red-Lit, Custody-Van Photobooth « Prison Photography
[…] These photos of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange arriving at Westminster Magistrates Court inside a prison van with red windows reminded me of Ben Graville’s past work, which I wrote about here. […]