Look online at Paul Seawright’s (1998) work, Sectarian Murders

1. How does this work challenge the boundaries between documentary and art? Listen to Paul Seawright talk about his work at: https://vimeo.com/76940827
2. What is the core of his argument? Do you agree with him?
3. If we define a piece of documentary photography as art, does this change its meaning?

Documentary style photography is defined by the Tate website as

 “……..a style of photography that provides a straightforward and accurate representation of people, places, objects and events, and is often used in reportage”

Paul Seawright’s series Sectarian murders could not be described as straightforward, there is far more to his images.

Paul Seawright revisited areas that were the scenes of sectarian murders in the 1970s. (Fig 1-6)

His work challenges the boundary between documentary and art because he his documenting locations that are part of a much bigger picture and instead of being explicit, he allows the viewer time to think. He engages people in the subject and almost asks them to “ponder. As he explains himself when he says that documentary/editorial photography has to

“give up its meaning quickly” and art “give up its meaning slowly”.

He also suggests that the images can’t be too ambiguous or they become meaningless. I think this is the case with a lot of art and can often lead to images being dismissed and overlooked.

Alan Sekula (1978) writes,

“Documentary is thought to be art when it transcends its reference to the world, when the work can be regarded, first and foremost, as an act of self-expression on the part of the artist”

Seawright’s images themselves different in their composition from what would generally be expected in documentary style images, with several of taken from unusual perspectives, such as the slide, the roundabout and the dog.  There is also an emptiness about them, which made me think about the scene before the bodies were found and then the activity around  crime scenes and then onto infamous “beauty spots” or children’s playgrounds. Are they meant to represent “sectarian murder’s”? The religion of the victims was not included in the text so which side was which is not clear, and in my opinion; for these images, is not necessary

Context is very important here and without it these images are inconsequential. They could be about anything or indeed nothing.

Having been born in the early 60s and growing up through the 70s “The Troubles” are engrained in my mind through the names of towns and streets. I recently spent a week in Belfast working, and it was a surreal experience to see these town names on signposts and to walk down street synonymous with murder and violence and to see the normal everyday goings of people going about their business, shopping, working and meeting up. There still are signs of the past in graffiti and in the present, that leads you to realise that it may look “normal” on the surface, but there un an underlying unease in the shape of armoured police vans and specific restrictions on movements of those working in the services such as Police which is not the case in the UK.

Bibliography

At: https://vimeo.com/76940827
[Accessed 06/10/2020

Figures 1-6
At: http/::www.paulseawright.com:sectarian
[Accessed 06/10/2020]

At: https://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/d/documentary-photography
[Accessed 05/10/2020]

At: https://monoskop.org/images/7/76/Sekula_Allan_Dismantling_Modernism
_Reinventing_Documentary_1978.pdf
[Accessed 05/10/2020