I accessed Nigel Shafran’s website
at http://nigelshafran.com/ on December
1st, 2017, at 8 pm, and look at images from all the series:
I did not focus then only on the series “Washing up”, but
extended the exercise to a small research about Nigel Shafran.
 |
| Nigel Shafran, from the series 'Ruthbook (1992-2004)',http://nigelshafran.com/category/ruthbook-1992-2004/page/11/ (accessed 01/12/2017) |
I admit that I was “surprised”
by Shafran’s opera and appreciated his work after some difficulties. I had to
go back and forth from images to texts and, remembering the reading of “The Photograph as
Contemporary Art” by Charlotte Cotton, I went to the link http://nigelshafran.com/charlotte-cotton-the-photograph-as-contemporary-art/
(accessed 01/12, 2017) and found a word, “domesticity”, that for
me was the key in better understanding Shafran’s still life opera.
“…. Nigel Shafran’s (b. 1964)
Sewing kit (on plastic table)
Alma place invites an imaginary investigation, initiated by the
position of the sewing box on the side table, which creates a balancing act, a
totem of domesticity…..”
From http://nigelshafran.com/charlotte-cotton-the-photograph-as-contemporary-art/
(accessed 01/12 2017)
I realized then that if I focus
only on “Domesticity”, I could not explore Shafran’s opera in deep. Then I
associated other key words like “ordinary”, “understated”, “everyday living
scenario”, “commonplace” and went back to his series in order to better
exploring their content.
Did it
surprise you that this was taken by a man? Why?
If I
look to the domestic series (as "Washing up" is), actually yes. Maybe because the concept of domestic
is related to the concept of home/house and, as Maria Kapajeva stated: “….I grew up in a
culture [Estonia] where women were declared equal to men. This, however,
applied to their jobs not to domestic duties, which remained exclusively the
obligation of women….” (Maria Kapajeva in OCA, Context &
Narrative, 2017 Edition, page 84).
This culture is latent not only in Estonia, but nearly all around the
world, and we hear about the woman as the “queen of the kitchen”. Therefore,
every series with domestic images lead to the idea that behind the camera there
is a woman.
However, if I look, in this instance, to the series “Paddington Escalators”,
I find something in common with Walker Evans’ “Subway Portraits” and a totally
different narrative, not necessarily male, but not even gender-related.
 |
| Nigel Shafran, from the series 'Paddington escalators 2009-2010',http://nigelshafran.com/category/paddington-escalators-2009-2010/page/4/ (accessed 01/12/2017) |
In your opinion does gender contribute to
the creation of an image?
I believe that gender contributes more to the selection of the subject than
to the creation of an image. However, if we consider the selection o fthe
subject as a step that leads to the
composition and creation of an image, my answer to the question should be “yes”.
This is the reason why I was surprised by some subjects that Nigel Shafran selected
in his series.
What does this series achieve by not
including people?
When I look at “Washing Up” I am lead to imagine a presence.
Because of my culture, the presence of a woman. Could be the Ruth of other
series, could be another woman.
Therefore I dare to say that the absence of a woman achieved the indirect
self-absent portrait of Nigel Shafran.
Do you regard them as interesting ‘still
life’ compositions?
I feel comfortable with
the composition, the guidelines, the use of ambient light, long exposures,
shadows.
I like the point of
view as well, and the framing, coincident to the human eye: he probably used a
50 mm, in order to be as neutral as possible.
Is there a narrative
in “still life”, or is it a paradox? I can find narrative in the series’ title,
or, for instance, in the open water tap. The narrative is about a not-yet-completed,
ongoing domestic work.
