I'm suddenly working on a lot of ideas that are basically landscape projects. I didn't plan it that way so I suppose it's serendipity or perhaps an indication of where my heart is pulling these days. Moving out of London to a rural idyll doesn't seem like it'll happen soon so the next best thing is to escape for work. With a bit of luck I can fill my lungs with good, fresh air and walk some hills, maybe even sleep out under the stars and all that with the added bonus of producing work. As well as the benefits of getting out into nature I think that there's value in shooting projects that redress an imbalance towards the urban in documentary photography and photojournalism. Landscape photography, at least rural landscape photography seems to be outmoded: associated with the postcard, calendar and biscuit tin; whereas urban photography, including urban and suburban landscape work is the sharp edge. There are exceptions: Simon Norfolk's work on the hidden military significance of the Hebridean landscape (The Hebrides: A slight disturbance of the sea) combines picturesque imagery with hard fact to great effect, and leafing through a copy of Fay Godwin's book "Landmarks" reminded me of the political content of her work, much of which is pure landscape. So, it's not impossible to produce work outside the city and suburbs that still has significance, is it?
Dominick Tyler - Clitter/Clatter
Comments