|
| |
Sigrún Sigurðardóttir
Reykjavík
May 2007
|
|
Parma ham, salami, red wine, laughter,
jalapeno, bread, crying, pesto, mozzarella, chatter, Pellegrino,
pasta, olives, demand, attention, happiness, discussion, dog, tiredness,
chaos, and finally a child that gets up and runs away.
Dream, nightmare, narrative or reality. Katrín Elvarsdóttir’s
photographs from a family dinner, on a hilly landscape (that appears
as by change in one of the photographs), present all this to us
at once. A family gathering that is ordinary but at the same time
seems somewhat alarming. The photographs are a representation of
the longing that every one of us carries within about a perfect
world, a perfect moment, one that slips between our fingers when
we least expect it and our life’s elaborate exterior stands
like an empty shell unable to support the life within the circle.
The dinner party contained within the circle that the photographs
form is full of chaos and unexpected moments. The children create
tension at the table, they shout out loud, demand more, not those
greens, take a dance step between courses, spill and run away unexpectedly.
The adults persist in carrying on with the conversation and enjoying
their food. Keeping up the spirit and reminding themselves of the
structure that creates a frame around chaos itself.
The photographs confirm what once took place. They also remove
the moments from their original context and create a new narrative.
With her photographs Katrin Elvarsdóttir creates a narrative
based on moments in the life of her family. This is not the story
of her family, however. These are not their memories, not their
evening. They are only contributors to the story that the photographs
bring us. We have to be content with that. We cannot penetrate inside
the circle, into their minds and feelings – we don’t
know locations, facts, names, dates. We are outside the circle.
The narrative that the photographs present to us are fragmented,
like in a dream or a memory that we don’t recognize but know
that we partake in. It is in our hands to form a complete picture
from this—or to let it be and allow the photographs to form
a fragmented whole, a circle that doesn’t close.
Circular forms lead us from circular plates, bread baskets, sausages
and tattoos into a world seen through other circular forms –
a hole in a wall and a half-open window. Katrin’s photographs
of landscape that appears through window panes and wall openings
emphasize further the emotions that her images awaken, whether in
dream, fiction or in reality itself. Our viewpoint is always limited
and fragmented. Every day we try to give our life and memories a
complete picture. Create a framework, a circle that we incessantly
persist in closing even tough we know that if we succeed we can’t
let anything else inside. That’s how it ends.
Parmaskinka, salami, rauðvín, hlátur, jalapeño,
brauð, grátur, pestó, mozzarella, skvaldur,
pellegrino, pasta, ólívur, heimtufrekja, athygli,
hamingja, samræða, hundur, þreyta, ringulreið
og að lokum barn sem stendur á fætur og hleypur
burt.
Draumur, martröð, frásögn eða
veruleiki. Ljósmyndir Katrínar Elvarsdóttur
af fjölskyldukvöldverði í hæðóttu
landslagi (sem birtist eins og fyrir tilviljun á einni myndinni)
birta okkur þetta allt í senn. Fjölskylduboð
sem er í senn hversdagslegt en um leið örlítið
ógnvekjandi. Ljósmyndirnar eru eins konar birtingarmynd
þeirrar þrár sem hver maður
ber með sér um fullkominn heim, fullkomið
augnablik, sem smýgur burt úr greipum okkar þegar
minnst varir og úthugsuð umgjörðin
um líf okkar stendur eftir eins og illa gerður
hlutur sem hefur enga burði til að móta
það líf sem er innan hringsins. Borðhaldið
sem á sér stað innan þess hrings
sem ljósmyndin skapar umgjörð um er uppfullt
af ringulreið og óvæntum augnablikum. Börnin
skapa spennu við borðið, þau
hrópa upp yfir sig, heimta meira að drekka, vilja
ekki svona grænt, taka dansspor milli rétta, hella
niður og hlaupa burt þegar minnst varir. Þeir
fullorðnu þrjóskast við að
halda uppi samræðum og njóta matarins. Halda
sínu striki og minna sig á þá umgjörð
sem skapar ramma utan um sjálfa ringulreiðina.
Ljósmyndirnar staðfesta það
sem eitt sinn átti sér stað. Þær
rífa augnablikið jafnframt úr samhengi og
skapa þannig nýja frásögn. Með
ljósmyndum sínum skapar Katrín Elvarsdóttir
frásögn sem hún byggir á raunverulegum
augnablikum í lífi fjölskyldu sinnar. Þetta
er þó ekki saga fjölskyldu hennar. Þetta
eru ekki þeirra minningar, ekki þeirra kvöldstund.
Þau leggja aðeins til efni í þá
sögu sem ljósmyndirnar færa okkur. Við
verðum að láta okkur það
nægja. Getum ekki þröngvað okkur
inn fyrir, inn í hugarheim þeirra og tilfinningar,
þekkjum ekki staðhætti, staðreyndir,
nöfn og dagsetningar. Við erum utan hringsins. Sú
frásögn sem ljósmyndirnar birta okkur er brotakennd,
líkt og í draumi eða minningu sem við
könnumst ekki almennilega við en vitum að
við eigum hlutdeild í. Það
er í okkar valdi að skapa úr þessu
heildstæða mynd – eða láta
það vera og leyfa ljósmyndunum að
mynda brotakennda heild, hring sem ekki lokast.
Hringlaga form leiða okkur frá hringlaga diskum, brauðkörfum,
pylsum og húðflúri yfir í veröld sem
við virðum fyrir okkur í gegnum önnur hringlaga
form, gat í vegg og hálfopinn glugga. Ljósmyndir
Katrínar af landslagi sem birtist okkur í gegnum gluggarúður
og gluggaop undirstrika enn frekar þá tilfinningu sem
ljósmyndir hennar vekja, að heimurinn birtist okkur ætíð
á brotakenndan og afmarkaðan hátt, hvort heldur
í draumi, skáldskap eða í veruleikanum
sjálfum. Sjónarhorn okkar er ætíð
takmarkað og brotakennt. Alla daga leitumst við þó
við að gefa lífi okkar og minningum heildsteypta
mynd. Skapa umgjörð, hring sem við þrjóskumst
í sífellu við að loka jafnvel þó
að við vitum að ef það tekst getum við
ekki hleypt neinu öðru inn. Þannig endar þetta.
|
| |
Æsa Sigurjónsdóttir
París
febrúar 2007
|
|
Katrín Elvarsdóttir creates
a setting for a little story wherein we observe a group of children
that seem to be wandering alone in the woods. “The idea came
from a painting I had in my room when I was a little girl, it was
a painting of Hansel and Gretel walking down a forest path,”
Katrín says of the series she has chosen to call Without
a Trace.
Katrín is not photographing reality so to speak, she is
not taking photographs of any certain phenomenon. She is not taking
photos of children out in the woods, even though the children certainly
are of flesh and blood and the story staged in nature, amongst real
trees and forest paths. She is not illustrating a story or staging
“live pictures” even; she is rather positioning herself
askew to reality, and creating a private, parallel world, more like
a film director than a photographer.
Katrín employs film aesthetics; the ambient, omniscient,
transparent angle of the lens to create a fictional world, but at
the same time she lets the viewer sense the physical presence of
the lens through effects of light and shadow, which emphasise the
centrifugal structure of the picture.
What is correct focus? asked the British photographer, Julia Margaret
Cameron (1815 – 1879) when she was criticised for lacking
skills when she staged allegorical scenes in which children were
often the main subject. Cameron used soft focus to break down the
inherent temporality of the photograph, because she wanted to place
her photographs in fictional timelessness. Katrín has adopted
these pictorialistic methods; soft focus and chiaroscuro; the contrasts
of light and shadow create a mysterious texture and a dreamlike
atmosphere that severs the viewers’ ties to reality.
We are back in childhood, looking at images that Katrín
creates from a memory of a picture that she gazed at as a child.
The children seem oblivious to the photographer’s presence;
they do not stare into the lens. They are not being photographed
as individuals, but rather as anonymous, traceless shadows , doubles,
standing in as symbols for children, and the wood for a world outside
reality where the summer green evokes the eeriness of the beyond,
rather than memories of a pleasant picnic. In this way Katrín
ties her subject both in the fairy-tale of the nineteenth century,
and the surreal cinematography of the twentieth. The photographs
bear foreboding of “unexpected incidents”, of uncanny
circumstances, to refer to Freud’s concept of the aesthetic
feeling that awakens when the ordinary evokes apprehension and anxiety,
such as an insect in the palm of the hand or a scorched patch in
the grass.
The sequence Without a Trace reminds us of what happens when we
step away from objective description towards subjective interpretation.
Katrín shows the reality of unreality, creates new images
that the viewer entwines with his/her own vague memories of a picture
on a wall or in a book. The pictures suggest multiple contexts,
without referring to the particular, and the methods that Katrín
uses, the atmosphere she creates, emphasises the feeling of estrangement.
Katrín shares her fractions of memory with the viewer in
a post-modern recycling related to the experience often called déjà
vu. The children seem neither lost nor hungry, but rather captivated
by their own childhood fantasies. The theme itself – children
out in the woods – refers to the narrative, the text, and
the text cruises around the illustrations of the fairy-tale books
of childhood: “Tomorrow morning we shall take them into the
woods where they are most dense. There we shall light a fire, give
them each a bit of bread and then we shall go to work and leave
them behind. They will not find the way home on their own and so
we are rid of them … “ [1].
In this way Katrín feeds the viewers imaginary with unbridled
stream of imagery and texts, and studies how different media (painting,
photography, print, film and fantasy) coverge in the imagination.
Of course, this method is not exclusive to the narrative of photography,
but adheres to all lyrical and aesthetic experiences. Each and everyone
must then find his/her way back by his/her own personal routes and
travel the long and winding roads that the individual must trek
to make his/her own story. and context, and has to do with what
has been called the narrative aspect of the self.
One characteristic of the photograph has been said to come from
the photographs condition of being a copy without an original, both
figuratively speaking and in fact. A photograph is reprinted and
reproduced over and over again, in different sizes and variations.
Photographs are projected onto walls, printed in books, arranged
into albums or framed. The size and hanging of a photograph affects
the viewers understanding and experience of it. In this exhibition
Katrín has printed the photographs in different formats in
order to break up the grid, which was established by modernist visual
standards of the 20th Century, and the sequential nature of film
frames. The irregular size of the photographs brings the viewer
closer to the private, the chamber, the album, and the book of fairy-tales,
and thereby plays down the temporal distance of the photographs.
The title of the exhibition, Without a Trace, refers to the subject,
the story of the children abandoned in the woods, but first and
foremost to Katrín’s attitude towards photography as
a phenomenon. Her images are a study of the fluctuating relationship
between photography and reality, and its transparency as an art
medium. The invisibility of the photograph creates a certain volatile
condition with regard to the viewer’s experience of the photograph’s
realness, at the same time this quality also distinguishes it from
other art forms, aligning it with cinematography as being the most
immediate, way of contemporary image making.
Katrín rejects the conventional definition of photography
as a tool to document and study reality, rejects the widespread
belief that the photograph shows “this has been”, that
the photograph is a mirror, a trace, or a shadow touching time.
With the title Katrín exposes her own understanding and use
of photography as a way of creating images and as a form of expression.
Her photographs are subjective, cosa mentale, fiction; they are
a place where stories come to life, to quote the American art critic
Clément Greenberg who rightly predicted that the photograph
had conquered the narrative that painting had deserted.
[1] Grimmsævintýri.
Fimmtíu úrvals-æfintyri úr safni Grimms-bræðranna
með fjölda mynda eftir þýzka listmálara,
Theodór Árnason íslenskaði, Reykjavík:
Bókaverzlun Sigurjóns Jónssonar 1922-1926.
Katrín Elvarsdóttir setur hér á svið
litla sögu þar sem við fylgjumst með nokkrum
börnum sem virðast ein á ferð úti í
skógi. «Hugmyndin kom frá málverki sem
ég var með í herberginu mínu þegar
ég var lítil en það var málverk af
Hans og Grétu að ganga eftir skógarstíg,»
segir Katrín um myndirnar sem hún hefur gefið
nafnið Sporlaust.
Katrín er ekki að mynda raunveruleikann í þeirri
merkingu að hún sé að taka myndir af einhverju
ákveðnu fyrirbæri. Hún er ekki að taka
myndir af börnum úti í skógi, jafnvel
þótt börnin séu vissulega af holdi og blóði
og sagan sviðsett úti í náttúrunni
innan um raunveruleg tré og skógarstíga. Hún
er heldur ekki að myndskreyta sögu eða setja á
svið «lifandi myndir», heldur er hún að
setja sig á skjön við raunveruleikann, og býr
til einkaheim eða handanveröld, fremur eins og kvikmyndaleikstjóri
en ljósmyndari.
Katrín nýtir sér fagurfræði
kvikmyndanna, altumlykjandi, alviturt, gagnsætt sjónarhorn
linsunnar til að búa til skáldskaparheim,
en lætur áhorfandann um leið finna fyrir
efnislegri nálægð linsunnar með
því að beita áhrifamætti
ljósi og skugga sem undirstrika hringsæja byggingu
myndarinnar. Hvað er réttur fókus spurði
breski ljósmyndarinn Julia Margaret Cameron (1815-1879),
þegar hún var ásökuð um
að kunna ekki á tækin þegar hún
setti á svið allegórískar senur þar
sem börn léku oftast aðalhlutverkin. Cameron
notaði mjúka skerpu til að brjóta
niður eðlislæga tímafestu ljósmyndarinnar,
því hún vildi staðsetja myndir
sínar í tímaleysi skáldskaparins. Þessar
piktoríalísku aðferðir hefur Katrín
tileinkað sér, mjúk skerpa og chiaroscuro,
andstæður ljóss og skugga, mynda dulúðuga
áferð og skapa draumkennt andrúmloft sem
skera á öll raunveruleikatengsl áhorfandans.
Við erum á berskuslóðum, horfum
á myndir sem Katrín endurgerir eftir minningu um mynd
sem hún horfði á sem barn. Börnin virðast
ómeðvituð um návist ljósmyndarans,
þau horfa ekki í linsuna. Það er ekki
verið að mynda þau sem einstaklinga,
heldur eru þau nafnlausar, sporlausar skuggaverur, tvífarar,
en um leið tákn fyrir börn, og skógurinn
heimur utan veruleikans þar sem grænka sumarsins
vekur frekar óhug handanheimsins en minningu um farsæla
lautarferð. Þannig kjölfestir Katrín myndefnið
jafnt í ævintýraveröld nítjándu
aldarinnar sem í súrrealískum kvikmyndaheimi
þeirrar tuttugustu. Myndirnar fela í sér
hugboð um «óvænta atburði», um «óheimilislegar» aðstæður,
svo vísað sé til hugtaks Freuds um þá
fagurfræðilegu tilfinningu sem vaknar þegar
hið hversdagslega vekur óhug og kvíða,
eins og skordýri í lófa eða brunablettur
á grasi.
Myndröðin Sporlaust minnir á það
sem gerist þegar við tökum skrefið
frá hlutlausri lýsingu yfir í hugræna
túlkun. Katrín sýnir raunveruleika óraunveruleikans,
býr til nýjar myndir sem áhorfandinn fléttir
saman við sína eigin óljósu minningu
um mynd á vegg eða í bók. Myndirnar
kalla fram margvísandi samhengi, án þess
að vísa til hins sértæka, og aðferðirnar
sem Katrín notar, andrúmsloftið sem hún
skapar, undirstrikar vissuna um að áhorfandinn
sé staddur handan raunveruleikans.
Katrín deilir minningarbrotum sínum með áhorfandanum
í póstmódernískri endurvinnslu sem tengjast
þeirri upplifun sem stundum er kennd við déjà
vu. Börnin virðast hvorki villt né svöng, heldur
niðursokking í eigin hugarheim, draumóra bernskunnar.
Myndefnið sjálft, börn í skógi, leiðir
hugann að sögunni, að textanum, og textinn hringsólar
að myndskreytingum ævintýrabóka bernskunnar:
«Snemma í fyrramálið skulum við fara
með þau inn í skóginn, þar sem hann
er þéttastur. þar kveikjum við upp bál,
fáum þeim sinn brauðbitann hvoru og förum
síðan til vinnu okkar og skiljum þau eftir. þau
rata ekki heim, og þar með erum við laus við þau…».
Þannig innlimar hún sífellu myndmáls
og texta í hugskot áhorfanda og rannsakar hvernig
óheft flæði ólíkra miðla ; málverks,
ljósmyndar, prentmyndar, kvikmyndar, og hugarheima, renna
saman í farvegi ímyndunaraflsins. Aðferð sem
að sjálfsögðu er ekki bundin við frásögu
ljósmyndarinnar eingöngu, heldur við allar ljóðrænar
og fagurfræðilegar upplifanir. Hver og einn verður
síðan að rekja sig eftir sínum eigin persónulega
þræði og rata þær löngu krókaleiðir
sem einstaklingurinn fer til að búa sér til sína
eigin sögu, sitt eigið samhengi og tengist því
sem kallað hefur verið frásögulegur þáttur
sjálfsins.
Eitt einkenni ljósmynda er það sem
kennt hefur verið við það
ástand ljósmyndarinnar að vera eftirmynd
án frummyndar og á það við
bæði í eiginlegri og óeiginlegri merkingu.
Mynd er endurgerð og endurprentuð í hið
óendanlega, í mismunandi stærðum og
gerðum. Myndum er varpað á vegg, þær
eru prentaðar í bókum, settar í albúm
eða rammaðar inn. Stærð og uppsetning
myndar hefur merkingu og áhrif á hvernig áhorfandinn
skilur og upplifir þær. Á þessari
sýningu hefur Katrín prentað myndirnar í
ólíkum stærðum í þeim
tilgangi að brjóta upp hefðbundið
upphengiform sem mótaðist af módernískri
sjónhefð 20. aldarinnar og raðbundnum
eiginleikum kvikmyndarammanns. Óregluleg stærð
myndanna færir áhorfandann nær einkaheiminum,
herberginu, myndaalbúminu eða ævintýrabókinni
og dregur á þann hátt úr tímalausri
fjarlægð myndanna.
Titillinn Sporlaust er margvísandi. Hann vísar til
myndefnisin, frásögunnar um börnin á hrakningi
í skóginum, en fyrst og fremst til afstöðu
Katrínar til ljósmyndarinnar sem fyrirbæris.
Myndir hennar eru athugun á ótryggum tengslum ljósmyndarinnar
við raunveruleikann og gegnsæi hennar sem listmiðils.
Gegnsæi ljósmyndarinnar skapar ákveðið
óvissuástand hvað varðar upplifun
áhorfandans á raunveruleika myndarinnar, um leið
og þessi eiginleiki ljósmyndarinnar aðgreinir
hana frá öðrum listmiðlum og setur
hana á bekk með kvikmyndalistinni sem nærtækasta
aðferð samtímans til myndsköpunar.
Katrín hafnar viðteknum skilningi á ljósmyndinni
sem tæki til að skrá og rannsaka raunveruleikann,
á þeirri útbreiddu skoðun að
ljósmynd sýni « það sem
hafi verið», að ljósmyndin sé
spegill, spor í sandi eða skuggi í snertingu
við tímann. Með titlinum afhjúpar
Katrín skilning sinn og notkun á ljósmyndinni
sem myndsköpunaraðferð og tjáningarleið.
Myndir hennar eru hugrænar, þær eru cosa
mentale, skáldskapur, staður þar sem
sögur verða til, svo vísað sé
til orða bandaríska listgagnrýnandinn Clément
Greenberg sem sannspár taldi ljósmyndina hafa náð
valdi á þeim frásagnarheimi sem málaralistin
hefði yfirgefið.
|
|
 |
Directions
Bragi Ólafsson
Reykjavík
2004 |
|
The two of them walk on the potholed road, away from here, towards
the bottom of the image that appears to us. It has been raining
and the rain has left us a different image of this area than the
one we had before; we are located in the present. We don’t
see where the two of them are coming from, we can only see what
lays in front of us. They become smaller with each step, and when
they disappear behind the hill that spreads out at the top of
the frame the next picture takes over - but we can't see that
picture; at the moment our eyes are occupied by the past.
Here is a mountain and the mountain is sheltering a house. But
no one lives in this house and therefore we don't know what the
inside looks like. It gazes upon the lawn outside through its
hollow sockets; it gazes its own space, but nothing that it sees
changes by being seen - everything continues to stay the same
as always. At first I feel like time has erased all life that
once was to be found here, but after a short contemplation I realize
that it happened the other way around.
By looking around, the following questions emerge. What is the
color of the grass reaching down towards the edge of the lake
- and what is the color of the water? Is it possible to say that
the mountain – when one looks in the other direction - displays
a specific color, or that the dead eyes of an abandoned house
are the same color as death? Is the rock lying on the ground somehow
differently colored then the next rock? And what is the color
of the sun? Does its color change when it disappears below the
horizon? I don't know the answers to these questions - first I
need to see the grass, the water, the mountain, the abandoned
house, the rock lying on the ground and the rock next to it, and
the sun on the other side of the horizon.
The only purpose of the road is to point us in the direction
that it is leading. The road doesn't have any other purpose. And
I'm not on the way that it suggests; I'm on my way here. For I
recognize this place - here everything is as if it had been created
from my own ideas: the mountain, the house, the water and the
expanse, all of it small enough to easily fit in the eyes.
|
|
|
|
Sigrún Sigurðardóttir
Reykjavík
júlí 2005
|
 |
Það er kaldur sumardagur í íslenskri
sveit. Ég finn lykt af gömlum blúndugardínum.
Rykkorn kitlar mig í nefið. Ég halla mér
upp að kaldri rúðunn og fæ ofbirtu í
augun. Samt er ekki sól. Þetta er kaldur sumardagur
í íslenskri sveit. Þetta er ljósmynd
af veruleikanum eins og ég man hann. Ég var barn.
Ég var fullorðin.
Ljósmyndir Katrínar Elvarsdóttur eru ögrun
við hinn línulega tíma og hið skipulagða
minni. Þegar við virðum fyrir okkur hvít
blóm á skógarbotni, hafflötinn sem er
í senn tælandi og fráhrindandi eða skugga
trjágreina á hvítum vegg er sem hið hefðbundna
tímaskyn fari á flot. Löngu liðnir atburðir,
augnablik sem við geymum innra með okkur, minna fyrirvaralaust
á sig. Augnablikið heltekur okkur. Minningin er líkamleg.
Við finnum fyrir henni með öllum líkamanum.
Rifjum upp lyktina, áferðina og óljósa
sýn sem birtist okkur eitt afmarkað augnablik líkt
og í draumi. Þessi minning á sér ekki
stað innan hins hefðbundna krónólógíska
tíma. Hún er ekki hluti af endurminningum okkar.
Katrín Elvarsdóttir hefur fest óljósar
endurminningar sínar á filmu og þar með
gert okkur áhorfendunum mögulegt að framkalla
minningar sem búið hafa um sig djúpt í
undirmeðvitund okkar. Katrín deilir minningarbrotum
úr lífi sínum með okkur og þau
fléttast saman við okkar eigin óljósu
minningar um blúndugardínur í íslenskri
sveit og hlykkjóttan veg á fjarlægum slóðum.
Ljósmyndir Katrínar kalla fram tilfinningar sem
skapa minningar. Tíminn er ekki tekinn með í
reikninginn. Hann leysist upp og líf okkar skreppur saman.
Skyldi það vera svona á dauðastundinni? Skyldu
óljós minningabrot, sem við komum ekki fullkomlega
fyrir okkur, en hafa okkur algjörlega á valdi sínu,
brjótast fram? það er einhver drungi í
ljósmyndum Katrínar. Einhver háski sem Þrátt
fyrir fegurðina er við það að skella á.
Hin fullkomna kyrrð felur í sér einhverja óljósa
hreyfingu. Frásögn sem við getum ekki rifjað
upp. Er þetta augnablik fegurðarinnar, augnablikið
sem festist í minni okkar, rétt áður
en áfallið dynur yfir, rétt áður
en allt breytist, veruleikinn gerir vart við sig og ekkert
verður eins og áður?
Góður ljósmyndari opnar leið fyrir veruleikann
inn í hinn tilbúna efnislega heim sem við sífellt
byggjum í kringum líf okkar. Í ljósmyndum
Katrínar minnir veruleikinn á tilvist sína.
Háskinn er handan við hornið, óendanleiki
hafsins verður áþreifanlegur og tíminn
leysist upp. Er ég barn sem leitar skjóls á
skandinavískum skógarbotni? Er ég unglingur
í tilboðspakkanum flug og bíll í Evrópu?
Eða er ég fullorðin kona í íslenskri
sveit? Ef til vill er ég þetta allt á einu
og sama augnablikinu. Ef ég horfi nógu lengi á
ljósmyndina, leyfi hverju smáatriði að búa
um sig í mér og hrifsa mig á brott á
vit löngu liðins tíma, já, þá
er sem veruleikinn sjálfur geri vart við sig. Og það
rifjast smám saman upp fyrir mér hver það
er sem er þessi ég.
|
|
|
|
Gyða Margrét Pétursdóttir
Reykjavík
febrúar 2005 |
 |
Formáli.
Einu sinni átti maður nokkur heima við mýri
eina langt úti í löndum. Maður þessi
var ákaflega smávaxinn. Hann bjó einn síns
liðs í mjög litlum og níðurníddum
kumbalda og skammaðist sín óskaplega fyrir hvað
hann var lítill. „Ég er orðinn dauðleiður
á því að vera svona smávaxinn,“
sagði hann við sjálfan sig. „Ég ætla
að komast því hvort ég geti ekki stækkað.“[1]
Meginmálið
Að vandlega íhuguðu máli tók ríkisstjórnin
þá ákvörðun að lýsa yfir
stuðningi við innrás Bandaríkjanna og Bretlands
í Írak. // Það er ekki eins og þetta
hafi verið gert í skyndingu. // þetta eru staðreyndir
málsins // við veitum slíkan móralskan
stuðning // Var það ekki skylda okkar að gera
það? // Grunur um gereyðingarvopn írakskra
stjórnvalda réð auðvitað miklu. // Það
sem liggur hins vegar ekki fyrir er hvað varð um þessi
vopn. Það er enn ekki upplýst.
Íraksstríðið er umdeilt um allan heim.
Það hefur verið umdeilt og það er það
enn þann dag í dag. Það er líka
umdeilt á Íslandi. // Þeir sem gagnrýna
mest innrás Bandaríkjanna og Breta voru líka
miklir andstæðingar viðskiptabannsins. Þeir
vildu trúa því, sem er mjög gott að
trúa, að þetta leysist allt af sjálfu
sér. Trú þeirra er mikil. // Hvað sem
því líður getum við ekki snúið
til baka. Við hljótum að vinna út frá
þeirri stöðu sem er í dag. Það
er kominn tími uppbyggingar. Sá tími er kominn
að hernámsliðið fari frá Írak
og Írakar taki sjálfir stjórn í sínar
hendur. // Það er alveg klárt að við
verðum að sæta ábyrgð á gjörðum
okkar. // það er það sem skiptir meginmáli.
Íslensk stjórnvöld studdu aðgerðir
til að koma Saddam Hussein frá völdum. Það
hefur nú tekist. Hann ríkti yfir þjóð
sinni sem grimmur harðstjóri og miskunnarlaus böðull.
// Við skulum vona að slíkir harðstjórar
komist þar ekki aftur til valda.[2]
Eftirmáli. „Lengi lifi hermaðurinn!“
hrópaði mannfjöldinn sem hataði feita kónginn
og drottninguna. Kóngurinn hafði reist margar fínar
hallir fyrir peningana sem fólkið átti. Og meðan
allir unnu baki brotnu myrkranna á milli sat kóngurinn
í höll sinni og vann ekki handtak. Já, fólkið
var ánægt með að þessu ástandi
linnti. Nú mundi það að minnsta kosti fá
kóng sem bæri hag þegnanna fyrir brjósti.
„Lengi lifi nýi kóngurinn!“ hrópaði
fólkið. „Húrra!“ Hermaðurinn
var krýndur kóngur og hann gekk að eiga prinsessuna.
Þau eignuðust þrjú falleg börn sem
aldrei þurftu að óttast neitt því
hundarnir þrír með ógnarstóru augun
gættu þeirra hverja stund.[3]
Bútasaum annaðist Gyða Margrét Pétursdóttir
Mynstrið sem hún studdist við kallast „Kostnaður
karlmennskunnar“
1. Hartman,
B. (1998). Ævintýri frá ýmsum löndum.
Sögur og sígild ævintýri (Hreinn S. Hákonarson
þýddi). Reykjavík: Skálholtsútgáfan.
[Bls. 64].
2. Bútar úr
ræðum fyrrverandi utanríkisráðherra
(núverandi forsætisráðherra) á
Alþingi dagana 5.11.2003, 28.1.2004 og 19.5.2004. www.althingi.is
3. Andersen, H.C. (1998).
Ævintýri H.C. Andersen (Sigrún Árnadóttir
þýddi). Reykjavík: Vaka-Helgafell hf. [Bls.
134].
|
|
|
|
Sigrún Sigurðardóttir
Reykjavík
júlí 2004 |
 |
Wet pavement. I lose my sense of balance. The world recedes from
underneath my feet. All that was is no more, but still is. Buried
somewhere deep inside myself.
The photographs of Katrín Elvarsdóttir speak to
that which lies in hiding. Yet they do not tell a story. They
only contain experiences. Moments that do not find their place
among other memories. Moments that live outside the language sphere
and are awakened through pure coincidence, capturing the viewer.
Elvarsdóttir’s photographs do not speak to common
sense. Language, with all its subliminal authority, is not their
subject. Elvarsdóttir’s photographs speak first and
foremost to the senses. They belong with those memories that the
French author Marcel Proust called mémoire involuntaire
– involuntary memories. Our involuntary memory system lies
out of linguistic reach and its contents will thus never become
part of the public narrative that we tell others and that we come
to believe about ourselves – that which we call our recollections.
Such memories, nonetheless, constitute a true connection to that
which has come to pass. To that which was – yet actually
wasn’t. The senses awaken the subdued from a deep sleep.
The past appears to us without warning, caused by an object, smell,
touch, taste, sound or sight, arousing feelings that we have safeguarded
within us.
And so it is with our own past. It is a labor in vain to attempt
to recapture it: All the efforts of our intellect must prove futile.
The past is hidden somewhere outside the realm, beyond the reach
of the intellect, in some material object (in the sensation which
that material object will give us) of which we have no inkling.
And it depends on chance whether or not we come upon this object
before we ourselves must die.
- Marcel Proust
Elvarsdóttir’s photographs evoke memories that
we don't know are part of us until they appear before us, without
warning or preparation, awakening feelings of times long gone.
A child’s foot submerged in water, momentarily distorted.
A foot that used to have a familiar shape takes on a foreign and
frightening form. An instance turns into momentary terror. Repeated
motion. A foot touches the water surface. Distortion becomes play.
The terror fades. The play fades. The memory goes dormant. Until
this moment, formerly a part of me, appears to me again in a different
disguise, calling forth emotions that have laid submerged, until
this moment.
The voluntary memories that have formed our self-image, along
with the stories which we constantly repeat about ourselves, are
molded by language and thus by rhetoric and common views held
by society. The picture that our voluntary memory holds is therefore
always distorted, influenced by our own views towards society
and by society's views on that which is and that which was. Our
voluntary memory doesn't hand us the past as it really was but,
rather, as we have come to represent it. Involuntary memory is
hidden in the senses. It is independent of language and thus the
idea about linear time where the present turns into the past and
the future turns into the present. In our involuntary memory the
present and the past interact. A past becomes, for a moment, part
of the here and now, and we are unable to tell that which happened
from that which is happening.
In the photograph the past and the present meet. What once was
in front of the photographer acquires a second life in the mind
of the viewer. Fractions of memories – which don't belong
to ourselves – acquire new life when they awaken trapped
emotions deep within. Emotions that we may even be incapable of
relating to particular events but yet evoke streams of consciousness
that give the present a new meaning. The terror of a scantily
clad child, a lonely back yard, red swings slowly moving. Dream
or reality. I don't know. Yet I only know that the feeling is
real. Familiar. But nondescript. Involuntary memories. Moments
buried deep inside.
|
|
|
|
Jóhanna Guðrun Árnadóttir
Reykjavík
Feburary 2003 |
 |
The subject of this seires
compromises mannequins of various kinds which appear to be on the
fringes of life and lifelessness. The obeserver is shown indistinct
images of bodyparts and the unclear distinction leads to doubt as
to whether the images are of real people or models.
Katrín achieves this unclear effect using a
cheap and primitive 120 mm camera, where the results depend upon
the fixed apperature, and the depth of field in the phototographs
is mysty yet clear. The technique underlines the dreamlike ambience
of the picture plane, where the boundary between the real and the
unreal has been obliterated.
Laden with mystery and uncertainty about what is happening
Katrín's Breathless implies that things are not what they
seem. The intention with the work appears to be rather to bring
out the reality we perceive between dreaming and wakefulness than
to focus on stone-cold reality.
|
|
|
|
Doc Crane,
Massachusetts
December 2001
|
 |
The phantoms suggested by the title of Katrín Elvarsdóttir's
series, Revenants, are of a different variety than the spectres
that might float through a keyhole. The ghosts glimpsed in her
photographs have more to do with things left behind to memory
— earthly things, perhaps, but just as haunting. The items
or places are inert, yet it is as if they radiate with some last
vestige of emotion — a last gasp of imparted spirit.
The landscapes, originated on archaic equipment barely more
advanced than a pinhole camera, hark back to the earliest era
of photography. The territory is of a rural Iceland whose inhabitants
have died out or moved on to better prospects, a condition not
uncommon to many parts of the world, the cause being anything
from industrialization, to climate change. The result is that
the environments depicted could be of any high latitude, whether
the post-Soviet Union, Labrador, or Patagonia. But because it
is Iceland, the ghosts implied within the title are specific to
their own culture. The Icelanders themselves may be re-established
in Reykjavík or on extended trips around the world. But
the folklore remains among the ruins, as if the previous generations
left behind a sediment of emotion that has been absorbed into
the soil, rendering each outcrop a sentient being. And if the
Icelandic interpretation of their mythology is more literal than
in other parts of Northern Europe, this would seem a logical enough
proposition. Mythology has always fermented in the opaque regions
just beyond sight of the campfire, or in the modern era, the zone
beyond certifiable evidence. In the effort to maintain an authentic
identity within the larger western industrial civilization, a
link to superstition has carried over, allowing for a good amount
of leeway in retaining a sense of the elves.
The land is nameless, the titles of the images not so much documenting
specific locations in Iceland as denoting realms no more accessible
than the ether of memory. It is in this way that the parallels
exist between Katrín Elvarsdóttir's own origins
and her work, as she was born in Ísafjördur in 1964,
but her family relocated to Reykjavík. After a period spent
abroad during her teens in Sweden, she attended the University
of Iceland studying French literature, followed by an extended
stay in the U.S., where her inclination shifted to photography.
Out of such an environment with so many disparate instincts, Katrín's
own personal sensibility resonates with an unflappable integrity.
An individual artist with a distinctive body of work, she has
functioned and survived within a larger, prevailing global culture,
as evident in her shows during the late 1990s in Reykjavík,
Florida, Denmark, and New England. Whether in photographs or collage
assemblies, her imagery strikes a balance between narrative and
a strong graphic instinct.
In Revenants, her attention shifts back towards the territory
of her origins. She has pared down her technology to the most
rudimentary of 120 format cameras, reducing her choices to the
essential exposure, the rudimentary optics dictating a unity within
the images, with concentric degrees of illumination emphasizing
innate distances as palpable and yet indescribable as any glimpse
of Elysium or Beulah Land. The result is not unlike an alchemist's
camera obscura capturing evidence of a place that is at once just
beyond the lens but as inaccessible as the netherworld.
It is indeed an ethereal heritage that Katrín has returned
home to. Yet for all the prevailing themes that unify the series,
there are as many elements that distinguish each individual photograph.
In photograph "Suðurland II" (2001) the exposure
evokes not so much Iceland, but a Soviet Union of secret numbered
cities or forgotten gulags. As if in a surreptitious snap taken
by an exile, or by remote sensing, the northern sun illuminates
what could be either launching gantries or oil wells, the technology
reduced by the environment to its most primitive form. And for
all the light shining downward, the cold is all encompassing,
even while the chimera of the spires would suggest radiation passing
through them, rendering everything within the frame lifeless,
the dark swath at the bottom of the image not so much earth as
inert sediment.
"Norðurland III" (2001) is, of course, more blatant
in suggesting a Soviet/post-Soviet venue, as the Cyrillic lettering
on the ship's superstructure leaves little doubt as to its origin.
The connection between the two worlds would seem logical enough,
the shore being on the edge of the abyss, the Arctic beginning
just beyond view. Whatever comes from over the horizon, whether
Russian freighters, Siberian driftwood, Maersk containers, crates
of oranges, or Algerian corsairs, their influences are deposited
with the currents, forgotten a month later, but remembered for
generations.
"Snæfellsnes" (2001) with its emptied house
and connected outbuildings sitting at the foot of a glaciated
mountain, the disposition of the sky and the line of the mountain
carries a homely trace. As if harking back to the idyll of a silent
film epic, the site resembles an archaic redoubt, however the
substance, structure, and size of the ruin would indicate a fairly
recent past. With its asymmetrical lines and lopsided cavities,
the decrepitude is all pervasive — the former occupants
having either perished or moved on to a more sustainable existence,
as if the region as been formally deincorporated and declared
an empty quarter, abandoned to the hinterlands.
In "Strandir II" (2000) the wreckage of the grounded
ship, devoid of any masts or deck structure, righted only by an
external framework, has merged with the land and the harbor, forming
an inadvertent promontory. The hull, although still solid, would
appear to have been picked clean by salvagers, its crew having
disembarked more or less in safety to the shore. It is a sight
reminiscent of the Falklands Islands and other high-latitude outposts,
with generations of working ships beached and written off rather
than venture further into treacherous seas. Any sense of memorializing
seems happenstance, no plaques being necessary, the long, sculptural
lines of the hulk itself serving as enough of a monument.
"Norðurland II" (2001) with its surplus Quonset
Hut and mid-sixties Oldsmobile carries over to what now seems
as much a mythic era in that it could be called "Middle Cold
War." The iconography of both the hut and car scream of a
shabby American nostalgia, and unlike the previous images, it
is not an abandoned site. The light above the car is on, glowing
faintly, and there are no uneven traces of debris in the foreground,
just a sparse functionality of the environs. But at most, there
would seem to be only a skeleton shift in a workshop, the machinery
idling during a summer dusk, the American influences counting
as a decorative layer already settling back into the earth.
In "Strandir I" (2000) it is not clear if the factory
overlooking the span of water, like the previous image, is a derelict
or is functioning on some basic level, as a faint wisp of vapor
emanating from the chimney appears to mimic the low-hanging cloud
in the harbor. But it is the barest sign of life, as the right
angles of the building settle into a foreground that is as opaque
as volcanic ash – a parked car rendered a faint, half-submerged
shape, lost among the murk. With its smudged cement surfaces,
worn by time and the elements, it is hard to image the factory
ever having supported itself so far on the periphery of any larger
economy. Its only apparent link is the water and the narrow causeway
and winding road on the right, and yet it might be purely illusionary,
as if faces could be glimpsed in the detail as well. All that
remains amidst the composition and the interplay of light is that
the structure remains, the smokestack still reaching upward, almost
a monument, a rust-belt obelisk.
"Að Norðan" (2000) sits under a shroud of
overcast, the solitary stucco cottage reflected in a mudpuddle.
It could be Ireland or straight out of the remembered potato fields
of Günter Grass's Kashubia, and somehow, as if by virtue
of its placement within the frame, the cottage evokes a grandmotherly
presence, left behind to a hardscrabble existence. It is a sentimental
premise, or at least a projected sentiment, as the gulf between
the comfortable, reflective present and the earlier generations
who tried to make a viable living off such a landscape and often
failed continues to haunt as much as any specter.
That "Suðurland I" (2001) should follow "Að
Norðan" makes perfect sense, for beyond the link in the
weather and the rain-filled puddles, the road winding towards
the horizon is no doubt escaping the isolated world of the previous
image. There is no sense of arrival, only departure, as if setting
off and severing ties is an inevitable fact, but the loss is undeniable.
For as much as the landscape is comprehended, having been measured,
divided, and worked to exhaustion, it is only upon return that
the final aesthetic transformation is apparent.
If arrival is to be had, it is in "Suðurnes" (1999)
the overcast of the earlier images having broken, the road having
deposited the perspective — in what may belie the title
— to the edge of true North, Ultima Thule, the rough-hewn
shrine serving as a marker. As much as it would seem morning,
the lateness of the hour – or indeed the epoch – has
been reached. It is the fact of the high latitude, the very sense
of impossibility that buffets the place with a roar, and that
there is indeed a palpable glory cast upon this knoll. It is a
glory not dependent on the cross pushed up against the sky; the
cross is simply another mythic application, another level of iconography,
another visitor's interpretation. The glory is that the patch
of windblown high grass and distant mountain frame a rarefied
pocket where the transcendent is to be glimpsed, a point where
geography and the sublime converge.
|
Katrín
Elvarsdóttir©2006
|