I wasn't sure how how Laura Latinsky's work would relate to my current practise or really my thinking on photography in general but many helpful thoughts and ideas have arisen from this article in Bomb Magazine. Latinsky is very good at describing her practise in a very easy to understand manner and for me her descriptions conjur up more questions and ideas in each of her answers in this interview...
There is definitely a relation to a moment, but the photograph doesn’t capture anything except what is photographable. The moment cannot be contained within the photograph, which is something else unto itself. That idea of the moment is also a question as it is in some sense a composite, evidence of what has come before, that is, the product of what and how to see.
I immediately thought about the spaces in my photographs which really are places that hold memories for me as a child. The moment in which I make the photograph is actually nothing but the moment in which the mechanism of the camera makes the image of what is in front of the lens. To me personally what is in front of the lens is a whole capsule of memory, of imagination and also to the viewer I hope will be a connection for the viewer and a place that holds equal memory to them. I know when I looked at The New Village project by John Spinks, I didn't recognise any of the places he had photographed but I immediately recalled places in Devon which I assume held equal memory or an equal urge to be photographed. Again to the viewer I hope to convey an urge for them to recall such a place from their memory. I guess you could say that this work will be for me some sort of memory project but for the viewer a series of images that I hope they can connect with and find some sort of relative thought whilst observing.
The photograph doesn’t show the world the way we see. We have come to think of the photograph as akin to seeing—as a transparent or neutral act—but it is so different than the way we see. I mean this as regards the physical act of seeing, but more, what the sense of sight entails. Seeing is not a neutral act as much as the result of our conditioning. We see what we’ve learned to see and photographs obviously play a large role in that.
What I take from Latinsky's words above are what follows.. I think the photograph can show the way we see as photographers. The way I photograph a tree is different to the way someone else photographs a tree so in that respect I disagree with Latinsky. However, I do agree that we see what we have learnt to see. And, photography has played a late part of that role. I think this is for the better though.
As I choose to photograph a particular tree for a particular reason, for example its a tree I remember from my childhood. For the viewer of my image, its just a tree. But what I wish the viewer to take away from that it the idea that somewhere there is a tree that they remember or have photographed. I want my work to make connections between the viewer and a place form their memory like Spinks images did for me. For me this is what the project is about and is the entire goal of my current image making.
McNelis, A. (2018). Hungry or Full by Ashley McNelis - BOMB Magazine. [online] Bombmagazine.org. Available at: https://bombmagazine.org/articles/hungry-or-full/ [Accessed 2 Mar. 2018].
Further reading to do
Freud's responses to trauma