Parallel Lines: Laura Tota
© Marta Blue
Federica Belli: The language of photography is still among the most contemporary ones, notwithstanding the diffusion of digital art. Which factors make photography such a relevant medium in our time?
Laura Tota: The discourse on contemporary photography runs on a double track. First of all, technology has made the tool of photography extremely democratic, making it possible for everyone to become familiar with visual communication. Moreover, the proliferation of social media has allowed all of us to become creators of images and photographs; somehow it has allowed us to communicate a series of micro and macro-social events to everyone we would have wanted to relate to. To explore this issue, in the storm of photographs that reach us daily, it becomes fundamental to clearly distinguish fine-art photography from communicational photography. Photographers often complain about how everyone thinks they are a photographer, nowadays. Actually, this is not the case. While there are photographs taken to communicate who we are and to create an online avatar for ourselves through images, one must be aware of the difference between taking a picture and creating one, with an authorial approach. Because of this, photography today is truly the medium through which each of us communicates who we are. Yet, luckily, this remains a clearly separate industry from authorial photography.
F.B. This issue leads photographers to question what actually allows them to define themselves as photographer when anyone can technically call themselves one. The difference mostly lies in the research and awareness behind it, on a level I wasn't even aware of before deciding to really delve into photography. And these thoughts are relevant particularly for emerging photographers,
precisely the target audience of your curatorial work. Your path as Curator, started in 2016, has brought you to curate Ph.ocus, the contemporary photography section of Paratissima. Which considerations have brought you to concentrate all your energy specifically on emerging photographers?
L.T. It is commonly thought that it is easier to deal with an already defined narrative work, one which only needs to be communicated. Opposite, I like to think that I am accompanying emerging photographers on a maieutic process of finding their own narrative. Historicised or mid-career photographers already have a conscious vision of their work, which is a double-edged sword: many established photographers remain victims of the persona they have created for the eyes of the public. It becomes a cage, if one does not have a strong awareness of the changes occurring internally and of how photography might go along with those changes. Emerging photographers are still a sort of blob in search of their own uniqueness; it is extremely stimulating to follow along in this process, to see in their images what they in the first place are not yet aware of and help them bring it out. Without being the one to define their work, I help them outline a unique and tailored path themselves. The relationship between Curator and Artist is a bit like a marriage: they must be empathetically aligned, study each other and allow each other to grow side by side. That's why I work with emerging photographers.
© Giacomo Infantino
F.B. In a period in which all stories seem to have been told already, photographers continuously find new ways to narrate our time. How do the artists you collaborate with get emotionally yet rationally involved in new projects?
L.T. Much of it depends on the photographer's personal experience and the places she focuses on, especially in the case of documentary photography. Cartier-Bresson maintained that taking pictures requires the alignment of eyes, head and heart. This is why the distinction between photographs taken to remember something and photographs created to leave a mark lies precisely in the planning. There is no heart without a head, just as there is no head without a heart. Having recently talked with a photographer whose name I will not mention, I discovered that every time he carries out a project he wonders which problem inside himself he is trying to solve. It is a search for answers that still remain inaccessible to the photographer. Also, there is an additional consideration.
Excluding commissioned work, photographers often run the risk of telling stories simply because they suppose that topic is exactly what the audience would like to see. But as soon as the interest in the subject matter fades, the real value of the photographic work remains to be assessed.
F.B. Another characteristic of the contemporary photography industry is the high concentration of talented artists. Having one’s work be seen and making it circulate are fundamental steps in the creation of a career. Have you ever witnessed a case in which a talented photographer publishes work too early, somehow spoiling her growth?
L.T. I actually had the diametrically opposite situation happen to me: it is now common sense that if something is not photographed, in a certain sense it does not exist; in addition to that, if the photograph is not shared on social media, it does not exist as well. I have recently had the opportunity to collaborate with a talented photographer who had a great project in her hands, and given she had not shared it on social media yet, a very similar work was published by a much better known photographer before her. Thus, if on the one hand it is true that we risk ruining the quality by publishing a work too early, without taking the time to have it sediment in our mind, at the same time making a project public can also lead to recognition by curators interested in it. A photographer can no longer do without social platforms, which remain the best way to keep the audience informed about projects and ideas. It's a very delicate balance. When is a photographer ready to come out of the closet? Maybe never. Stepping out of the comfort zone and dealing with curators who are experienced about the packaging of a project often helps. There is such an authorship behind being a photographer today that the shot itself becomes a minimal part of all the work that goes on before and after.
© Carla Sutera Sardo
F.B. In fact, photography is much more than a craft. It is an approach to life that influences our every experience. I'm realising with enthusiasm–and sometimes reluctantly–that it's not possible to take a break from this mental approach. And in the jungle this industry can be, photographers often end up acting as their own Agent, Curator and Gallerist. In which ways can such phenomenon be self- defeating?
L.T. Dealing more and more often with emerging photographers I have found myself facing a really comforting awareness. The most recent generation has learned that there are many different professions around photography, also thanks to the proliferation of courses and workshops dedicated to them. I think it's really detrimental for a photographer to assume they could carry on a job totally alone, in the shoes of Editor, Agent, Designer and so on. The more one opens up to collaborations, the more it becomes possible to emerge and get access to a network system in which each professional figure contributes with knowledge, increasing the chances of a project being seen and known. Acting in total autonomy and independence is definitely not intelligent in terms of diffusion a project. I have often met photographers who have trusted and relied on me both for the preparation of exhibition and publication paths. And I have always tried to diffuse the vision of these artists at the best of my possibilities. In an increasingly digital world, the human and personal relationship with the actors of this field becomes more and more fundamental. Also, it is quite easy to think you're good–as well as not good–without the confrontation with experts in the field. It is essential to be ready to take risks, for better or for worse.
