Capital of Hope: the hidden photographic history of Brasília

‘It is a monotonous refrain to say that we need to occupy our country, own the land, march westward, turn our backs to the sea, and not remain eternally with our eyes fixed on the waters as if we were thinking of leaving…The founding of Brasília is a political act whose scope cannot be ignored by anyone. It is the march towards the interior in its fullness. It is the complete possession of the land. We shall erect in the heart of our country a radiating centre of life and success.’

- President Juscelino Kubitschek, quoted in Revista Brasília 40:79 (1960).

Photographs by Marcel Gautherot in the magazine Aujourd'hui Art et Architecture, July 1964.

Brasília is presented here in just the way its boosters intended: a space-age enigma, an extension of the possible. Of all the photographers working on the site in the early years, Marcel Gautherot was particularly adept at conveying the strangeness of Niemeyer’s buildings, which eschewed straight lines and angles for ‘free-flowing, sensual curves’. Shapes inspired, the architect wrote in his memoirs, by the ‘sinuous rivers’ of Brazil, the waves of the ocean, even the ‘Universe of Einstein’.

For Niemeyer, Brasília was the ultimate canvas, as well as a vehicle for his communism. His designs have become almost synonymous with the city. But he was only one among a number of charismatic personalities who willed the new capital into existence. For the President, Juscelino Kubitschek, the inauguration marked the start of a new era for Brazil, a ‘stone cast to create waves of progress.’ Transferring the capital from Rio (a constitutional requirement) was first among a list of targets drawn up by his administration to modernise the country and lessen its reliance on primary products. This meant new highways, the cultivation of infant industries, intensified goods circulation.

The city itself would symbolise a vigorous young democracy throwing off the mental shackles of its colonial past. And with its new seat in the central plateau, the federal government could project power into the vast untapped interior. More radically, Brasília was intended as a crucible for a new kind of citizen. The masterplan of Lúcio Costa, a disciple of Le Corbusier, was premised on the conviction that architecture could be a condenser and conductor of change, that it could be used to mould society in desirable directions, propelling the whole nation past undesired stages of its historical development. This meant eliminating capitalist social-spatial stratification and nurturing a modern consciousness through the force of shapes, space, and voids.

Candangos at work, 1970. Arquivo Público do Distrito Federal.

The construction was an epic endeavour, involving thirty-thousand workers, or candangos, recruited from all over the country, though disproportionately from the impoverished north-east. They lived and died in frontier conditions. And with their toil, the city rose from the red earth in just three years - a feat the government worked hard to promote around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, for instance, funded a touring exhibition which debuted at Berlin’s Interbau in 1957 (held under theme ‘city of tomorrow’). Its purpose was to affirm Brazilian cultural renewal, as well as to build momentum for the modernist movement.

The state construction company, NOVACAP, also put together a remarkable journal each month during the construction years, which is full of sketches, maps and photographs. These efforts did much to create a popular impression of the new city, often encapsulated by the bowls of the National Congress, one to signify openness, the other deliberation. Gautherot’s rendition is typical of a mode of representation which glorified form using complementary techniques and perspectives. But there is a deeper context to the above spread, which was published in Paris only a few months after the military coup which brought an end to democracy in Brazil for twenty-one years.

Brasília’s rational layout, broad boulevards and panoramic vistas proved predictably amenable to authoritarian rule. Against the erratic pulse of a port like Rio, it could be patrolled and surveilled with ease. Seen in this light, it’s easy to read into Gautherot’s sullen tones: the great experiment in modernist democracy falling into darkness; the utopian project strangled in its cradle.

Orlando Brito, ‘Soldiers hoist a Brazilian flag on the Planalto Palace’s flagpole’, 1966. A reminder of how quickly things can change, the plasticity of the present.

The military period produced few images that could be described as iconic. In the photographic imaginary at least, Brasília is still defined by the work of a group of photojournalists who played a key role in conjuring a durable impression of a remote place in the late 50s and early 60s. Perhaps the most influential was the great Magnum photographer René Burri, whose work covers the whole spectrum from groundbreaking through to the lived reality until as late as 1997.

Burri’s images of inauguration night are unmatched in capturing the giddy optimism of the moment. I imagine guests stepping out onto the terrace for a moment, breathing in the warm air and taking in the luminous newness of the city. To some that night, it must have seemed like Brasília was just the start, that radiant cities would soon sweep the world, bringing order, control and harmony.

As it turned out, it was the zenith of international modernism. Its failures and contradictions, seeded during construction, contributed in no small part to the movement’s eventual disavowal. Today, Brasília is a microcosm of Brazilian society at large: unequal and spatially divided. Niemeyer’s buildings have lost their lustre, some now plastered with billboards for Netflix shows and the latest iPhone. The paint is cracking, the grass unkempt.

Despite this, photographers still seek inventive ways to render Niemeyer’s curves or integrate them into broader studies of contemporary Brazil. It’s not difficult to see why. Even now, and through a screen, his buildings cast a spell. Who could refuse their twisting forms, especially when set against the spartan solemnity of Brasília at dawn? They do look dated, or at least clearly of another age (‘nothing dates faster than people’s fantasies about the future’, said Robert Hughes in The Shock of the New). But still, somehow, they appear more profoundly modern than anything of this scale dreamt into existence today.

Central to modernist aesthetics was the notion of fresh perception. Some of this architectural work, which is typically abstract and minimal, does succeed in presenting the city afresh. But in continuing a tradition begun with Gautherot, it also reproduces a long faded millenarian discourse - and is therefore at odds with its subject. More interesting is the kind of work which explores what happens when, as Dutch photographer Iwan Baan puts it, the ‘chilly, impersonal drawing from the past’ is populated with real people with complex needs and desires. His work in Brasília and Chandigarh attempts to do this.

It’s also illuminating, and disquieting, to look into the construction archive - although only a fragment of the roughly ten-thousand negatives is available online. As well as Gautherot and Burri, photographers including Alberto Ferreira, Thomaz Farkas, Jean Mazon, Peter Scheier, Dmitri Kessel and Lucien Clergue roamed the site. Taken together, their work preserves for posterity a poignant history of dispossession and repression which has been all but obscured by the ubiquity of the millennial representation.

James Holston’s The Modernist City (1989), an ‘anthropological critique’, provides the classic English-language account of this history. In Holston’s view, planners’ egalitarian intentions were ultimately negated by the ‘inherent paradox of the project itself’ - having to use the old to populate the new (the same tension which Baan confronts). He unfolds the various processes of ‘Brazilianization’ that took place in the city’s first decade, as people reacted to their sterile and uniform environment by reasserting traditional cultural values and forms of commerce. For a number of years, the authorities pushed back. Squatters, chaotic growth and subversive organisations were met with clampdowns and directives. But authorities were defending the purity of an idea which had already been corrupted beyond reprieve.

‘…in compounding the basic contradictions of Brasilia’s premises, [planners] created an exaggerated version - almost a caricature - of what they had sought to escape.’ (Holston: 200)

Vila Amaury, one of the workers’ settlements, 1959.

Early in 1957, the government had run a recruitment campaign for three different purposes (construction, materials supply, and administration). People came from every state in the country, many fleeing a terrible draught. But when the city was deemed complete, the candangos and their families were denied residency rights. In a bid to prevent the Brazil they represented from taking root, authorities set about demolishing the makeshift settlements that had sprung up on the ‘semi-legal periphery’. At least one, Vila Amauary, was inundated during the creation of Lake Paranoá.

In time, authorities recognised that the satellites were there to stay, and most were given legal foundation. But as a consequence, their organic development was stifled as planners restructured them according to the same zoning principles as the Plano Piloto. This essentially meant converting them into dormitory settlements, with residents taking a long and expensive commute to the centre for work. But through such strict separation of functions, the city soon became stratified along class lines.

Elites eschewed the imposed egalitarianism of the superquadras for gated communities on the shores of Lake Paranoá. Meanwhile, everyone except for middle-class bureaucrats clustered in the satellite towns, travelling into the centre only when absolutely necessary, hence the aphorism: ‘In Brasília there is only casa e trabalho.’ In other words, there is a missing third element, a sphere of random congregation and celebration which in other Brazilian cities is the street, the square or the beach.

Marcel Gautherot, Sacolândia, c. 1958. Acervo do Instituto Moreira Salles, Rio de Janeiro.

The origins of this dual order can be encountered in Gautherot’s documentary work in Sacolândia, the most basic camp in the federal district. It was named for the old cement sacks people used to line their shelters. Whereas much photojournalism of the time presented the candangos heroically, these images reveal the underlying reality: families eking out an existence from the detritus of construction, having been promised a new start. The photographer later spoke of wanting to publish a book on Sacolândia. But he was unable to find a publisher.

As much as Brasília has failed to realise its utopian promise, its physical profile has also been softened by urban sprawl. Designed for half-a-million people, the metropolitan area is today home to more than four million. It’s likely Costa would have considered this an unacceptable subversion of the project’s integrity. After all, his proposal was selected for its fundamental rigidity: his capital would be self-contained, closed.

And yet when touring the city on Street View, I began to appreciate how the masterplan is not really legible anyway. There is a sense of Brasília’s scale, of the negative space. But the overall vision is inaccessible, at least from the inhabited perspective. If you ascend to the viewing deck of the Torre de TV, something approaching a general overview can be found, however. Visitors can look straight down to the Praça dos Três Poderes along the Monumental Axis, which, with its twelve-lanes, holds the record for the widest central reservation of any dual carriageway in the world. A strange way to think about the strip of land on which all of Brazil’s most powerful institutions are based.

Twenty kilometres from the centre is the Torre de TV Digital, Niemeyer’s last building. It’s fitting, perhaps, that the great architect bowed out with a means to gaze upon his works. The viewing deck offers a more comprehensive, but still dissatisfying view of the modernist city.

The Torre de TV, 1968. The Energetic Church believes the structure is one of the foci of Brasília’s mystical energy. The city is home to an array of New Age, paranormal and occult groups, many of whom hold that it was built upon the world’s largest crystal deposit. At the Temple of Good Will, there is a pyramid capped with a huge crystal.

The only way to fully appreciate Costa’s intentions is from the air. Brasília is intimately tied to the concept of flight, most obviously through its outline. For Le Corbusier, planes were the ultimate symbol of mechanical civilisation, of the new age. In them, planners could fly over the great cities of the nineteenth century, crammed and haphazard, and derive immediate insight about what to raze, what to keep, where to develop. And with such capacity, the underdeveloped world could avoid the chaos and inequity of the Industrial Revolution. As he put it in Aircraft (1935):

‘The airplane has given us the bird's-eye view. When the eye sees clearly, the mind makes a clear decision.’

Aerial view, 1972. The height of military rule.

As the plane banks in the skies above Brasília, its own image stares back. It’s a joyful silhouette, streamlined and buoyant. The sweep of the wings is bisected by the fuselage at a point where Costa placed the city’s huge central bus stop. At the cockpit is the Praça dos Três Poderes. And in the lower promontory, the Alvorada Palace is clearly visible. Bolsonaro’s predecessor as president, Michel Temer, found it to have a negative energy, and vacated.

Although finished for a full twelve years at this point, the city seems somehow still fresh - newly etched and scraped out of the ground. Today, it is somewhat ossified, inscribed by UNESCO as a ‘singular artistic achievement, a prime creation of the human genius’. As such, the fundamentals of the Plano Piloto are protected, frozen - complicating efforts to address Brasília’s chronic problems: inequality, congestion, violence. Adjustments must be made on the periphery of the planned city, in the area designated by Costa as the ‘bucolic sector’.

One of the most significant is an ‘innovation district’ in the north-east designed by Carlo Ratti Associates in Turin. Although the practice claims to have been inspired by Costa, their scheme aims to ‘overcome’ his functionalist divisions and open up the superquadra typology to allow for al fresco dining and landscaped gardens. Grafted onto the tip of one of Brasília’s wings, the district will a new layer of historical meaning to the city, testifying to an age of starchitects, environmental rhetoric and private-led development.

Plano Piloto, Google Street View.

Elsewhere, a kind of synthesis between Kubitschek’s vision of national self-aggrandisement and the smart city movement is being carried out on a much grander scale. The Indonesian government recently announced plans to transfer the capital from Jakarta to a new ‘forest city’ on Borneo. As with Brasília sixty years previously, it’s partly about escaping colonial legacies, as well as national self-assertion.

But Nagara Rimba Nusa (‘forest and island hilltop’) will be based on very different ideas: a blend of Indonesian spiritualism and twenty-first century eco-connectivity. The city will be networked and compact, with private vehicles discouraged. And it will supposedly manifest a spatial philosophy based on a harmony between people, God and nature. The architect, Sibarani Sofian, has even spoken of realising a concept of ‘bio-mimicry’ which seeks to ‘imitate and adapt the forest into a man-made development’.

The official justification for the move is that Jakarta is sinking, a legacy of Dutch mismanagement, population growth and the over-extraction of groundwater. To combat this and keep the ocean at bay, a forty-kilometre sea wall is being built, its massive cost to be partly offset by selling prized real estate on the reclaimed land. An artificial island will form the shape of Indonesia’s national symbol, a mythical eagle known as Garuda Rakasa. It will be quite a sight from the air.

Meanwhile, the largest purpose-built capital in history is rising rapidly in the Egyptian desert. Recent drone footage shows the astonishing speed of development. The decision to move was only taken in 2015, a year after the military coup which brought Abdel Fattah El-Sisi to power. Many of the new government buildings are complete, and the residential districts have taken final shape. From above, they look a bit like a motherboard.

Planners claim to have learned lessons from other city-building projects, and say they are not setting out to build a ‘monumental’ city. Instead, the New Administrative Capital will be ‘smart’ and ‘sustainable’, with satellites being used to monitor traffic and optimise circulation. Residents are to carry a unified ‘main card’ to access goods and services. There will be an entire entertainment sector, and a ‘green backbone’ twice the size of Central Park. The CBD will feature the tallest tower in Africa, an odd pyramidal structure meant to demonstrate continuity with ancient civilisation.

Residential districts under construction in Egypt’s New Administrative Capital, with the CBD cluster visible on the right.

Just as Brasília is seen by some as marking the beginning of intensive deforestation in the Amazon, the new capital on Borneo is only the latest landmark in a long history of efforts to master the resource-rich interior. And in an echo of Naypyitaw (built by the Mynamar military at the start of the century), Egypt’s new capital will go a long way to insulate the Sisi regime from protest. The prospect of another Tahrir Square in a city of bureaucrats seems remote.

Both schemes stem, ultimately, from a will to evade the symptoms of modernity. The megacities of Cairo and Jakarta have become unsustainable, liabilities - their ‘circulation clogged’ and ‘respiration polluted’, to use Holston’s words. Le Corbusier would have called them unhealthy organisms. But behind the shiny visualisations is the same old dysfunctional lurching: the displacement of risk, a technical fix to slow-burn crisis in a conjuncture increasingly defined by the spectre of climate emergency.

And the new cities will not be hermetically sealed. Given time, their inner contradictions will work themselves through, leading one day, perhaps, to the renunciation of their organising principles. Planned capitals are supposed to interrupt the disorderly cascade of events. The masterplan for Brasília mandated a certain fixity of form, as though to cement the country’s self-image in 1960. But the course of things runs on, delivering shocks and sudden reversals, introducing maladies and contradictions which cannot be resolved without recourse to the kind of practices utopia forbids.

I wonder about the images these early twenty-first century mega-projects will leave behind. The golden age of photojournalism is long gone, and with no symbiotic relationship prevailing between the medium and a movement such as modernism, there is no real imperative for architects, planners and artists to collaborate. It seems unlikely there’s a René Burri or Marcel Gautherot at work down there, documenting the suffering and sacrifice. So perhaps the best we can expect is a drone flyover.

Dmitri Kessel, 1961. LIFE Photo Collection.

The aestheticization of cooling towers in photography

Eric de Maré brings forth something profound in these deep charcoal tones: a representation of two epistemes, two systems of thought. The colossal towers of Ferrybridge B appear at once quite primitive, as though shaped from clay, and aggressively, fervently, modern. Nestled in their shadow, the little church persists as a place of worship, a sanctuary from the vagaries of modern life. But its symbolic stature is radically diminished. Only in a godless world could it be dwarfed by a pair of monoliths whose shape and scale, though manifestly utilitarian, is also bound up with discourses of boundless progress and the exploitation of universal forces.

Cooling towers proliferated in Britain during the 1950s, but are dwindling fast. Largely overlooked by architectural historians, and deemed - at least for now - by heritage bodies as too abundant to save, around a third have already disappeared - many in the last several years. This is a shame because, as Otto Saumuarez Smith observes in this thoughtful eulogy to Ironbridge B (perhaps the finest and most theatrical sequence to have been dynamited so far), cooling towers embody a unique and revolutionary design.

‘Whether or not you see an abstractly humanoid presence in cooling towers, as I do, there is something elementally graceful about the way that they make heavy concrete visually light through a tender hyperboloid curve.’

And yet few will register, let alone regret, their demise. Most of us are not routinely exposed to the unlovely edgelands of infrastructure where cooling towers stand. It usually takes a trip up the motorway, or along the East Coast Main Line (where at one point each member of the Aire Valley trio of Ferrybridge, Eggborough and Drax is visible) to bring them to consciousness. The other main way is through photography. Some photographers have found years of inspiration in cooling towers. Reginald Van de Velde’s Landscapes Within takes the viewer inside the cavernous condensation-streaked drums, highlighting, for all the outward uniformity, their surprising internal variation. And the abstract monochrome studies of Michael Kenna help us become aware of the towers’ sculptural strangeness, to see them anew.

Michael Kenna, ‘Ratcliffe Power Station, Study 26, Nottinghamshire, England’, 1986. His long exposures make the towers look semi-cosmic, somehow in touch with the universe.

Others have found in cooling towers a powerful symbol for addressing socio-political themes. One of the best-known is John Davies’ winter view of Agecroft Power Station (a possible referent for Simon Roberts, Mitch Epstein and others). Like the Bechers in their post-typological work, Davies sought to reveal the tensions of a particular historical conjuncture through sweeping compositions.

John Davies, ‘Agecroft Power Station’, 1983

The towers seem latched to the Earth like alien limpets. But they cascade and ripple into themselves like fabric at the moment of demolition. From the tangles of branches in the foreground, via the expanse of cleared land to the domineering hulk in the background, Davies distils in one image the gradual stripping back of the land in fits and starts of gradual optimisation and frenetic subjugation.

It’s easy enough to overlook the white horse. Standing beside the cars, it throws into relief the layering of historical worlds. At the time of Davies’ visit, Agecroft had another ten years of operation. Now that little sign of it remains (the site is now a prison), the photograph takes on a new resonance. The horse, obsolete for most functional purposes, confronts a concrete behemoth in the twilight of its own productive use.

Shirley Baker, ‘Cooling towers through the rooftops’, Salford, 1962

Here is Agecroft captured twenty years previously by Shirley Baker from a Salford backstreet. From a distance, it has a very different energy. What in Davies comes across as faintly sinister is here almost mundane, blending in with the Victorian chimney stacks. The overall impression is not of encroachment but of managed separation.

In stark contrast is Bill Brandt’s view of 1930s Halifax. Here, the foreground dwellings are fully embroiled within the industrial organism. The towers are the centrepiece of the composition, and probably the standout feature of the lost cityscape. But for me it’s the infinite regress of smokestacks and illusion of a double flattening which make this image great. It’s as though Brandt photographed a model for a Gothic stop-motion, complete with the forced perspective of a delicately painted backdrop.

In a late-career interview, he recalled Halifax as ‘absolutely extraordinary; a real dream town - I’d never seen anything like it before.’ For an artist with his vision and sense of the surreal, this charred forest of brick and mortar must have been an intoxicating sight. Indeed, when looking at his other work from the same period, it’s difficult not to feel a kind of perverse wistfulness for the spectacles of the Industrial Revolution.

A similar feeling is evoked by Michał Cała’s extraordinary series Silesia, captured in the late 70s and 80s when the ‘Black Triangle’ industries were at their zenith. Cała finds beauty not just in cooling towers and sublime juxtapositions, but also in frozen wastelands and the patterns of pollution - perhaps to an uncomfortable extent. His later colour work is less compelling, more a record of structural change in the region than an aestheticization of industry. But I was particularly struck by this tower on the outskirts of Bogatynia in Poland’s south-western extremity.

From Michał Cała, Silesia 2004-2009

The cartoon sun raises intriguing questions. On whose orders was it painted, and for what purpose? It suggests a desire to mediate between technology and nature, to domesticate the structures, perhaps even to celebrate their wealth-creating capacities. It was probably part of a post-communist beautification drive, a bid to brighten up a landscape blighted by decades of lignite mining (the vast open-pit nearby has consumed whole villages). But for all the pastel kitsch, it’s a conspicuously half-hearted intervention. We remain on the plain of a veiled antagonism.

From Alexander Gronsky, Pastoral (2009-2012)

With this wonderfully beguiling photograph by Alexander Gronsky, however, we come close to reconciliation. In the clear skies above the meadow, the clouds seem to drift out of the towers’ lips. The people in the bower introduce a touch of everyday life but, as with Davies’ white horse, they are the magic element which somehow completes the scene.

But as soon as the meta-context comes into focus, the image loses its lustre. It’s not possible to hold in mind the environmentally destructive function to which the towers are annexed without also viewing the image as faintly deceptive - a fantasy of harmonious co-existence. So perhaps it’s best simply to appreciate the photograph on its own terms, to ignore the function of the structures and admire them for their tender curves.

For me, however, such abstracted enjoyment is foreclosed by the bands of the Russian Federation encircling Tower One - a reminder that beyond this lovely edgeland is a world of coercive states. It’s a very different form of embellishment to Bogatynia, a symbol of power and possession which, at the level of Gronsky’s composition, disturbs the harmony of the scene, preventing its totalisation or symbolic closure. And it’s that, I think, which makes it a great photograph.

Marc Riboud, Leeds, 1953

Nostalgia Loops: analogue photography in the age of Instagram

As with all art forms, photography evolves when practitioners do something radical to express a new way of seeing. Whether in response to social or political upheaval, technological breakthroughs or creative intuition (and usually a combination of all three), these moments of contradiction give way to transition when received conventions are challenged and eventually ossified. I am increasingly interested in the question of how the medium can progress in an age when almost anything is a legitimate subject, smartphones come fitted with Leica lenses and flawless auto-exposure, and millions of images are uploaded to the internet every hour.

In this context, the analogue-digital dichotomy is increasingly blurred and hybridised by artists sceptical of photography’s longstanding claim to epistemic privilege. Indeed, the most expensive photograph sold at auction, Andreas Gursky’s abstract landscape ‘Rhein II’, was first captured on medium format outside Düsseldorf, then scanned and digitally manipulated to remove all sign of infrastructure on the far riverbank. But of course the strangely depthless bands of ethereal green and grey that result nevertheless depict a clearly man-altered landscape. The final image is something of a photorealistic Rothko.

In this vein, practitioners have also turned towards interrogation of the medium itself, its particular grammar and functions. Emblematic are Gregory Crewdson’s elaborate tableaux, which look almost computer generated, or the overblown pixels of Thomas Ruff’s Jpegs series. Clare Strand’s Deutsche Borse Prize-nominated The Discrete Channel with Noise also draws attention to the transmission and reception of photographs in the digital age - their inherent bittiness.

Andreas Gursky, ‘Rhein II’, 1999

Andreas Gursky, ‘Rhein II’, 1999

In a parallel development, and perhaps partly in response to the glutting of cyberspace with snaps, film photography has made a comeback in recent years. The growing visibility of analogue-centred accounts on photo and video sharing platforms is testament to this. As the lionising tendencies of the metaphorical platform play out in force, YouTube and Instagram have enabled aspiring photographers to bypass traditional gatekeepers. There’s no longer such a need to be in the right place at the right time: film devotees are able to build and engage an audience whose loyalty can be monetised in the service of personal projects. This is an exciting development. But it is also fuelling a growing disconnect between the concerns of contemporary art photography and the interventions of those shaping the interests of analogue amateurs and hobbyists.

A notable innovation on Instagram is the ‘community feed’ – internet magazines with no operating costs and curators sometimes separated by oceans. The most popular have followers in the tens-of-thousands, and as these numbers grow, so too does the algorithmic force of attraction. As little hubs in the fabric of Instagram’s spacetime, they draw in a deluge of hash-tagged content. More so than with traditional magazines, there is an imperative for them to stay on brand. The largely ad hoc, informal gathering of content leaves little scope for distinct issues based around a particular theme or concept. As such, the grid as a whole must appear coherent if not uniform. And I am struck by the fact that, for a number of successful feeds including @burbsonfilm, @makemeseemag and @thefilmstead, the images are selected according to a unifying aesthetic saturated by nostalgia. Scrolling through the grid, the viewer is presented with very little that comments on the vicissitudes of the present.

Indeed, the palette, atmosphere and subjects evoke the work of the American colour pioneers who in the 1970s challenged black-and-white as the only respectable language for art photography. The subjects of Stephen Shore, William Eggleston, Joel Meyerowitz and others gain new currency on Instagram: chunky television sets and other retro appliances, laundry interiors, suburban homes, faded boardwalks and, above all, the classic American car. The smooth plains and gentle undulations of Chryslers and Chevrolets appear again and again, sometimes contextualised in a garage, parking lot or leafy street; occasionally found shrouded in a cover loose enough to reveal the pleasing metallic contours underneath. These subjects are sought out in sentimental defiance of the all-enveloping grip of modernity at its frontier, the echoes then disseminated by a sequence of steps wholly alien to their reference period.

Particularly when seen together, the photos are undoubtedly beautiful: sunlight streams through diner windows to illuminate glasses of fresh juice, lamps glow in dim hotel rooms, palm trees stretch the frame. The images hark back to a time when things were somehow more transparent, more tangible. As such, they have a kind of soothing presence, a stillness.

Nostalgia (from nostos, home; and algos, pain) as a feeling or state of mind is rooted in an apprehension of the irreversibility of time. It hasn’t been so long since these scenes were banal. Indeed, their very banality underpinned the whole New Topographics movement. But as we are drawn further into the postmodern vortex of free-floating bits and pixels that artists such as Ruff are grappling with, they are slipping ever more into the domain of fantasy. This slipping-away certainly amplifies our propensity towards sentimentality. But more instrumental to the manufacture of nostalgia is the economy of recognition which governs the circulation of signifiers on Instagram.

In the churning froth underlying the continuity of its visual stream, the signified is lost or rendered subordinate by the platform’s engagement algorithms. The effect is self-sustaining and self-reinforcing: images are endlessly imitated, reproduced and shared in a kind of photographic echo chamber. Photos circulate, pregnant with the legacy of the colour pioneers - sometimes without the awareness of their creator.

The ellipsis here is of course loaded with words unsaid: the ‘woman’s hand’ makes all the difference. Juxtaposed like this, Bruce Brown’s nice but otherwise unremarkable image of air travel seems sapped. It’s a snapshot, a record of modern comfort in a time when affordable air travel is taken for granted - a ‘social photo’. The Eggleston referent, by contrast, is timeless and uncanny: the cocktail emanates a kind of energy; the ethereal partial-object stirring it gives the image an air of voyeurism.

The formerly banal: Stephen Shore, ‘Thirty-First Avenue and Crescent Street’, 1974

The formerly banal: Stephen Shore, ‘Thirty-First Avenue and Crescent Street’, 1974

The rise of film photography on new media platforms has also contributed towards what could be described as the deterritorialisation of the Americana aesthetic. This phenomenon has found recent expression, for instance, in British photographer Ian Howorth’s debut monograph Arcadia (2019), which he describes as a visual representation of Britishness. Although paying titular homage to a vision of pastoralism uncorrupted by the vices of civilisation, Howorth does not seek some kind of Merrie Olde England. Rather, he looks to the traces of a pre-digital age in what is also described as a personal exploration of his fraught relationship to the concepts of home and identity.

The cover image, leaves and petals pressed up against frosted glass in a way that makes it appear almost permeable, immediately establishes the organising principle of the work: seeing though a filter. Although Arcadia does often capture the little quirks of England in a thoughtfully observed way, much of the series depicts the same kind of recycled nostalgia as the community film feeds: diners, vintage sports cars, faded seafronts. At times it is more America than England: at least one image could have been made in Palm Springs.

The point is not to discount the beauty and mystery of Howorth’s work. His soft interiors with their muted pastel tones complement wonderfully the vivid colour of his sunlit exteriors. But, as the photographer himself suggests, the series ultimately amounts to a blast of dreamy ‘nostalgia porn’. It has little to say about Britishness in the 2020s. When Howorth turns his lens towards the ‘unusual colours’ that defy the ‘neutral’ tones of contemporary England, he is expressing longing for another place that was actual once, but is now lost to time. His nostalgia is thus a kind of ‘utopia in reverse’, to use Andreas Huyssen’s phrase.

‘Although I have a genuine love for all the scenes I photograph, for me, it’s their survival amidst rampant modernity that interests me the most.’

- Ian Howorth

What strikes me here is the notion that somehow these places would not survive, that the onslaught of ‘progress’ would be so totalising as to eliminate all traces of a former modernity. But the implicit proposition is interesting. Perhaps an enhanced appreciation of the material co-existence of multiple temporalities could indeed remind us that the present is not immutable: attitudes are not fixed, lifestyles not static. The onward rumbling of modernity is a function not only of technological progress but also of human agents making decisive cuts into the fabric of reality. Perhaps, then, the selective representation of the present in all its constitutive unevenness could alert us to its radical openness, its actuality.

The problem when it comes to Arcadia is that Howorth makes no allowance for anything beyond 1985 in the frame. He celebrates that which escapes the flattening and dislocation effects of global convergence patterns but refuses any immanent indication of their unevenness. In his representational bubble, the tensions of the current age are therefore obfuscated. Ultimately, the fact of the book’s publishing in 2019 is more significant with respect to understanding the age than its contents.

One common reading conceives nostalgia as a kind of compensatory impulse, a reaction to the frenetic pace of what Zygmunt Bauman calls ‘liquid modernity’. To live in age of cynical reason is to live under the sway of the basic ideological injunction to Enjoy and to more or less accept the coordinates of the political-economic status quo. In response, the photographic curation of reality fetishistically avows the past as more meaningful than the present. But in so doing, the complexity of the bygone age is glossed. What we get instead is a phantasmic projection whose function is to fill the void of the present, a world rendered grey not only in colour palettes but in teleological, ontological and theological knowledge also.

This is only to suggest that when photographers uncritically embrace the past through mimesis, their work cannot usually provoke much more than idle enjoyment or psychic pacification. While Howorth can offer us escape from the antagonisms, even the sheer blandness, of neoliberal society through heightened awareness of vintage forms and spaces, he cannot substantially alter our relation to the modern world and its predicates. And when the same impulse to document nostalgically is subordinated to and reinforced by the logic of Instagram’s algorithms and the economy of recognition they serve, the effect is doubly numbing: circulation takes precedence over signification.

Most of us, I believe, ultimately accept the impossibility of discarding our digital support systems and the entire technological substratum which continually and by necessity renders their elements outdated - not only in form but also in their very relations to one other. And so even if not always in outward appearance, the suburbia of the colour pioneers is lost forever. This is so too because, when their scenes and subjects pop up amidst Howorth’s ‘rampant modernity’, they are no longer banal. Indeed, as the community feeds highlight, a new kind of aura is being created around vintage cars and the rest.

‘Chudleigh’, from Robin Friend’s Bastard Countryside (2018). The work is a kind of anti-Arcadia: landscapes neither fully blighted nor preserved, but rather altered, corrupted – hybrids.

‘Chudleigh’, from Robin Friend’s Bastard Countryside (2018). The work is a kind of anti-Arcadia: landscapes neither fully blighted nor preserved, but rather altered, corrupted – hybrids.

 

 

Emanations of our Time: Bernd Becher, Hilla Becher and the search for cultural paradigms

Just as cathedrals came out of the medieval world view and castles embody the feudal system, these edifices are to be seen as emanations of our time, as a self-representation of our society.
— Bernd and Hilla Becher, 1971

Bernd Becher, Hilla Becher, Duisburg-Bruckhausen, Ruhrgebiet (1999)

Bernd and Hilla Becher’s photograph of the Thyssen Krupp steel mill in Duisburg is remarkable on its own terms. A formally ideal composition obtained from a cacophony of objects, shapes and angles, it depicts a frontier between two zones. But although the monochrome film and diffuse light is consistent with the grids of industrial structures for which the Bechers are renowned, the image, unlike those, brings into focus the urban context - allowing us to appreciate in great depth the actuality of the historical world whose decline they documented. Captured at the cusp of the millennium, long after the Ruhrgebiet began its slow decline as the industrial heartland of Western Europe, the image is also significant because, unlike the great majority of the Bechers’ subjects, the plant remains in operation today.

The Bechers’ ‘typologies' of ‘anonymous sculptures’ - lime kilns, water towers, cooling towers, blast furnaces and gas tanks - provide a unique and vital panorama of the industrial age in Europe and North America. On the photographers’ own understanding, they are both 'self-representations' - the conscious stories, perhaps, that we tell about ourselves - and 'emanations' - not quite an archetype or a vernacular but an architectural form which crystallises an age, distilling its particular attitudes and stratifications. The couple's creative partnership evolved over the years from 1959 into a rigorous aestheticization of utilitarian structures as they slipped into obsolescence. Their unsentimental approach in doing so recalls the pre-eminent photographers of New Objectivity (August Sander and Albert Renger-Patzsch in particular), a movement which emerged during the Weimar years in reaction to the sentimentalism and subjectivity of Expressionism.

In developing the typological method, the Bechers discovered through experimentation that a kind of tonal harmony could be generated from careful arrangement of particular forms. When apparently ascetic structures were presented alongside other instances of the same general type, their stylistic idiosyncrasies were suddenly rendered apparent - as with the ‘hats’ on French and Belgian winding towers.

Winding Towers, 1963–1992

In view of this capacity to emphasise and illuminate form, the typologies can be viewed from a standpoint of ‘disinterestedness’ - one of the essential characteristics of what Heidegger in ‘The Origin of the Work of Art’ (1936) calls the ‘aesthetic’ disposition. As theory, this conception emerged in antiquity; only with the advent of modernity did the practice of art also become aesthetic. Under its sway, artworks are deemed successful by virtue of their beauty alone - they possess an ‘aesthetic appeal'. Taking pleasure in the work's ‘formal aspects, its qualities and charms', the viewer essentially 'brackets' the political, social and ideological context. Such abstraction facilitates idle enjoyment and enables escapism but it is for Heidegger inimical to the creation of ‘great’ art - which discloses and embodies the meaning of being for an epoch. The Greek temple at Paestum is deployed as an example of an edifice which ‘opened up’ a world for a particular historical people:

‘It is the temple-work that first fits together and at the same time gathers around itself the unity of those paths and relations in which birth and death, disaster and blessing, victory and disgrace, endurance and decline acquire the shape of destiny for hu­man being. The all-governing expanse of this open relational context is the world of this historical people.’

Heidegger, ‘The Origin of the Work of Art’

Giovanni Battista Piranesi, Paestum, 1778

In expressing the strife between ‘world’ (the horizon of horizons, that within which all our knowledge and perspectives is contained) and ‘earth’, (that which evades conceptual mastering - the unfathomable), the monument at the same time allowed ‘earth’ to be experienced as something that resists the will of humans. Central to Heidegger’s famous critique of technology is the contrasting view that the paradigms of the industrial age disclose a hubristic confidence that the earth can be mastered, that nature’s most capricious forces can be calculated, channelled and controlled. His fundamental point - that there is a historicity to ontology, that our understanding of what it means to be shifts over time - is predicated on the irreversible ‘decay and withdrawal’ of historical worlds.

In this light, the Bechers’ work can be read as a visual testament to the decay of an ineffable worldview and the triumph of ‘enframing’ - that way of revealing which frames the world as 'standing reserve'. Their anonymous sculptures encapsulate the perceptions and attitudes of the industrial revolution: domination of nature, the expectation of limitless growth, continual innovation.

Structural change: Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord

Much of the resonance when engaging with the typologies today lies in their representation of a superseded world, a time increasingly alien to us. Even the most stereotypically modern of the Bechers’ subjects, cooling towers, are now routinely felled to spectacular effect. The industrial age is by no means transcended: blast furnaces, coal-fired power plants and massive chemical works are an enduring feature of the landscape in transition and emerging economies especially. Modernisation is, in short, uneven, variegated and non-linear. But in the West at least, the decay and withdrawal of the historical world in which the Bechers intervened is at an advanced stage. In the 'core' economies of the Global North, the possession of information, rather than material resources, is increasingly the driving force behind societal development.

The shift from machinery to information, from manufacturing to services, is dramatised at industrial heritage sites such as Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord and SteelStacks in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania - a city whose prime was immortalised by Walker Evans (1935), and then recaptured by the Bechers (1986) in a way that speaks to the power of photography to string together places in a chain of significance. In an interview filmed towards the end of his life, Bernd Becher remarked that he and Hilla had spent their career documenting the ‘sacred buildings of Calvinism’. But it is perhaps only now, after their silencing, that the great rusting apparatuses, partially reclaimed by nature, can be appreciated as somehow hallowed spaces.

Their repurposing can be situated within what Andreas Huyssen has described as ‘a new postmodern temporality which hovers between the need for memory and the rapid pace of forgetting’ (1995:254).On this view, a kind of memorial sensibility emerged in the late twentieth century in response to the quickening pace of material change on the one hand, and the proliferation of images and information on the other. But the urge to ‘heal and understand’ the industrial past is surely also rooted in a recognition that its ‘sacred’ spaces were once at the centre of a historical world in Heidegger’s sense.

To the millions who worked and lived in their shadow, daily routines were tuned to the rhythms of mass production. And in the same way that cathedral spires dominated the medieval horizon, chimneys, cooling towers and mineshafts loomed above the landscape in the Ruhr region, the South Wales Valleys, the Rust Belt states and the other heavily industrialised areas the Bechers visited.

But while the latter manifested the idea that humanity is the sole master of its destiny, cathedrals embodied the medieval view that the world was there for humans only by divine will. In Facades (2008-17), Dresden-born photographer Markus Brunetti serialises great devotional structures in immense clarity. As the period’s highest form of artistic expression, constructed sometimes over decades of toil, every part of these buildings - Gothic, Renaissance and Moorish - was adorned and embellished to make the space worthy of God: stained glass windows far out of sight, exquisite masonry in rafters and above vaults. Like the Greek temple of antiquity, these edifices were intrinsic to the ‘setting-up’ of medieval Christendom.

In its scope, composition and presentation, Brunetti’s work is redolent of the Bechers’. But his method is sharply distinct. Over the course of a year or more, he laboriously stitches together thousands of high-resolution photos of a single facade to bring forth an impossible vision. By removing people, cars, lampposts and other modern ‘noise’ from the final image, he seeks, like the Bechers, to reveal the structures themselves. In effect, Facades synthesises the encyclopaedic ambition of Neue Sachlichkeit, the search for cultural paradigms, and the digital manipulation typical to many of the Bechers’ most successful students (Gursky’s ‘Paris, Montparnasse’ is indicative). And, in a certain sense, Brunetti also aestheticises the obsolete: although these buildings remain the spiritual heart of cities and sometimes nations, no longer do they illuminate what is and what matters to those living in their shadow.

Although their original use and appearance remains largely unaltered, our collective orientation towards them has been radically transformed - as is manifest in Thomas Struth’s ‘Milan Cathedral’, a photo which seems especially pervaded by the death of God when viewed alongside Brunetti’s digital mosaic of the same edifice - bored tourists sit on the steps licking ice-creams while locals stride past clutching phones and briefcases. As much an attraction today as a place of worship, the cathedral has been to an extent profaned - stripped of both its spiritual magnetism and relative architectural dominance.

Until 1894, when Ulm Minster was surpassed by Philadelphia City Hall, the world’s tallest building was always a church or cathedral. Today, of course, the collective imagination’s most imposing and audacious structures are skyscrapers, the concentration of which began rapidly to increase in the command-and-control centres of the global economy as the structural shift gathered pace. The regeneration of post-industrial sites like Canary Wharf, Baltimore’s Inner Harbor and, more recently, New York City’s Hudson Yards can be conceived as the obverse of the preservation of industrial heritage sites - places where the past is renounced and forgotten in a forest of shimmering vertical forms.

These triumphalist monoliths, as totems of financialisation and economic liberalisation, are the obvious candidates to symbolise our age. Their increasingly irregular or adventurous designs testify to the need for global cities to forge a ‘brand’ so as better to compete in the struggle for highly mobile flows of capital, jobs and people. So, in a certain sense, they disclose the (theoretical) economic orthodoxy of the times: competition is the natural order of things and it should be enabled and protected by the state. But it would be wrong to analogise them to one of Brunetti’s cathedrals: as points where capital feeds on itself, they also embody a kind of postmodern nihilism.

David Plowden, World Trade Center, New York City, 1972

Insofar as they manifest an understanding of being in which humans are masters of their own destiny, they can more easily be compared to the Bechers’ building-machines. Both are also defined by a certain anonymity: although typically designed by internationally acclaimed ‘starchitects’, skyscrapers’ sweeping surfaces give no immanent indication of the kind of activities that take place beyond. And as the events of 2020 have thrown into relief, the value produced within these buildings is not dependent upon their physical existence. More statements of power and prestige than essential economic apparatuses, the total virtualisation of trading floors has exposed the paradigmatic structures of neoliberalism as empty vessels.

To an extent, then, the partial supersession of machinery by information has engendered a kind of separation of form and function. Underlying the intangible trades and transactions is a more fundamental emanation, a layer of infrastructure in which the materiality of the World Wide Web can be encountered - vast warehouses of computers, transmission masts, submarine cables. In the photo below from Taryn Simon’s An American Index of the Hidden and Unfamiliar (2007), the subject is framed with the same objectivity as one of the Bechers’ water towers. From a systems standpoint, this particular segment of the transatlantic cable is of no special consequence - an extreme close-up of a great oceanic axon, strung between continents.

But, as the artist elicits so well, there is something quite profound about the scene: inside the sheaths, which form a continuous connection for thousands of miles, are hundreds of twisted pairs conveying a full spectrum of information, from the inane to the critical, at incomprehensible speeds across the Atlantic. This feeling is evoked not only by the meta-content but seems almost inscribed into the apparatus itself. In this restricted facility, the danger of anyone tampering with the bundle-ladder is presumably remote. And yet, fenced off from the rest of the room, albeit in the cheapest and most functional way, the cables are conferred a kind of dignity, as though they were a priceless sculpture in a usually crowded museum.

Taryn Simon, ‘Transatlantic Sub-marine Cables Reaching Land VSNL International Avon, New Jersey’, 2007

From Connie Zhou, Technology

Insofar as they embody a degree of anonymity more extreme than even the Bechers’ sculptures, these unassuming racks of telecommunications and data-storage equipment, blinking under harsh lights, are not a ‘self-representation of our society’ in the same way as the World Trade Center was. But, amidst the din of high-veolcity cooling fans, it is in them and objects like them that we confront the real of our historical moment. This presents clear difficulties in updating the Bechers’ project.

In contrast to the emanations of industrial society, which were never too far from consciousness, those of the digital age are hidden away under seabeds and brought into communion in nondescript corporate warehouses. They are almost impossible to encounter casually or by happenstance. And with the growing sophistication of ‘lights out’ data centres, which can be operated entirely remotely, the need for the hardware to be perceived by even those who operate it is increasingly obviated.

In the introduction to Anonyme Skulpturen (1969), the Bechers described the experience of driving through the Ruhrgebiet:

‘…one experiences an image of forms overlapping one another, from a chaos of housing estates and technical apparatuses. Steam, smoke and fire result in peculiar forms that overlay some [of these objects] and obfuscate others. The photographic technique makes it possible to release individual forms from their environment, to make them comprehensible and to compare them to one another.’

From a chaotic, dynamic landscape, punctuated with such spectacles as cooling towers letting off great billowing steam clouds at regular intervals, they derived visual order and harmony. From disparate particulars, they enabled appreciation of the universal forms of the industrial revolution. And in doing so, they helped make sense of a world in which things were comparatively more susceptible to inexpert understanding: standardised procedures, inputs and outputs. Aisles of servers in data centres, by contrast, can be analogised to the human brain perceived by a neurosurgeon mid-operation: it appears to the observer that there is ‘nobody there’ - just inert matter.

But out of them emanates the ‘cloud’ - central to our lives and yet noumenal, mostly imperceptible and almost impossible to grasp. These are not the dark mills driving climate breakdown - though their consumption of (dirty) energy is vast. But even as they expand by leaps and bounds the realm of the knowable, they also anchor the condition of communicative abundance which functions systematically to produce its own negation, leading in turn to increased polarisation and the fragmentation and colonisation of the public sphere.

Ultimately, it seems likely that the social and cultural importance of photography will be protected by the medium’s unique epistemic privilege - its ‘mind-independence’. But, to the extent that it can no longer keep pace with the rate of dematerialisation and repressive desublimation, this search for cultural paradigms also suggests, perhaps, that, if practitioners wish to be fully in touch with the ‘modern’, they should embrace and confront the excess of the digital void - even if that means doing so without a camera.

‘Cathedral’ from Thomas Ruff’s JPEGS (2006)