itourist?

© Paul Antick, ‘Behind Closed Doors: photography as social interaction’ in Aoife Mac Namara, Bungalow Blitz, (Walter Phillips Gallery, Banff, 2006)

Although not directly related to itourist?, the following passage specifically relates to some of the ideas raised in Excerpt 3: Aoife Mac Namara, ‘An Interview with Paul Antick: Opportunism, Ideology and Photography’ in Aoife Mac Namara, Bungalow Blitz (Walter Phillips Gallery, Banff, 2006)

...During my second trip to Donegal I revisited Fintra, a self-build, Hacienda style bungalow on the outskirts of Killybegs, and showed Rosalyn Murray a selection of images taken during my first trip. After a while it became clear to me that she was not pleased with the results. Because I felt rather concerned about this – which is to say embarrassed – and was therefore reluctant to discuss it further, I steered the conversation away from the photographs and, in doing so, somehow managed to secure another appointment to take more photographs later that week. When I returned, however, Rosalyn politely informed me that, whilst it would be fine for me to photograph the living room and / or the kitchen, she did not think there was much point in my taking anymore photographs of herself or her husband, Brendan, because, as she said, ‘we don’t photograph very well’ . It was a sign of graciousness on her part perhaps, that rather than hold me directly responsible for the disappointing pictures I had taken several weeks earlier, she instead chose to displace responsibility for their ‘failure’ onto herself and her husband. In other words, the photographs were disappointing, not because I was a ‘bad’ photographer, but because they were ‘bad’ subjects.

Of course, I could have pointed out that I was responsible, because it was I who had instructed them to assume such ‘ridiculous’ poses in the first place, but I chose not to. First, because I sensed that Rosalyn was well aware of my ‘shortcomings’ in this respect and second, because even if she was not I thought it unlikely, as a result of my producing such ‘poor’ images, that she would allow me to do the same thing again. Thus, although my status as a professional remained intact, by virtue, perhaps, of the photographs’ technically accomplished nature – something Rosalyn remarked upon – and despite the self deprecating mode of address employed by Rosalyn, clearly the extent to which she felt she could trust me to represent herself and her husband in accordance with their – or her – own fantasies about the ways in which they ‘should’ be represented, was irrevocably undermined.