1. What is your earliest memory of how or what attracted you to photography?
I grew up in a family steeped in photography, in Delhi, in the 1960s and ’70s. My father graduated with an architecture degree from MIT in 1944 and had become a serious photographer then. He brought back a darkroom with him and became a great architectural photographer, documenting his own buildings. My mother was a classical dancer and a great beauty, who was sought out by photographers all the time. My father photographed her dance and also made a series of portraits. Our home was filled with photographers – Sunil Janah, TS Satyan, TS Nagarajan, Kishore Parekh, Frank Horvath, Hiro, Marilyn Silverstone, Madan Mahatta, amongst many others! But it was MIT that awakened my interest in it as a powerful medium, and also made me realize how terrific and important was the work of all these people whom I had observed as a kid! Which is how I ended up doing exhibits of their work and lecturing on them years later.
2. How did you move from physics to graphic design to photography? Did an education in physics and design influence your photographic practice?
Gosh, that is a tough one. I was shocked to get into MIT, as I was a pretty average student in Modern School in Delhi (though I had great teachers there in chemistry and physics and did well in those subjects). When I arrived at MIT, I was terrified that they had made a huge mistake and I was an idiot compared to everyone around me. But the open system and the insistence on taking classes beyond one’s focus interest led me to go across the street and register at the photo lab. There it was luck that Jonathan Greene became my teacher (Tod Papageorge had also started teaching there then). I got so caught up in the photo lab and started other courses in ‘design’ under the great Muriel Cooper and Ron MacNeil in the architecture department. Midway through MIT, I switched departments from physics to architecture. I was able to study at the Fogg in Harvard under Stuart Cary Welch, who did incredible lectures on Mughal painting. I also did film at MIT under Ricky Leacock and his gang. It was just luck that I had incredibly inspiring teachers there – an education that was eye-opening and thrilling. Physics did influence me a lot; it was the scientific view of the world, which I think sharpened the way I looked at the world through my images.
3. How was it growing up around parents who were both artists? What were their influences? How did this inform your sensibilities?
Growing up in a home of architecture, design, and dance was formative. Also hugely formative was the fact that it was the ‘Nehruvian’ moment in India – when a new modern culture was being forged, especially in Delhi. All the painters, dancers, theatre actors and directors, writers, filmmakers, and their kids were a part of my childhood. So that sense of making the new culture and that excitement it generated was a part of me. And later, I realized that I was documenting this in my photography, and it became my subject.
4. Did you study photography formally in a college or university? If not, how did you inform yourself about the medium – the techniques, the language and the aesthetics of it?
My MIT years gave me a very heavy-duty education in photography, as it was being taught in the U.S. then (refer to my response to #7, below). I also did the Strobe-project lab, under Charlie Michener, mentored by Dr. (Doc) Harold Edgerton, the inventor of the strobe. Edgerton was still at the lab and became a good friend. This lab was a science project lab, but using the high-speed flash and the camera as a tool of experimental observation. So, you could not get a more technical education than this!
5. Do you think it is important to receive a formal training in photography?
It really depends on the individual. Up until the ’80s, very few photographers in India had any formal training. Studio or press photographers mentored most photographers. Someone like Raghubir Singh, who started out as a press and feature photographer, sought out photographers to understand his medium better and his practice was enormously changed and influenced by American photographers like William Gedney and, later, Lee Friedlander. A really great formal education (like I chanced upon at MIT in the ’70s) can be transformative. But a not-so-great training can make you a clone (as can be seen by many Indian photographers who had formal training in the U.S. in the ’80s onwards).
6. If you were to design a photo program for young Indian photographers, what would it look like?
I have always emphasized the importance of history in any creative practice. In India, we have suffered in many fields – photography and architecture in particular – because of a lack of contemporary histories of practice. I feel it is important to be very conversant with the history of a medium in your own context as you can build on a foundation, which already exists, as well as get an understanding of approaches and visions at different points of time.
7. Who or what has inspired you to pursue photography and/or continues to do so?
It was definitely Jonathan Greene at MIT in 1974-77, as my ‘guru,’ who awakened my interest in photography. He was a passionate teacher and, as editor of Aperture magazine at the time, was intellectually hugely stimulating. Eugenia Janis, who was teaching art history at Wellesley at the time, was also a huge influence. She was an early teacher of photography history and her history lectures, especially on 19th century French photography, were full of passion and excitement. They furthered my interest in the history of photography. She also organized seminars with the likes of Susan Sontag, Robert Frank, and Eugene Smith, which were an amazing opportunity to meet and listen to these people in an intimate setting. At the same time, Peter Laytin at MIT organized an amazing set of lectures, bringing Brassai and many others to speak and show their work.
8. Is there a book, exhibition, or body of work that has really impressed you and maybe influenced your work / life?
There are many from cinema, literature, history, and dance. All of Fellini and the music of Nino Rota, the dance choreography of Jiri Kylian, Gravity’s Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon, Hamlet’s Mill by Giorgio de Santillana and Herta von Dechend, Ratri danced by Suddhendra Singh Deo – Seraikella Chhau. Koodiyettam Guru Ammannur Madhava Chakyar in Balivadham, Sunil Janah’s photography epic. Anything by Romila Thapar or Irfan Habib.
9. What draws / drew you to the subject matter you are pursuing in your current work? Does it come as a gut feeling, or after analysis or research? Memory? Something that bothers you?
All of these impact the work one makes. I’ve always felt it is important to be conversant with history, especially economic, political, art, architecture – everything. It gives you a basis from which to locate the present. And, ultimately, let your instinct respond instantly, which is why photography is so suited to me as a medium; it is that instant when this all comes together in that instinctive moment. The images form a part of an ongoing narrative or diary of a lived life.
10. With the increased censorship of the works of writers, journalists, activists, and artists over the past years, where do you think we are headed in terms of the kinds of works being produced?
With my over 30 years of activism with Sahmat, the artists collective, we have always resisted any censorship and defended those who have faced this over all those years. Yet, artists and the creative community have always come forward in resistance. Since we were a ‘platform’ the works artists made were not necessarily political in content, but their very participation on the platform was an act of resistance. Many artists have continued to make work reflecting contemporary politics and issues. I think after Shaheen bagh, a more direct activist content can be foreseen.
11. Please share your views about the imagery that is coming out of the Shaheen Bagh protests. Do you see it in contrast / as a reaction to the self-censorship of works that have been produced over the past years?
As I write this, Shaheen Bagh has just been dismantled after 100 days, and the amazingly vibrant murals at Jamia have been whitewashed (on the heels of the corona lockdown – a convenient excuse to diffuse the protest). Yes, the attack on Jamia by the Delhi police on December 15, 2019, and especially the attack on the library, shocked the country; and overnight the fear that this regime had instilled across the country was replaced by anger. The resistance, which blossomed across India, led to a phenomenal outpouring of both verbal and visual creativity, which was totally no-holds-barred! A lot of this came from very ordinary citizens, besides the students who led it across India. It completely broke the self-censorship, which had grown in the atmosphere of fear and reprisal that this regime had increasingly utilized in the last six years.
12. Do you ever find yourself creatively ‘stuck?’ Is there something that is particularly helpful to you in overcoming this?
Stuck only in the sense of lack of financial resources, which has always held me back. In the early years, I earned a little doing architectural and interior photography, but it was never enough to fund the extended projects I would have loved to do. I never had any luck in getting the few grants that existed and for which I applied – The India Foundation and the Prince Claus Fund, for a book on Sunil Janah, and more recently the Alkazi Foundation grant to work on my mother’s and grandmother’s dance photography archive. So that is an avenue I have given up – leaving bodies of work that ‘might have been!’
13. Digital technology has changed photography drastically over recent years. Did you initially embrace the changes or resist them? Do you believe the changes have been good for the medium or not?
I was witness to Ron MacNeil’s initial attempts to do digital photography at MIT with a carved up Nikon with a scanning sensor screwed into it that was linked up to a mechanical spray paint rig! Photography has always been a technical medium. Edwin Land was at MIT when he invented Polaroid film, which was a revolution. The SX-70 camera he designed was also revolutionary. I had no problem at all with my science background at the dawning of digital, even though I loved printing black and white in the darkroom. In many ways the change has been incredible, especially in how it has manifested in the mobile phone camera. The sensors now can capture details and a wide range of shadow and highlight that film could not. We can also now shoot under varying lighting conditions and color correct them digitally later. Also, as a designer, digital technology has made life so much easier and faster when you need to use photographic images along with typography. So definitely, digital has been great, especially in how it has democratized the medium through the phone. Hail to Steve Jobs!
14. How much effort do you put into getting your work shown? Is this important to you? Does showing your work feed your creative process, or does it distract you from it?
Early in the ’80s, I did struggle to do a big show in Delhi with a printed catalog, which was unheard of in those days. I did manage to raise enough to cover some of the costs (the prints I made myself in New York). It made no money. We did not even have proper or easy framing then! It was important for me to do then, as I felt the work I was doing was not the norm. I did another big show in Delhi with Bodhi, in 2007. It was important for me to show then, too, to show the extended body of work on the scale I felt was necessary. Bodhi produced a terrific catalog. It was right at the moment the art market crashed, so it was another financial disaster. The problem with shows is the financial aspect. Very little work sells. I have never been great at selling work or pushing sales, and exhibitions are an expensive proposition. I have a huge body of work (negatives and digital), which has never been printed, so showing it is impossible.
15. Do you feel that there are adequate opportunities and avenues to share / show your work in your home country, or do you always look for such opportunities abroad?
I have always felt it more important to show in India. While it is great to show internationally, sometimes ‘reading’ the photograph is difficult for a non-Indian audience, as the nuances are so local, they are missed by outsiders. Of course, that changes with individual images, but I do think local audiences ‘get it.’ References to local histories and politics are not caught by uninitiated viewers. The one Indian museum / collection that acquired my work was The Devi Art Foundation in Delhi, which were a few prints. Oddly, the Pompidou Museum in Paris acquired a large installation of almost 40 prints and posters that they showed a few years ago, and the MET and MoMA in New York acquired a few recently. The U.S. collector, Umesh Gaur, has gifted his large collection of contemporary Indian photography to the Smithsonian in Washington, which includes some of my work. There are a few private collectors in India who have some work, but sales do not support a practice at all. For me, the digital social media platforms have become a way to share work quickly. What this does not allow is to showcase a large body of work, which an exhibition or book can do, with sequencing and a variation of scale.
16. Do you think there is a universal language that photography uses? Do you think that South Asian photographers are finding that they are judged by western criteria and standards?
While the technology may be universal, the embedding of meaning and narrative can be very individual, not even national or regional. A photographer, who is rooted and intelligent, will reflect their local culture very strongly, both in visual and philosophical ways. I have a lecture on this, and on how Sunil Janah (India), Manuel Alvarez Bravo (Mexico), Brassai (Paris) and Walker Evans (Southern U.S. and U.S. east coast) so strongly imbued their work in extremely local contexts, with the specific becoming universal in the power of their individual visions.
Yes. Western curators or scholars bring their own biases, but that is only natural. We would do the same looking at their works. Some have a more interesting take than others because of their own intellectual predilections, but many just follow the herd. Ultimately, does it really matter? A non-Indian can never comprehend the epic body of work of Sunil Janah, for instance. Without a deep knowledge of our history, of the moment, of the cultural positioning and the politics of a body of work like his, it is only an Indian who can comprehend its importance and value.
17. With your years of experience, of the lessons you have learned, what is the one thing you wish someone had told you when you were starting out?
Gosh, I cannot think of anything. I had very liberal parents who let me follow my own path. They were not good at making money, though both were very famous. On the not-making-money issue, I have followed in their footsteps.
18. How would an interested collector go about buying your work?
They can get in touch with me at: ramrahman@yahoo.com, since I do not have a full-time gallery. The Guild Art Gallery from Mumbai has sold some of my work, too. For instance MoMA, The Pompidou, and the MET bought directly from me.
19. If you didn’t do photography, what other career might you have pursued?
Well, I have also done design work, curating and activist organizing, so I guess those are multiple careers already.
[This interview was conducted in early 2020, at the beginning of the global pandemic.]
Copyright © 2021, PhotoSouthAsia. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright © Ram Rahman
20 November
