Why Asian Photography?

1. What are the most important factors shaping contemporary photography in the region of Asia you know best? What were the most important factors encouraging the development of photography in this region historically?

To answer these two questions we need to consider the notion of “Chinese photography” more carefully and critically. Historically speaking, early photographs by Felice Beato, Milton Miller, and John Thomson—-to name just a few——were “photographs OF China” made by foreign photographers for a Western audience. These works were rarely distributed and reproduced in China at the time; and some of them reflect a strong colonialist mentality. But can we say that the appearance of Chinese studios and independent Chinese photographers marked the beginning of “Chinese photography”? The answer is by no means clear, because early Chinese studios and photographers in Hong Kong or Shanghai basically adopted Western practices and styles. It is problematic to define “Chinese photography” purely based on the ethnic identity of the photographer.

A similar situation exists in contemporary Chinese photography. First, how do we define a work as a “contemporary” Chinese photograph”? Can we call present-day photojournalism contemporary photography? Or are only those following current international artistic trends, such as conceptualism and appropriation, “contemporary”? Again, the answer cannot be found purely in style or mode. Local history, globalization, etc. are all important factors to consider.

Chinese photography is a large field and encompasses many different genres, subjects, purposes, and styles (e. g. ethnographic, medical, journalistic, portrait, architectural, artistic, propagandistic, commercial, etc.). Each genre and subject has its own historical conditions, representational conventions, and sociopolitical context. It would be too simplistic to ignore their specific conditions and contexts.

2. Under what circumstances is national or cultural context important to understanding a photograph? When is it not important? How can photographs made within one cultural context be best understood by viewers from another culture?

This is related to my answers to the above question. Generally speaking, national and cultural context is always important to understand the intention and intended audience of a photograph, even if the image rejects local references and tastes (the rejection itself is meaningful). There is no absolutely “correct” understanding—-or a “best” understanding—-of a photograph, because the eye of the viewer and interpreter is never innocent or entirely objective. Large, international exhibitions do provide a supra-national context for viewing. But such exhibitions do not erase the original significance of a local product, but only mask such significance through dislocation.

3. Is a trans-national history of photography (including photographic work from Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas) desirable or imaginable? If so, how might you imagine it?

In my view it is both desirable and imaginable, but only when we stop assuming the singularity of such history. In other words, I hope to see many different versions of trans-national histories of photography, researched and structured in different ways and embodying different views. There should be many different stories of photography.

4. What further questions should be asked regarding photography and culture generally, and photography in Asia specifically?

In terms of historical Chinese photography, this is still a very small and young field. The most urgent task is still foundation building, to systematically establish photo collections and archives, and to conduct careful case studies. In the field of contemporary photography, we need better criticism and exhibitions. The Three Shadow Photography Center in Beijing has taken this mission seriously. I hope to see more places like it.

Wu Hung is Harrie A. Vanderstappen Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago, where he also directs the Center for the Art of East Asia and serves as a consulting curator at the Smart Museum of Art. His numerous publications include Between Past and Future: New Photography and Video from China (2004, with Christopher Phillips), Chinese Experimental Art at the End of the Twentieth Century( 2005) and Making History: Wu Hung on Contemporary Art (2008).