“Simulacra” is a commentary on the manipulated sea of information. Perhaps more importantly, it is meant to encourage the general public to start asking more critical questions: “What am I looking at, what does it want me to do, feel, buy or what does it want me to behave like?”

Madison

Madison (born in 1974) is a contemporary Dutch artist. In this interview he talks about the first volume of his long-scale project “Claustrum Corporis” which is called “Simulacra”. In that he deals with questions of “truth” in visual imagery and how reality is altered in modern society. For Madison photography is a means to creatively illustrate the assumption of French philosopher Jean Baudrillard that “our current society has replaced all reality and meaning with symbols and signs, and that human experience is of a simulation of reality”.

Interview with Madison about “Simulacra”

Madison, the current project you are working on is called “Simulacra”. What is it about?

Actually “Simulacra” is finished. The project is called “Claustrum Corporis”. Volume I is “Simulacra”.

“Simulacra” is based on Jean Baudrillard’s hyperreality theories. Baudrillard claims that our current society has replaced all reality and meaning with symbols and signs, and that human experience is of a simulation of reality. The impact of these theories on mass media and particularly the medium of photography is huge. It effectively suggests there is no truth anywhere.

During a period of one and a half years I worked with professional actors to construct a reality to emote people. Today’s holy grail of photography – the truth – was juxtaposed directly against its often invisible but much more untruthful doppelgänger: hyperreality. As a simple test, the photographs, openly titled “Simulacra” and explained as such, first appeared before a test audience. Baudrillard’s theories proved themselves immediately.

The test audience not once questioned what they looked at. Instead, reactions were highly empathic as if the construct were real. This psychological reaction forms the very core of the project.

“Simulacra” is a commentary on the manipulated sea of information. Perhaps more importantly, it is meant to encourage the general public to start asking more critical questions: “What am I looking at, what does it want me to do, feel, buy or what does it want me to behave like?”

This is why “Simulacra” is the first volume of the series.

In your work you are dealing with the effects of abundant visual imagery in today’s society. How has that changed or conditioned our way of perceiving the world?

Absolutely.

“People no longer take time to critically question images in times when they should. They respond the way animals do: instinctively.”

It’s not so much the abundance itself that disturbs me. It is the abundance of artificiality in all current media. Mainly because it causes two things: the acceptance of manufactured images as truth and the rise of visual illiteracy when people no longer take time to critically question images in times when they should. They respond the way animals do: instinctively.

It’s propaganda. Information without meaning to steer the emotions of the audience. We are no longer being informed. We are being entertained.

You adopt a position from French philosopher Jean Baudrillard that the “real world” doesn’t exist anymore, that people have become visually illiterate. How do you use photography, a visual medium, to show that and do you think that the process can be reversed?

I photographed 24 actors, upper nudes, in believable emotional poses. Alternated with quotes about reality and artificiality. People reacted very emotionally as expected. But the emotions in the portraits are empty. They are copies without originals. When people find out at the end of the exhibition that they never once looked at all the obvious clues that these were not documentary portraits they first experience an anti climax. But they all go back to re-watch it, and realise what their psychological reaction was, and how it changed in round two. They look more carefully and suddenly see the signs. After that happens they often tell me they feel liberated.

What can be done to learn how to “read images” correctly and to be aware of the inherent traps?

Realise that every image is a construction to make you do, think, buy something or behave in a certain way. Get past your first reaction, which is an emotional one, pause, and ask yourself what this image wants from you. There is no truth in any kind of photography. Not even in the documentary field. The audience has become an instrument.

At the beginning of each project one often has some kind of idea in mind as to what the result could be like. Sometimes that changes along the way and the result is quite different. Was that the case with “Simulacra” and if so what did you learn during the project?

Because of my art director background “Simulacra” was set up to look a certain way in advance. It was casting the right people that took most of the time. What I learned was that people have a volume dial and I can tune it to a point where I want them to be emotionally. I learned how to direct actors I suppose.

A photographer has many “tools” at hand to bring across his message: lenses, lighting, framing, color treatment etc. Can you elaborate a little bit on the techniques you used for this particular project in order to link form and content?

Technically it’s one lens, one light, hard shadows, high contrast: raw.

I cast diversity so people wouldn’t see perfected bodies like they do in magazines. That way they identify with the imperfections of the human bodies they see: and what they immediately do is believe the face on top of that uncensored body. It’s a trick. But it served an important purpose.

They have to believe the emotions to be woken up at the end and review themselves and how they perceive reality. How the real is manufactured.

“Simulacra” is a rather long-scale project. What have you planned? How is it going to continue?

Four more volumes will be shot for “Claustrum Corporis”:

I. Simulacra (deals with truth)

II. Mortui Te Salutant (deals with time)

III. Lugentes (deals with flesh)

IV. Invisi (deals with status)

V. Iudicium Finale (deals with fear)

All five volumes examine how society, viewed as an entity, interact with its people in times where socialdarwinism and (post) neoliberalism reign supreme. It has a very bad effect on people. All volumes are deeply rooted in philosophy, psychology or sociology.

“Simulacra” is conducted in a portrait style. Portraiture is a genre traditionally used to explore issues of identity. What do your photographs tell about the persons being portrayed? And why did you choose this particular genre as a suitable vehicle to transport your message?

The photographs tell absolutely nothing about the people being portrayed. That’s he whole point. The portraits are copies without originals but the viewer doesn’t know that at the start of the exhibition.

“What better way to wake people up to the fabrication of the real in current society than to choose a documentary style portrait that is completely void of anything real.”

Yet they are all emote. Why is that? Apparently there is an instinct-like mechanic that dictates the people in my portraits are real. What better way to wake people up to the fabrication of the real in current society than to choose a documentary style portrait that is completely void of anything real and confront them with the stories and feelings they themselves created around it because they missed obvious visual clues? There are too many coincidences between the photographs for them to be real.

On the other hand it’s said that a portrait also tells a lot about the person who took it. Do you find that to be true and if so what do your images of others tell about yourself?

I am not the most conventional person in town and I have a dark personality. I think that shows. It’s in my handwriting which mixes beauty with an unapologetic darkness and rawness. I’m in my own shadows. Photography is an extension of who I am. So parts of me sneak into my work whether I want to or not. Every photo I make is at its core a self-portrait. Ansel Adams, a landscape photographer, once said that. He was right.

What reaction do you intend to provoke in people looking at you photos?

I honest to God don’t think about my audience when I work. I have a story to tell. As soon as you think about how you want to provoke your audience you start making compromises to make sure you do that. You limit yourself in a way. So I leave the audience out of the equasion ando focus on the original core message.

What do you consider to be the biggest challenges contemporary photography is faced with? And what are the most important changes recently?

“Today it’s about quick hypes, trends, and money. Money is the devil.”

People have the attention span of goldfish. They want photographers to change personal styles every two years. I get asked the question why I never work in color at least a few times a week. Masters like Richard Avedon had time to study their craft gradually and thus time to truly refine their craft and themselves as artists. There is no time to refine anymore. You have to demand that and be clear about that. Today it’s about quick hypes, trends, and money. Money is the devil.

Susan Sontag once said “The camera makes everyone a tourist in other people’s reality, and eventually in one’s own”. How has photography changed the way you look at the world and what have you learnt about yourself?

It’s the other way around for me. The world around me is changing and so are my opinions about it because I don’t like what I see, so my photography changes with me. The stories change.

What I’ve learned? I no longer crave acceptance. Once you let go of the desire to be understood or celebrated: you are free. Success and money mean nothing to me.

Every photographer is going through different stages in his formation. Which “landmarks” do you recall that have marked you and brought you to the place where you are today as a photographer?

I started in fashion photography which was great fun. I occasionally still do portfolio shoots for befriended models. I stopped because I needed to get closer to people. So I studied portraiture for a while. They were very fashionesque and became more emotional over time. It wasn’t until my switch to fine art photography that my style remained the same but there was a lot more meaning. My influence on my audience skyrocketed when Simulacra opened to the general public.

Last but not least, let’s switch roles: Which question would you have liked to be asked in this interview about your work that I didn’t ask? Please feel free to add it – as well as the answer.

To ask yourself a question you have to become a dualist. I can’t do that. It’s like hearing people say “I can’t live with myself. Apparently there is an ‘I’ and a ‘myself’. That concept frightens me as an artist. I can tell you the Simulacra Installation version scored by Nine Inch Nails will debut on the internet in december after the exhibition finishes though. That’s an exclusive!

Image from the series Simulacra shot by Dutch artist Madison photography as part of his project Claustrum Corporis
© Madison

Image from the series Simulacra shot by Dutch artist Madison photography as part of his project Claustrum Corporis
© Madison

Image from the series Simulacra shot by Dutch artist Madison photography as part of his project Claustrum Corporis
© Madison
NEWSLETTER
Inspiring photographers from around the globe share their secrets and insights. Join the newsletter and you’ll get actionable advice to help you develop an unique photographic language and eventually take your craft as an image maker to the next level.
We hate spam. Your email address will not be sold or shared with anyone else. More information

1 COMMENT

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here