Infra

schultmb
Nov 4, 2017
4 min read

As an aspiring photojournalist, I take a special interest in photography (and photographers) that challenge the norms of documentary photography and use their lenses to focus on social justice. In my Visual Methodology Class, I have been introduced to a photographer who does just that – his name is Richard Mosse and in 2012 he published a body of work called Infra. His work features scenes from the war-torn region on the Congo, but it’s all shot on color infrared film; a technology which maps the thermal footprint of a scene and gives photographs a surreal pink tint. The film was originally developed as a military technology used to identify camouflaged targets. In 2009, Mosse bought up a huge store of the stuff when he found out it was being discontinued, and used the material to document the ongoing conflict in the Congo over the next 3 years. Mosse said that he was “interested in [the films’] original purpose as a military tool, but was also drawn to its peculiar color palette. [He] wanted to use it as a way of thinking about conflict and the rules and conventions of war photography.” (Pulitzer Center) With their striking pink hues, there is no question that Mosse’s images are visually stunning. However, since its debut there has been much debate regarding the merit and ethicality of Mosse’s work.

Mosse’s work received lots of praise in the months and years after it was published. His photobook is heralded as a “series that rethinks the tension between a photograph’s violent or disturbing content and its aesthetic value.” He’s been acclaimed for “making vivid how cruelty can be sublime and violence can ravage or remark a landscape in ways we may politically detest but also find visually arresting, even beautiful.” (New Republic) Finally, he’s been celebrated as a photographer who is “creatively revisiting traditional ways of image making and using the latest digital technology to revitalize the genre and reach a wider audience.” (Time)

Some critics of Mosse’s work claim that it is “lacking in critical value.” Some have accused him of presenting soldiers in the ‘mannered mode of fashion photography’. One author said that she was “uncomfortable with the idea of a European photographer reimagining a subject already freighted with an especially brutal colonial past and a complex series of subsequent conflicts.” (Apollo Magazine)

Personally, I think that the entire history of one place or one conflict can rarely ever be portrayed flawlessly– concepts in their entirety are hard (if not impossible) to capture in photographs. That being said, I think Mosse’s work is genius. Here’s why:

1. IT'S VISUALLY IMPACTFUL

As I’ve said, the striking red and pink hues of Mosse’s work make it indisputably appealing to the eye. I believe this is important: it’s the first level of photographic success. Photographs need to be interesting in order for people to want to look at them.

2. IT'S CLEVER

Mosse used a war technology to portray a war-torn area. The resulting pink imagery is confusing to the viewer: this bubblegum color is typically supposed to be dreamlike, but it’s evident from the scenes Mosse captured that there is something else underneath the surface. His images disorient the viewer: they make the landscape and its inhabitants unfamiliar. This was no accident: to (the vast majority of) a first world audience, these scenes are unfamiliar. Our media is saturated with images that trick us into believing otherwise. We believe we’re familiarized with war-torn third-world countries because we see them so often. In actuality most of us are not familiar with these scenes in the slightest. They are, in fact, far from our experience and realm of understanding. By staying away from trite depictions of the Congo, Mosse's work jarringly reminds us of this. “Mosse wanted to short-circuit any easy familiarity we might feel with reportage images from remote war zones.” (The Irish Times)

3. IT TAKES A RISK

I believe that photojournalism is at a cross-roads, so to speak. There is a need in contemporary photography to begin to push boundaries in order to make people see things differently. Mosse’s work does this wonderfully. His photographs were bound to be controversial – documentary photography has essentially been on trial since its genesis – but he didn’t shy away from this.

4. IT MAKES YOU THINK

As soon as Mosse’s work went public, discourse and debate about it spread like wildfire. This is no coincidence: meaningful art causes discussion. Mosse said of his own work that he hoped to “provoke a dialogue surrounding the generic conventions of documentary photography in Congo, and more generally in Africa. The aim is to surprise the viewer to look again at a forgotten but very tragic conflict.” (Time). Mosse was wildly successful in achieving this goal. The sheer amount of dissenting opinions about it proves that Mosse’s work causes its audience to ask questions, and to stop and think critically about what they are seeing.