Born out of a frustration with both the clichés and limitations of photojournalism and an enthusiasm for the open-ended narrative possibilities of photography — and inspired by the true story of Zambian schoolteacher Edward Makuka Nkoloso who, in 1964, declared himself the country’s “Minister of Space” and founded his own unofficial space academy in an abandoned farmhouse outside of Lusaka — Cristina De Middel’s The Afronauts tells a fictional story of an African space program during the height of the Space Race. The project was nominated to the 2012 Paris Photo—Aperture Foundation PhotoBook awards and has been short-listed for the 2013 Deutsche Börse Photography Prize.
Afronauts tells a fictional story of an African space program during the height of the Space Race
Aaron Schuman: To start, how did you first get into photography?
Cristina De Middel: I studied fine arts in Valencia with a concentration in drawing, and I initially began to take pictures so that I’d have a catalogue of things to draw. That’s how I first discovered the darkroom, and like many people, I quickly fell in love with the process, so I started focusing more on photography. I then received a scholarship to study photography for a year at the University of Oklahoma; they had all kinds of cameras, equipment, and a huge darkroom, so I really began to experiment.
Then when I returned to Spain, I realized that I wasn’t very comfortable with the “art world” — most of the time, I don’t really understand what artists are saying. For me, artists should be supreme communicators who can really control their language in such a way that it adds layers and depth to their message. But if you add too much, then no one actually gets what you’re saying. I get very frustrated with certain artists and art forms, especially when only a few experts can understand what it’s about. So I decided that I wasn’t going to talk about myself, or my work, using hard-to-decipher messages. Even if I’m telling a complicated story, I wanted to find a way to make it accessible without sacrificing all the layers and depths of the message.
Then when I returned to Spain, I realized that I wasn’t very comfortable with the “art world” — most of the time, I don’t really understand what artists are saying. For me, artists should be supreme communicators who can really control their language in such a way that it adds layers and depth to their message. But if you add too much, then no one actually gets what you’re saying. I get very frustrated with certain artists and art forms, especially when only a few experts can understand what it’s about. So I decided that I wasn’t going to talk about myself, or my work, using hard-to-decipher messages. Even if I’m telling a complicated story, I wanted to find a way to make it accessible without sacrificing all the layers and depths of the message.
“For me, artists should be supreme communicators who can really control their language.”
Also, at that time I wanted to use photography practically, so I decided to study photojournalism at the University of Barcelona. After graduating and then working at the university for a little while — both in the museum and as a teacher — I moved to Ibiza and knocked on the door of the local newspaper. In Barcelona it was almost impossible to make a living in photojournalism — there were so many people wanting to get into the newspapers — but the door opened in Ibiza, so I started working as a photojournalist.
“If you really want to raise debate and change things, photojournalism is not the platform.”
AS: Was photojournalism simply a means of making a living for you at that time, or were you genuinely committed to it?
CDM: I was very committed to it. For me, it seemed like an opportunity to share my vision, which was one of the reasons that I initially pursued art. But I really wanted to reach a larger audience with simple ideas, so photojournalism was perfect. And also I had this conviction and romantic view of photojournalism at the time; I thought that I could actually change the world, raise awareness, and so on. That illusion lasted for eight years, and then I realized that it wasn’t working. If you really want to raise debate and change things, photojournalism is not the platform — or at least, newspapers aren’t the platform.
CDM: I was very committed to it. For me, it seemed like an opportunity to share my vision, which was one of the reasons that I initially pursued art. But I really wanted to reach a larger audience with simple ideas, so photojournalism was perfect. And also I had this conviction and romantic view of photojournalism at the time; I thought that I could actually change the world, raise awareness, and so on. That illusion lasted for eight years, and then I realized that it wasn’t working. If you really want to raise debate and change things, photojournalism is not the platform — or at least, newspapers aren’t the platform.
AS: Were there any particular photojournalists that you were modeling yourself after?
CDM: At the beginning, the photographers that I really liked were Diane Arbus and Duane Michals, neither of whom have anything to do with photojournalism. I liked Arbus because she documented the strange and freaky parts of society, and I liked Duane Michals because of his use of sequencing. But in terms of great photojournalists, like Sebastião Salgado and Steve McCurry, I’ve never been attracted to very aesthetical or beautiful photojournalism; I’ve always been more focused on what the image says and the message that is behind it — using the photograph as more of a word in a sentence rather than as a definitive depiction of a place or thing.
CDM: At the beginning, the photographers that I really liked were Diane Arbus and Duane Michals, neither of whom have anything to do with photojournalism. I liked Arbus because she documented the strange and freaky parts of society, and I liked Duane Michals because of his use of sequencing. But in terms of great photojournalists, like Sebastião Salgado and Steve McCurry, I’ve never been attracted to very aesthetical or beautiful photojournalism; I’ve always been more focused on what the image says and the message that is behind it — using the photograph as more of a word in a sentence rather than as a definitive depiction of a place or thing.
So in the end, working for a newspaper was not the place for me. I became very disappointed with how photojournalism works, and how newspapers work, because they are companies after all, and the have to make money, so they adapt the product, which is my work. It’s a market decision, and it was terrible. So during my last three years as a photojournalist, when I was working in Alicante for a big newspaper, I started taking my small revenge by presenting my own vision of each day on my blog, which was about what it was like to be working as a photojournalist.
Then at the newspaper, I proposed a new section that allowed me to go around to all of the areas of Alicante — the small barrios — one by one, and focus on the history or local heroes of each neighborhood. It was fantastic, because during my last year at the paper, I didn’t have to go to press conferences or anything like that. I could just make the pictures that I wanted to make. So at the end, it actually wasn’t that bad, because I had my own section in the paper, and they were very supportive.
AS: What were the most common images that you would be asked to take for the newspaper?
CDM: Either pictures at press conferences, or waiting for politicians to go in or out of the courthouse, or bullfighting, or football, or if there was a manifestación…What do you call it in English? When there’s a strike, with people in the street complaining?
AS: What were the most common images that you would be asked to take for the newspaper?
CDM: Either pictures at press conferences, or waiting for politicians to go in or out of the courthouse, or bullfighting, or football, or if there was a manifestación…What do you call it in English? When there’s a strike, with people in the street complaining?
AS: A protest?
CDM: Yes, a protest — exactly. The newspaper would report that there were a thousand people protesting, but really there would be only ten, so I would have to squeeze everybody together and go in really close so it looked like a crowd. Or the reverse would happen — there would be ten thousand people protesting, but the newspaper would say that there were just a hundred. So really in photojournalism, you’re documenting the opinion of the journalist rather than what is actually happening. And even if you photograph the reality of the situation, they simply won’t use it.
CDM: Yes, a protest — exactly. The newspaper would report that there were a thousand people protesting, but really there would be only ten, so I would have to squeeze everybody together and go in really close so it looked like a crowd. Or the reverse would happen — there would be ten thousand people protesting, but the newspaper would say that there were just a hundred. So really in photojournalism, you’re documenting the opinion of the journalist rather than what is actually happening. And even if you photograph the reality of the situation, they simply won’t use it.