The fifth annual Photographic Portrait Prize has been won by Jonathan Torgovnik, 38, for his portrait of Joseline Ingabire, a victim of rape during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. Photographed with her two children, born at the height of the conflict, the portrait explores the terrible impact of the atrocities of war and aims to raise awareness of the plight of thousands of women abused in Rwanda. The £12,000 award was presented to the Israeli-born photographer at the National Portrait Gallery, London, last night (Tuesday 6 November).
Torgovnik's first-prize winning photograph was taken as part of the series Intended Consequences: mothers of genocide, children of rape, an ongoing project which documents the lives of Tutsi women raped during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. The work, titled Joseline Ingabire with her daughter Leah Batamuliza, Rwanda shows Joseline embracing her second daughter, while her first daughter, Hossiana, is shown in the background, standing in front of the stark, simple structure of their mud-walled home. "When the genocide started, Joseline was married and two months pregnant' says Torgovnik, 'The militia came to her village and brutally killed her husband in front of her." Joseline was raped throughout her pregnancy, even at nine months, and again after she gave birth to her husband's daughter. She eventually became pregnant with her second daughter, she also became infected with HIV.
It was announced at the awards ceremony that the European law firm Taylor Wessing will become the
sponsor of the Photographic Portrait Prize from next year. The partnership is a continuation of Taylor Wessing's support of the National Portrait Gallery, following its sponsorship of the 2005 exhibition The World's Most Photographed and its co-sponsorship of 2007's exhibition, Face of Fashion. Thanks to the new sponsorship, from 2008 the Taylor Wessing Photographic Portrait Prize exhibition will be free from admission charge.
Terry O'Neill Award - A Reader Writes
From the Ag postbag:
The shortlist for the first Terry O'Neill Award has been published. Being open minded I never thought I would do this; that is, criticize the work of others in competition, but enough is enough.
Before anyone asks, no, I didn't enter and yes, I understand how subjective photography can be; each to his own and so on.
This award carries the name of Terry O'Neill for whom my respect and admiration knows no bounds and yet, viewing the images, why does the word Schweppes spring immediately to mind? Mr O'Neill is quoted as saying 'Photography in the UK is going through a hugely innovative and exciting period' and I'd like to think that's true. It's just that I'm personally not seeing it in these awards; just more of the same.
Most, but not all, of the images carry the characteristics of what I would consider to be 'art' photography. This has been going on for some time now and I've been waiting patiently for someone to move this strand of photography forward but it just doesn't seem to be happening.
I've always had a problem with the need of the photographer to 'explain' their work. For example; there is a technically accomplished image of a young woman with a crow on her head, that purports to deal with 'women and their image in the eyes of men and society'. Here we go again. The male gaze. Stereotyping. Haven't Barbara Kruger, Cindy Sherman et al already been there and done that?
I'm mindful of the fact that the single images published may not represent a whole project. Projects always work best when seen in full, or at least in groups of photographs. But if, as it appears, this competition is based on single entries then I'll continue. Here are some other examples: An image of clothing on a stick apparently 'signifies the absent body while evoking more abstract ideas relating to loss or memory'. Well, I'm sorry, but no it didn't, even after I'd read the text.
Another asks: ' What is home and what is homelessness?' and yet I did not get an answer from this rather bland image especially as so much good work has already been done on this subject, even as far back as the nineteenth century with Thomas Annan and Jacob Riis. What's new?
I believe that often the problem lies in the colleges and art departments where there seems to be a lack of promotion of the originality of thought. It's as if students are offered a list; this is how to do it today and that images broadly in the 'Schweppes style' are the only way forward.
Fortunately it isn't all bad news. Zak Waters 'Birdman' is in the true spirit of documentary; James Tye's boxer (although reminiscent of Rinike Dijkstra's bullfighters) and Ahmet Unver's Stockholm landscape did not have, at least in the text provided, or require any explanation and both are excellent. Which brings me to Indre Serpytyte's 'State of Silence'. Indre does explain that the image (part of a project which) 'conjures a powerful atmosphere of intrigue and is inspired by the death of her father, a Lithuanian government official in an apparent car accident'. I looked at this deceptively simple image and immediately formed my own opinion that it indeed suggested a faceless bureaucracy that generated it's own pointless work, as represented by the blank paper, and I don't mean in Lithuania. This should win but probably won't.
I wonder if, in the pages of Ag, David Lee will have an opinion. What am I saying? Of course he will.
Geoff Maxted