Child and Her Reflection
at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial
(Washington, D.C., United States)
BY Michael Katakis

You have a particular interest and commitment in taking photographs that synchronise with society at a precise point in time, the ones regarding the Vietnam War Memorial, for example. How did this strong sense of consciousness and instinct come into being?

You see, as opposed to the banal notion of photography being a form of objectivity or truth with a capital “T,” there are no answers in my photographs. To a large extent, I don’t believe in seeking answers in photography. The images concerning the Vietnam War give no answers, as far as absolute proof is concerned. This is the same case for the series of images I took in response to the September 11 attack, a way to confront the violence that our world faces, even though we may not have the necessary “scientific answers” or so-called “empowering technological solutions.”

Concerning taking photographs that correspond strongly to a social statement at a precise point in time… it means taking specific images, not overviews. I want to say that taking such photographs means not just spotting a line or movement. It is something else — you can call it humanity or empathy. For me, it is simply to have a heart. I am not a voyeur. I’m an observer and I step in the situation or circumstances that make up the context of my photographs. If you want to take a real photo, move closer. This is the secret.

I want to say that taking such photographs means not just spotting a line or movement. It is something else — you can call it humanity or empathy. For me, it is simply to have a heart. I am not a voyeur. I’m an observer and I step in the situation or circumstances that make up the context of my photographs. If you want to take a real photo, move closer. This is the secret.

What usually happens before and after the “click” is in fact the photograph itself. You can’t just take voyeuristic photographs or aesthetic images of victimised soldiers. You can’t imagine being able to take these photographs with the idea of them being “beautiful,” and without reading the newspapers. There is a big difference between “manipulate” and “illuminate.” I’m skeptical of the notion of “being aesthetic” for the sake of aesthetics. Photographs are not small and they’re never neutral. Further, they aren’t mine once I take them. They always belong to someone else — the viewer, the people in the photos, the moment, the place, the memories…

I like to be informed by history. I think it’s important to have a solid working knowledge of history before going (into) somewhere. This is necessary in order for one to take photographs that reflect the society’s present. Also, photography is about knowing yourself. And beyond that, knowing others. Otherwise, you just can’t be able to take photographs that will speak and reach out to the wider world of different levels and cultures. Neither will they have meaningful consequences in time to come.

Is there ever something that you would not photograph, that you would not try to create an art out of?

That is easy. I would not wish to photograph celebrities because they are of little interest to me. They are always posing even when they are living their lives, and I must say that bores me.

I am far more interested in an unnoticed street sweeper or a doctor’s child or an elderly person standing alone in the metro. I am most interested in the life that is composing itself around me — its joys and tragedies, its sweet and sour.