Tampa as sculpture
Tampa was a site-specific performance, sculpture, photography and web-based artwork about the plight of recent refugees in Australia. It took place between 30 October 2003 and 16 November 2003 as part of the Sculpture by the Sea exhibition in Sydney. The sculpture and performance acted as a dichotomy between the sense of freedom and grandeur the individual experiences at the seashore and the imprisonment refugees faced as a result of their trust in the most basic form of human rights. The Tampa ship signified the beginning of how the seashore turned refugees in Australia into prisoners of inhumanity. This incident was of particular interest because of the definite schism it created in Australias perception of itself. The term asylum seekers and refugees entered the vocabulary of everyday and with it, unease about nationhood and a crisis about who the Other really is.
The prison like structure was built as a 10:1 scaled version of the Tampa ship. Lloyds Register shows the Tampa to be 246.41m x 32.36m breadth x 21.01m depth. Therefore the Tampa cell was 24.6 m long, 3.2m wide and 2.1 m high. The bars were spaced approximately 15cm apart with barely visible wires connecting the bars. The bamboo sculpture created and confined space in order to give the performance a context. The permeability of the prison walls signified both conflict and fragility a reference to the osmotic relationship between the viewer and the performer through the inversion of the gaze process, more on that later.
Tampa as performance
The performance consisted of myself dressed in black waiting for my release for the duration of the exhibition. My possessions and daily needs were contained in an old leather suitcase. I would arrive each morning at 10 am, enter the prison and stay there without exiting at any time, until 6pm. Throughout the 18 day performance, endurance and claustrophobia were to be presented with the relentless process of daily imprisonment, including sitting through an electric storm, scorching temperatures, sand blasting from gale force winds as well as public apathy and antagonism. Symbolism of suffering as experienced by the refugees on the Tampa ship and the subsequent process of forced and unjust incarceration were primary objectives. Otherness, caging and display were the underlying themes, and Coco Fusco & Guillermo Gómez-Peñas Two Undiscovered Amerindians Visit Sydney performance in 1992 provided a thematic comparison. In the latter, Fusco and Gómez-Peñas sat in a cell at the Australian Museum posing as exhibits of two newly discovered savages from an island in the Gulf of New Mexico. This performance intersected with Gómez-Peñas comments on contemporary cultimulturalism.1
An essential part
of the Tampa performance was the obsessive documentation of the process of imprisonment.
Each day photographs were taken from within the cage and four were posted on
the website at the end of the day. In
his essay on "Ethnic Caging" Ghassan Hage says, "Most vivid in
my consciousness are intimations of caging practices: people behind fences,
hands clutching wires, guards. Ive seen the films and the photos, and
listened to and read reports of governments officials justifying the way they
handle the situation. Of course, in the well-established traditional
pattern of knowledge dissemination, the point of view of the caged,
from the budgie to the prisoner, is seldom or never heard."3
This point of view of the caged was one of the critical issues examined through the performance. Who the subject really was through photographing from within the cage, was played out against a backdrop of an audience unused to being confronted by an observing Other acting out a gazing process. Austerity, aversion to discourse and silence were the methods deployed to reinforce the walls of the bamboo shell. Holding a camera in my hand acted as a witness to possible crimes, keeping intruders and aggressive behaviour at bay.
Tampa as Photography - The inverted gaze
Inverting the gaze through the act of photographing from within the cage was an attempt at subverting the gaze of the subject. In his essay The Artwork in the Era of its Technical Reproducibility on the role of photography, Walter Benjamin says, "For the first time in world history, technical reproducibility emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence on ritual Instead of being based on ritual, it begins to be based on another practice politics"4. In Tampa, photography as a technically reproducible device, together with politics laid the ground for redefining the direction and static nature of the gaze. Peter Hutchings 5 in his essay on Benjamin examines David Octavius Hills Newhaven fishwife photographic portrait where Benjamin identifies the notion of the gaze through the fishwifes photographed averted eyes. He finds it difficult to engage with her eyes and therefore is driven to wonder about her real identity. He says, "In Hills Newhaven Fishwife, there remains something that goes beyond testimony to the photographers art, something that cannot be silenced, that fills you with an unruly desire to know what her name was."6 Benjamins definitive declaration that the desire of contemporary masses to bring things closer spatially and humanly suggests that the exchange which takes place between the gazer and the gazee is an intimate process of identification. Bringing things closer therefore sets out the ground for a process of reaching a closer proximity, physically, mentally as well as metaphorically to that, which cannot be reached through ordinary means.
In Tampa, the performance of photographing from within the cage then placing the images on a website during the course of the performance was an attempt at bringing even closer the viewer to the subject or vice versa. In effect, through this process, the distance between the subject and the viewers eyes had become so infinitesimal that the identity of the gazee and the gazer were caught in an oscillating and intense continuum. The fusion of two spatial and temporal processes through the act of photographing from within created a tension, which had at its core a conflict of identity. The relationship initiated and executed as I photographed onlookers then boldly circulated their images through the Internet stood in sharp contrast to the assumed refugee status I employed. As the performance progressed over time and viewers became aware of the virtual concept of the Tampa performance, an unease about being photographed and then of being dispersed on the Internet began to emerge as highlighted by some of the comments and questions received and documented . Hence a mirroring and an escalation of roles set out to question the function of photography in defining the identity of the viewer and their object. The intended dissolution of meaning of words such as refugee and migrant was played out in a highly charged terrain with no visible fields or dimensions. As the subjects role disappeared, an attempt was made to create an amorphous form of identification that slowly emerged over the time scale of the performance. It was hoped that in its place the notion of caging itself was impossibly dissolved.
The Australian government's multicultural policies, which set out to enhance the image of an ideal Australian society, sit in a bizarre state of tension with the practice of caging ethnics and their children. The merger of identities between gazer and gazee was an attempt at highlighting this tension.The issue of national border and identity as played out during this refugee crisis highlighted how a person branded as a migrant and economic asset in the past, can become a threat and a tool of national violation in the present, through no fault of their own. Inverting the gaze through photography therefore set out to rearrange not only the subject but also their histories. Many first, second and third generation Australians who arrived here as refugees fleeing wars, famine and persecution did identify with the performance and the mirroring process of inverting the gaze.
Viewers relationship to the caging process and in particular to the Tampa performance no doubt created tensions and stresses as illustrated in the comments. These manifested themselves primarily through expressions of recognition or shame as well as through a distancing process. Inversion of the gaze through photography therefore was a tool of empowerment and an exploration into role reversals. In some instances the notion that an imprisoned person was photographing may have invited people to question assumptions about an imprisoned persons powerlessness. Consequently, photographing from within, was an attempt at illustrating that the watched and the caged are in indeed watching.
Mireille Astore © 2004
1. Green, Charles. Peripheral vision : Contemporary Australian Art, 1970-1994 Roseville East, N.S.W. : Craftsman House, 1995. p. 12
2. Hage, Ghassan. White Nation: Fantasies of White Supremacy in a Multicultural Society. Pluto Press, Sydney, 1998. p. 138.
3. ibid. p. 18
4.Benjamin, Walter. Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction In Illuminations. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1968
5. Hutchings, Peter J. Through a Fishwifes Eye: Between Benjamin and Deleuze on the Timely Image, In Terry Smith (ed.), Impossible Presence:Surface and Screen in the Photogenic Era. Sydney/Chicago: Power Publications/Chicago University Press, 2001, pp. 101123.
6. Benjamin, Walter. A Small History of Photography In One-Way Street and Other Writings, trans. Edmund Jephcott and Kingsley Shorter. London: New Left Books, 1979. p. 243
Back to Thinker