I remember this body of work from my first module and recalling the interview I remembered that this collaborative duo went into some depth into their approach and the mythology around this subject. The presentation was located in the Falmouth archive conversations section, I found it even more interesting the second time round- meaning that I have a couple of modules under my belt and I have a greater understanding for my own direction. I pleasantly found some correlation between my work and there’s, which I will discuss further. I really enjoy presentations that go in great depth on how they achieved it, gives me motivation for my own work. A quick introduction to this work Beth says on her website
“Over a million of London’s buildings were destroyed or damaged by bombing between 1940 and 1945. From the mysterious gap in a suburban terrace, to the incongruous post-war inner city estate, Missing Buildings reveals London as a vast archaeological site, bearing the visible scars of its violent wartime past.” (http://www.bethatkinson.co.uk)
Beth and Tom Atkinson are siblings and took over 6 years to produce ‘Missing Buildings’ they shot on a large format camera and were meticulous and systematic with their approach to documenting these not so common heritage sites. The Blitz hit vast areas within London and many of the bombs left their imprint by removing elements from the streets of London. Within the interview they showed a map of all the ordinance dropped doing the blitz which gave great context to the project. I wonder how many people actually realise the range and distance in which these bombs effected the local people across London. What I like about this project is that the missing buildings are there in plain sight and are seen daily. I wonder how many people actually stop and contemplate the visible traces of the houses that were once there and the history/memories of WW2.
I think I can relate to this within my own project, the local communities see these WW2 building/airfields daily but who contemplates the meaning of these stagnate structures and the memories, stories associated with them. For them I guess they just see them as a bit of an eyesore with very little physical value. Visually these images are quite objective, the lighting soft with quite a tight frame. The sky gives no added aesthetics, all attention is drawn to the buildings. The buildings themselves are quite beautiful they hold texture, shape and pattern, which is pleasing to the eye. Their work of course has similarities with the Becher’s, although each shot changes in shape but the same approach keeps their work consistent.
As the presentation goes on they say over time they began to develop a methodology in which they brought to each site Beth says “We started to interpret everything around us and read the buildings around us to see whether or not it looked like something has happened” (Atkinson, 2017) This says to me that over time they really started to understand their subject and notice certain shapes, textures that were left imprinted on the side of buildings. I like myself after awhile really started to notice the types of buildings, the style of roof or structure in its distinct form. It certainly helps to speed up the process when capturing because you can quickly assess the best angle and constraints that you are working with.
It’s actually quite interesting because the project that they are trying to represent are the buildings that are missing, you can just see the faint lines of a building that was once there. Many times the urban landscape that surrounds the empty space has been regenerated. Beth says “We were almost trying to take a empty space and photograph it as an object” (Atkinson,2017) Which as a viewer, I really find gets the imagination going and you wonder about the empty space being filled by a structure. Most of the sites that I capture have parts of the buildings left so that’s something to photograph as it sits but I always wonder the best way to capture airfield sites that nothing remains. I’m always able to find old photographs so I know what was once there and how the landscape is placed. The Atkinson’s work has given me a few ideas with how to deal with this, possibly focus on the empty space as if it was still there.
I really enjoyed this work and appreciate the catalogue of buildings they have created. I think for my FMP I will capture the sites as a whole, but I will also create a catalogue of buildings in quite an objective way. Not sure how it will fit my project so far but for me its better to have the option than not. Either way the imagery will get used if not by myself then I will give it to the Defence Heritage Project to populate their project.
Critical Research Journal 