Would ‘the abstract’ be possible in photography? Photography may be far from the abstract. A photographer has to face an object as it is – the reality – through the camera lens, and the result is the realistic representation. When considering art solely from Plato’s perspective, photography is the perfect art embodying mimesis. However, many photographers throughout the history have explored the area of ‘the abstract photography’ through projects of ‘constructing’ objects in abstract ways. Today, abstract photography has become an important category of photography that many photographers prefer to choose. Nevertheless, unlike painting, it is difficult to express the pure abstract that is absolutely free from an object in a photograph, because being free from an object may jeopardize the identity of photography. Objects, reality and mimesis are definitions and, at the same time, constraints of photography.
In 2017, I attempted a new experiment of abstract photographs while taking photographs of ancient tombs belonging to monarchs and royal families of ancient Korea. Most of all, I paid attention to the fact that a tomb itself embraces abstract qualities. By highlighting the aesthetic quality of unique contours of the tombs, I could take abstract photographs of tombs by their very nature. Then, I attempted to take a step further. I added some simple drawings of figurative symbols I gained inspiration from paintings of Malevich, the Russian abstract painter. The outcome came as a considerably unique product. ‘The photographed abstract’ and ‘the abstract’ were congruous and incongruous at the same time. These two factors were congruous in a way that they shared a concept and were incongruous in a way that they were polarized. But what I found here was the figurative tension between the two factors. It was a playful activity of symbols taking place on the screen of two-dimensional art or an offbeat energy, and another possibility for abstract photography. The ten photographs are the outcome of this new experiment.