Courage is what it takes to do this job Justyna Mielnikiewicz speaks about her exhibition “In Ukraine,” photography and being a documentalist.

Justyna Mielnikiewicz – born in Poland, is a documentary photographer  working in the countries of the former Soviet Union. While working on her personal long term photography projects she has also cooperated with leading international publications such as: Wall Street Journal, New York Times, National Geographic Magazine and Le Monde, among others. 

The International Cultural Centre in Krakow invites visitors to see the exhibition of Justyna’s photographs, entitled “In Ukraine.” The exhibition is open until 6 November 2022. Presented are photographs from her project devoted to Ukraine taken between  2014–2019, along with her latest work from 2022. The artist presents Ukraine and the war through the real-life stories of people she met while working there.

Sara Dąbrowska: You live in Tbilisi, and in your photos, you document life in post-Soviet states. The region of Silesia is, however, the place where you were born, right?

Justyna Mielnikiewicz: That’s right. I come from Silesia, which is a place where feelings of belonging to a specific community are deep-rooted. My mother comes from a family of native Silesians, and my father was forcibly resettled during Operation Vistula. So, as you can see, I also have Ukrainian roots. When I was a child, my parents decided that in school I was going to speak literary Polish instead of the Silesian dialect. Because of that other kids called me ‘gorolka’, which basically means “the other, ” the one who does not belong. I was not offended by that, but I did not fully understand what they meant by that name. Why do they do it? In general, the sense of “belonging, ” the distinction between ‘us’ and ‘them’ is deeply rooted in my worldview as long as I can remember.

SD: That ‘us’ and ‘them’ at  the borderlands is where you usually work. How do you personally define borders?

JM: As long as there is no war, a border can be seen as something abstract. It’s a type  of social agreement indicating that up to that point is ‘us ” and after that point is “them.”  This agreement is there to help people avoid fighting and killing because one side trespassed on the territory of the “other.” 

A border does not have to be seen only as a division, it can also be a connecting line, as we have with European Union borders, which I think is one of the best political concepts we as people have managed to come up with .

Borders can be defined in many different ways. But when we look at a country whose borders were moved, violated and ignored, as happened with Ukraine’s state borders, then that border becomes something very real. After a violation like that there is no space left for theoretical divagations.

SD: As a photographer, why exactly are you so interested in border areas? Is that the attitude people assume in relation to the social agreement on borders  you described?

JM: Theoretically, war should be photographed and documented from both sides.  Such an approach would be an objective approach, but is not possible to achieve. For sure, it would be very interesting to contact Russian soldiers who took part in the fighting in Bucha. It would be interesting  to go to Russia, but it is practically impossible because traveling there is not easy and if you start looking for these soldiers, you would be arrested.

The question of why attitudes on both sides of the border are so different is fascinating but the war in Ukraine is so very intense that again there is no space left for theoretical divagations. It is very clear who is on the side of good and who is on the side of darkness. It has been like that since 2014, when this war really started.

At that time, I was in Donbas and watched the then small group of protesters there. After a year, I came back to look for these people because I wanted to know how their lives unfolded. It was supposed to be a success story, but nothing good happened afterwards, there was absolutely no happy ending. 

SD: In your work, you always focus on relationships with people. You write down their stories and get to know their perspective. Do you set your own limits for these relationships, lines not to cross while working ?

JM: What limits could I possibly set for myself other than not to hurt these people? To not blackmail or promise to help. These are rather obvious ethical rules of my job. My interlocutors are the ones who set their own limits; for example, refusing to  talk with me.

On the other hand, people rather say “no ” than “yes,” but if I backed out every time I heard that “no,” I would not be able to do most of my work. I very often negotiate with those who are skeptical, telling them in the end it is them who decide what and how much they want to tell me.

One needs courage to do this job but also an awareness of why you are at a given location. I normally talk to people before or after I take a photo, but sometimes when I am faced with huge crowds of people fleeing, like in Lviv where I spent the first three weeks of the war, it is extremely difficult to have a conversation with everyone. My role there was to show the huge scale of suffering inflicted on those people.

I worked there for the “Wall Street Journal.” You feel a bit different when you work for a large newspaper knowing that your photos will be published the next day and can influence public opinion. The Ukrainians understand the importance of the media. I felt  they understood why I was there and what my role in all this is. Even exhausted refugees in Zaporizhzhia found the time to talk to journalists because they felt that was part of their responsibility. So, the answer to your question is yes, I set my limits, but they are flexible and can be adjusted depending on the situation.  I re-negotiate those  limits with myself and with the world. 

SD: One of the videos promoting the “In Ukraine” exhibition stated  that you wish to remind people of the ongoing war. Efforts to help Ukraine are no longer as intense as when the war began. Do you think that your photos can motivate people , make them move again ?

JM: The International Cultural Centre proposed to organize this exhibition in June, but that would have been too early. I needed time to process all that happened, so I said: let’s do it later, in autumn, when everybody will “forget “about Ukraine. This will be a good  moment to remind them about it.

To be honest, I never know what impact my photos might have; there is no way to measure it. Photos from this exhibition were shown also in the center of Paris – 22 photos were placed along a fence at the Paris City Hall. Thousands of people looked at them, stopped to read descriptions. This is what I am able to do , what I have, and what I do. Afterwards my work lives outside my control and I really do not know what impact they might have .

In 2014, I was told that my photos show people who are just like us. I think this is very important. I am not a war photographer and my photographs record the full experience of Ukraine as such, not just the part connected to war. When one familiarizes themself with that reality where war intertwines with life, where people live, function, have a family life, love each other – it becomes easier to identify with such a narrative. Such a comprehensive narration is more universal. The narrative of a stable daily life which war disrupts is something people can relate to easier; they’re able to sympathize with those affected.

SD: Some of your photos presented in the exhibition show just that – everyday life. There is a couple hugging, girls with balloons.

JM: Indeed, because such scenes are present at all times. War does not eliminate normal life. War is like a storm in which people are caught, but it does not stop them from living. People still work, love or hate each other, have arguments and say sorry. Children go to school.. Some people produce stuff so others can buy it, it’s an endless circle. For me, as a documentarist, war has never been and will never be the goal in itself. I have never felt the need to go to regions affected by war. I know some people feel such an urge, but this is not my case. It so happened that I documented Georgia and Ukraine during wars, because I already worked in these regions before.

SD: That passage from stability to war is strongly underlined in the International Cultural Center. In order to enter your exhibition, one needs to pass first the exhibition of photos by Włodzimierz Puchalski presenting monkeys and dogs…

JM: It is really wonderful that people enter my exhibition only after seeing photographs by Włodzimierz Puchalski! Those two worlds re-connected in some strange way. It struck me how Ukrainians treat their animals. People who have to escape in a hurry have two arms to collect and carry their most important personal belongings. So they would take a suitcase in one hand and a cat cage in the other.  They drug it all in  overcrowded evacuation trains provided for people fleeing the war which were moving in darkness and cold. For  me it reflects  the stage of civilizational development of the country. My photo of the dog, which has his mouth  tied with a bandage, closes up the exhibition of Puchalski’s works. I like that. I love the fact that these two worlds interact with each other. I’m not sure if you saw it in a similar way.

SD: For me, it was more of an emotional roller coaster. First I saw funny pictures of monkeys and birds and suddenly came your work with the opening scene of the funeral. I was surprised because I did not know beforehand that the exhibition space was arranged that way.

JM: Did you notice the picture near the entrance to my exhibition of MRs? Petro from the funeral home in Bucha? For me, he represents both death and life. On one hand there are coffins which he sells, on the other he is with his fluffy little dog and an expression on his face telling me “I am not giving up, I am holding up with dignity.”

My narrations – no matter if they are in an exhibition or a book – are constructed in contrast.  It never goes like: we cry, cry, cry then have a moment to smile at the end . With my work we cry, then laugh, cry again, take a break, laugh again .. and so on. I construct non-linear narratives. In that sense I believe Puchalski worked well, providing an emotional contrast you might not think of when walking into my exhibition. My narratives are like life – mixed of various emotions. Even during the war people laugh, make jokes. Like here monkeys and cute dogs are followed by war. Maybe that is also why my  exhibition touches people emotionally .

SD: This is true, but unfortunately with time we become indifferent ,  even to those drastic  war photos and  people affected by those military conflicts. Are you not afraid that people may not pay enough attention to your photographs?

JM: The way the space in the International Cultural Center was arranged is one of my best experiences so far while preparing an exhibition. It is a big exposition, well arranged and suited for the space. The exhibition has a rigid formal concept which works strongly I think. It is practically an installation. Talking about indifference, I think that this exhibition is like a separate world into which the audience enters. Visitors enter through a photograph of the exhibition itself, not by passing a framed picture hanging on the wall. This changes the perspective and reduces the distance.

It all a result of my close cooperation with curator Monika Rydygier, and interior designers, Patrycja Ochman Tarka and Paulina Ochman, whom I would  like to thank for their engagement and work.

SD:  Do you give others working on your exhibition freedom to design it, or do you insist on  your own vision?

JM: I am very controlling when it comes to my photographs and exhibitions. I make decisions because I am responsible for the underlying vision of it. I tell stories about things that directly affect many people and I feel responsible to be accurate. I cannot allow others to create their own narration around my material. On the other hand, my ego as an artist is not that  big.  I am flexible and ready to embrace new proposals. My approach is open; it is not just about me and my singular vision – not at all. I strictly control what and how my work will be presented and try to project an intended impact. After that, it is all up to the audience to have their own interpretations.

SD: Let’s talk about art then – the meaning of that word. You usually describe yourself as a documentary photographer while  others refer to you as a  reporter. I assume that you could also call yourself an artist. Is that right?

JM: Definitely. I perceive photography as a form of art, not just a mechanical reflection of reality. A subjective approach, the assessments and choices I make are very important in my work. They’re all elements which traditionally describe the work of artists. For some time, artistic and documentary photography have been completely separate categories. In artistic photography, people created artificial worlds that served as an interpretation of reality, while documentary photographers sifted through that reality in search for unique moments. Both groups discussed the same problems using the same elements. The difference was that one was arranging, creating  and inventing them while the other looked for those elements  in the real world to build narratives of it afterwards . Recently, these two worlds have started to merge. Especially within the documentery photography world, authors have started to experiment with conceptual approaches while maintaining a documentary base for such creations. They implement practices from the art world on the level of editing and presentation. While merging those two worlds, documentary photography became richer. A metanarrative level was added to it. All that  proves that photography is a very dynamic art form with a lot of space for creative freedom.

SD: What is more important for you – pure form or the content, message ?

JM: Form is important, but I do not always think about it. There is no time for it when I try to grasp emotions, atmospheres and moods. I would not be able to execute my work  if I thought about the form while doing that. I wanted to become a painter, and I always connected with the world through visuals. In photography, unlike painting, there is no need to train your hand. If one has a sense of aesthetics and composition, work happens intuitively and  does not require many preparations. I think I have a good eye and quick reflexes, I am able to make decisions fast  which  allows me to catch  things efficiently. I like photos that have something which can seduce and beguile the  viewer, something  which can stir up emotion. When photography is only a  nice composition we stay outside of it. We are not entering it because there is no passage allowing us that.

SD: What about the content, the stories of people? Have you ever felt the discomfort of interfering in someone’s private life? Have you ever seen yourself as a voyeur?

JM: I use lenses which do not allow me to take pictures from a distance. I am too close to people to be able to call me a voyeur.  It is a type of coexistence, taking photos from up close.

I felt some discomfort in Ukraine as I took a picture of a girl at the window of an evacuation train leaving the station. At first, she communicated that she did not want to be photographed, but later she suggested that she agreed. I decided that I did not harm her and the picture itself is important because it shows what these people were really going through. It is not pleasant to witness people suffering , to watch their lives when they have lost everything. My heros often look me straight in the eye. That can create discomfort as well.

SD: What about symbols? Do you pay attention to the  symbolic layer in your work ?

JM: I grew up as an artist, following the Polish school of film and art which is loaded with symbolism. It’s become part of my DNA. Let’s take the motif of crucifixion. For me, the picture of Eva, who is lying down  in her army uniform, is an image of crucified freedom . The way her body is arranged recalls iconography of the Descent from the Cross .

The way her body is arranged may remind us of iconography or pictures presenting the crucifixion scene. Of course, I did not think about it as I was taking this picture. But such reflections only come later. I knew back then that this very picture was among the key ones to communicate what I saw and how I felt about Ukraine. I asked myself, why. Then I started analyzing it and came to the conclusion that different motifs are combined within this photo. Motifs of the cross, a woman and uniform. I needed to dismantle this into constitutive elements .

SD: Your work takes time and it is always a long process, is that right? First comes an informed decision, then the storyline and conclusions. Did I describe the process correctly?

JM: I represent the old school, according to which the photographer needs to think on location. I need to know why I am there, what I want to say and what I am looking for.  I never set my camera on continuous shooting mode even when there is a lot going on around me. I make decisions there on location about when and why to press the shutter.

---

“In Ukraine. Justyna Mielnikiewicz”

International Cultural Centre
Rynek Główny 25

from 2 September to 6 November 2022

More