Photography collection explores power, performance and superficiality in American politics
Photographer Jay Turner Frey Seawell discusses his debut book “National Trust”
By the Editors of Kheiro Magazine
Jay Turner Frey Seawell is a Washington, D.C.–based photographer whose new book, National Trust, explores the connection between power, performance and superficiality in American politics. The title is a play on words evoking the role of government in preserving history and legacy at a time when trust in national institutions is at an all-time low. The images were made between 2011 and 2013, but they take on a whole new poignancy now that a reality TV star occupies the Oval Office. Jay sat down with us to discuss his process and the work — and whether it prepared him for the outcome of the 2016 election.
Kheiro Magazine: Thank you for being with us, Jay! When and why did you start making the pictures in this collection?
Jay Turner Frey Seawell: I started working on it in 2011, after my first semester of grad school in the MFA program at Columbia College Chicago. I went to Washington, D.C., for the first time to visit a friend, and was really struck by how prevalent this classical style of architecture is in the downtown, National Mall areas. You also see this in cities like New York and Chicago where there is a lot of financial activity — this Greco-Roman style that’s associated with empire. So this felt like something to explore.
At the same time I didn’t want it to become too much of these formal studies of nice-looking pictures of memorials and institutions. In 2011 we still weren’t that far removed from the financial crisis. It was natural then for the project to shift into thinking more about this foundation in architecture in our cities and how it related to the current moment with our political and economic situation.
KM: And as a result you broadened your scope to include Wall Street, the campaign trail and other contexts where power and performance interact?
JTFS: Right, it just made sense to go to Wall Street during my summer break. There’s a picture in the book that I made on Wall Street in August 2011, right around the debt ceiling crisis, when the U.S.’s credit rating was downgraded for first time in history.
There were all these journalists there. It was a big spectacle with the lights, microphone stands, people getting situated in their seats, steam coming from the vent out of the NYC underground. It was this very Hollywood atmosphere.
That picture marked a shift toward thinking not just about architecture but this blend of architecture and what’s happening in the moment. All these dramas and spectacles happening around it. The image shows a media spectacle taking place in front of these gigantic columns.
And is this what inspired you to then follow Mitt Romney on the campaign trail?
Right, then there was more of a shift toward what’s happening outside these traditional “power center” areas. During the 2012 election I was still in Chicago, living near swing states where the candidates were campaigning often. I decided to follow Mitt Romney around rallies in the Midwest because it didn’t seem that different from what I’d already photographed in terms of the spectacle and our understanding of power.
You weren’t working as a member of the press at that point, though were you?
No, I was working privately as a citizen. So logistically, following Romney was a lot easier than following then-Pres. Barack Obama. I wasn’t working as a member of the press anymore so I wasn’t privy to that scheduling information. Because Obama was the incumbent, his staff didn’t announce things ahead of time, so it was really difficult to get information about where he would be and when. I’m guessing they were a lot more guarded for security reasons. Romney was not the incumbent and his rallies would be announced two or three days in advance. That gave me enough time to figure out where I could be.
So what is it that ties all these pictures together and makes them a coherent whole for you?
The rally photos didn’t have neoclassical architectural forms in the pictures anymore, but it was still a lot about spectacle and how manufactured everything is. This is what ties all these pictures together: façades and appearances, and how they influence the way we think about power. It can take many different forms but these different locations, contexts and surface appearances play a big role in how we perceive things.
For example, there’s a photo of someone grasping Mitt Romney’s arm. I’ve always interpreted the gesture as a desperate one that carries with it the hope that the politician will be that person’s savior. These façades are what keep us believing in these systems — this trust we are willing to put in people who are making decisions for the benefit of society.
Then of course there has been a lot of discourse in recent years about erosion of trust in government. The government shut down in the fall of 2013, and I thought that was a pretty fitting place to end the project.
I was having all these conversations about the level of trust in our society and government, and it just seemed like the shutdown was the culmination of everything. It had really taken things to a whole new level, this level of dysfunction and partisan bickering. I felt like I had the pictures I needed.
You made these pictures between 2011 and 2013, but they seem more relevant than ever today.
These themes came so much into play in the most recent election. You think about it and now we’ve elected this reality TV star — this person our culture has created as a celebrity. Everything about celebrity and reality TV is superficial, but this is where we’ve decided to place our trust. Everything culminated in this disaster where politics, celebrity and appearance all folded together.
Were you surprised when Donald Trump got elected or did this project prepare you in some way to anticipate that outcome?
No, I wouldn’t have imagined someone like him getting elected even at the time. I was working on this project keeping in mind that surface appearances play a big role, but now that Trump has been elected I guess even I didn’t fully grasp how important they are.
A lot of people are looking back at the election and trying to figure out what happened and why things turned out the why they did. One question that’s come up is whether the press failed to treat him as a serious candidate and really scrutinize his policy proposals.
Your work also critically examines the press and its role in American politics and power. What is it about “watching the watchdog” that interested you so much during the project?
I think part of that came from my background. I did my Bachelors in Journalism at Indiana University with a focus on fine arts. After graduating I worked for a year as a photojournalist and did some political photography, so I had been in those settings before. It was interesting for me to go to those rallies again but turn the camera on the press.
The pictures in National Trust are more specific than just talking about the press in general, though. I was focusing on TV anchors; that particular part of the press really interested me because it has a lot to do with appearance, even down to hiring decisions.
I was looking at these instances where the reporters’ guard was down and they weren’t conforming to their usual standards for body language, presentation. There’s one of a reporter slumped on the ground. It reminded me of the Dying Gaul sculpture. In another picture a guy is on a step-stool looking absurd with a smug look on his face while the cameraman does testing.
The pictures were really about taking a step back and showing the mechanism behind how these reporters achieve the looks they do. So this is how this reporter is able to get a higher angle and seem like he’s above everybody: just get a step-stool.
It’s fitting that the cover image is of the Supreme Court with a false front. The Supreme Court is supposed to be this non-partisan bulwark of public trust — the last line for justice for “all Americans.” And yet last year the Republican Party took the shocking step of refusing to even hold hearings on a Democratic president’s court nominee.
The image was made back in 2013 around the time of the Inauguration when the Supreme Court building was having renovations done. They printed out a life size façade to cover the construction.
The Merrick Garland fight didn’t happen until last year, but I definitely thought back to the image when the situation was unfolding. It’s my favorite picture of the collection because it really sums everything up: it’s literally a façade.
Thank you so much for your time, Jay!
Thank you!
