Fig. 1. Rahuyo ng Mapag-asang Tala. Photograph by Marniel Daguio.
Since 1951, the Shell National Students Art Competition (Shell NSAC) has celebrated the talents of young visual artists by hosting annual competitions and exhibitions for Filipino college students. Some of their winners would grow into successful, well-known artists in adulthood—National Artists Jose Joya and Ang Kiukok, BenCab, Rodel Tapaya, and Maria Taniguchi, among others. While the competition originally featured traditional mediums like painting, watercolor, and sculpture, it introduced a Digital Fine Arts category in 2004, and finally introduced a Photography category in 2023.
There are countless long-running art competitions in the Philippines. It makes one wonder why the esteemed Shell NSAC chose to feature photography only now, when Shell has been a staunch supporter of youth in art for decades. As early as the 1950s, the Art Association of the Philippines (AAP) requested Shell, among other institutions, to conduct training programs for art teachers in public schools.
The aforementioned AAP has also hosted art competitions, and their photography category began in 1953—a full 70 years before Shell NSAC. Another more modern youth-oriented art competition that has featured photography is Vision Petron, hosted by Shell’s competitor. What is interesting to note, however, is that Vision Petron’s photography category was eventually renamed to “Digital Arts”, and now it encompasses everything from digital photography, digital collage, to digital painting.
In 2023, Shell NSAC’s theme was "Galíng Pinoy, Galing Pinoy”. The three judges of the Photography category were Jorrel Legaspi (Deputy Director-General for Museums of the National Museum of the Philippines), Ardie Lopez, and Edwin Tuyay. Lopez and Tuyay are both professional photographers with a background in advertising and photojournalism, though neither of them usually exhibit their works in museums or fine art galleries. Tuyay was also a judge for the photography category of Vision Petron in 2017. This 2017 panel was headed by the celebrated photographer and artist Wig Tysmans.
In 2023, Shell NSAC’s first place Photography winner was Rahuyo ng Mapag-asang Tala by the artist Marniel Daguio. It depicts a large family—two elderly women, six children, no adult men—in a bahay kubo. In the middle of the image, a child stands on a white monobloc chair so that he can hang a neon-green parol made of recycled plastic onto their thatched roof. The rest of his family surround him and gaze up at the parol with solemn expressions. Sunlight streams in through the sides of the bahay kubo and through the holes in the roof, illuminating the scene. They are surrounded by their household possessions—wash basins, a tarpaulin, the bric-a-brac of an average Filipino home. Their casual clothes come in colorful, cartoonish patterns that complement the brightness of the parol.
According to the Shell website, “this image showcases the creativity and value of the culture of Baguio and Tarlac City,” probably referring to the parol made of recycled plastic waste.
The second place winner was Buhay by the artist Jennielyn Liezel Sala. This black and white image depicts a close-up shot of a young plant stem that curls upwards and sprouts a single leaf. The photograph has a shallow depth of field, and so only the plant is in focus. The dark soil fills the foreground and the bottom third of the image, stretching into the background like a skyline’s horizon. According to the Shell website, “this poignant image encapsulates the universal struggle for survival, showcasing the indomitable spirit of even the smallest creatures in the intricate dance of life.” While the subject here is a plant, not a human being, it is an apt metaphor for the Filipinos’ struggle to survive amongst poverty and adversity.
Fig. 2. Buhay. Photograph by Jennielyn Liezel Sala.
According to the Shell website, “this image showcases the creativity and value of the culture of Baguio and Tarlac City,” probably referring to the parol made of recycled plastic waste.
The second place winner was Buhay by the artist Jennielyn Liezel Sala. This black and white image depicts a close-up shot of a young plant stem that curls upwards and sprouts a single leaf. The photograph has a shallow depth of field, and so only the plant is in focus. The dark soil fills the foreground and the bottom third of the image, stretching into the background like a skyline’s horizon. According to the Shell website, “this poignant image encapsulates the universal struggle for survival, showcasing the indomitable spirit of even the smallest creatures in the intricate dance of life.” While the subject here is a plant, not a human being, it is an apt metaphor for the Filipinos’ struggle to survive amongst poverty and adversity.
Fig. 3. Pahiyas ng Kamay. Photograph by Connie Grace Carlo
There is no such thing as a completely objective art competition, since each judge has their own preferences. The 2023 Photography winners do not necessarily reveal what is the best of Filipino student photography. Rather, they reveal the gaze of Shell as an institution and the gaze of Shell NSAC towards the medium. They reveal what Shell NSAC thinks photography’s worth, purpose, and style should be. In other words, like with any other institutional art competition, the winners reveal what Shell NSAC believes photography should look like.
Consider that two out of the three judges are professional photographers who work in advertising and photojournalism. Does this mean that they lean towards photography that is immediately striking, documentary, and obvious—perhaps even commercial?
The three winners have several things in common. Their images are all carefully posed tableaus, almost like paintings. The subjects are centered and in full focus. While the models are clearly posed, the events are realistic and believable, part of everyday life. There is an overall positive message even in the face of poverty, obsolescence due to technology, or general adversity. The message must be obvious; the subject immediately draws the viewer’s eye to the center of the image.
Second, as the theme specifies “Galíng Pinoy, Galing Pinoy”, then the images must be related to Filipino people or Filipino culture. We must consider how Shell positions what being Filipino is.
The captions explain that these are Filipino subjects—families from Tarlac City and Baguio, or a Filipino wood-carver with an iconic santo behind him. But the one thing all three images have in common is the theme of resilience. There is the resilience that allows a family to create parols out of recycled plastic waste, resilience that allows a wood-carver to continue his craft by hand despite the rise of machinery, and
resilience of a small plant to sprout towards the sun. Is resilience such an important part of the Filipino identity? Why not award straightforward photographs featuring Filipino cuisine, native dances, or traditional clothing? Can’t a Filipino showcase their talents without also implying some sort of struggle in their personal circumstances? In an institutional art competition, Shell still chooses which interpretation of the theme is worthy of winning.
Furthermore, there is no abstraction, no fantastical elements, no breaking the traditional rules of photography. The artist becomes an invisible eye, as if they had just happened upon a picturesque scene and taken a snapshot while passing by. The captions do not mention what personal connection the student-photographers have with the scene, or how they came across their subjects.
While the three photographs have different treatments in editing—saturated colors, using black and white, or emphasizing shadows—their styles cannot otherwise be easily distinguished from one another, unlike the way that one can distinguish art styles in paintings. One can easily differentiate a BenCab artwork from an Ang Kiukok—and both painters won the Shell NSAC in their youth.
The students’ lives do not feature in the image; they are not even mentioned in the captions. In a way, the photographer’s persona becomes anonymous, second to the image and the way it connects to Shell’s theme.
Commercial photography and photojournalism both lay emphasis on the transparency of the photographer. In these fields, the photographer is not meant to interfere or shine as the star of the show; they simply exist to take the one shot that elevates the subject above all else.
Photojournalism and commercial photography must also have a clarity in style and narrative. There is no space for playing with abstractions or blurry images that viewers can’t easily identify. Ambiguity is avoided, because ambiguity cannot easily show which product is being sold or which subject’s headline story is being shared. However, these rules don’t apply to fine art photography. It begs the question — why did Shell NSAC not choose to include a third photographer judge with career experience in mounting fine art photography exhibitions in galleries or museums?
Carina Evangelista states in her essay titled The Silverlens Foundation Photography Grants for 2007: History, Portraiture, Installation and Still Life:
“Photography is a medium we typically associate with the act of recording or capturing a subject, an event, or a moment. And so the stereotypical notions of photography are studio portraiture, news photography, and commercial photography (from print ads to wedding or graduation photo packages).”
Given that Shell chose a photojournalist and commercial photographer as their judges, then perhaps the institution only has this stereotypical notion of photography. Furthermore, since the category was only introduced in 2023, perhaps Shell has only considered photography as “fine art” in recent years. This is surprising, given that their Digital Art award began in 2004. Clearly, the use of advanced technology is not an issue. Perhaps their issue was the medium of photography itself, and its ability to immediately capture an image with one click of the shutter.
In the same essay, Carina Evangelista also says,
“[...] an artist who has served as a judge over the years observed that the unfortunate result of these competitions is the phenomenon of 'cloning' or 'copying.' Many young artists tend to paint or sculpt in the fashion of the previous year's winner, with the misconception that doing so would be the key to the prize money. Year in and year out, finding any number of such clones amongst the entries is virtually anathema in a field that ideally feeds on creativity, originality, and innovation.”
Both Shell’s vision as an institution and the assigned judges will affect the types of winners that emerge. If future students will only see photojournalism or commercial types being awarded, then they might assume that this is the best or most prestigious type of photography. It might prevent them from wanting to experiment with more abstract, non-commercial styles, since clearly those will not win. This is further compounded by the fact that photography courses in local universities are often geared towards advertising. Thus, young students have little encouragement to explore fine art photography or bend the traditional rules in their art.
Admittedly, this is only Shell NSAC’s first year in featuring photography. The institution’s preferences cannot be confirmed until more entries are rewarded. Shell may not be an art institution, but it is an important proponent of art amongst the Filipino youth. Therefore, it would be ideal if they allowed for more diversity in judges in the future. Hopefully, in the coming years, its treatment towards photography will evolve and allow for a more experimental slant—the same way it has allowed for more innovation in its paintings and sculptures throughout these decades.
May 2024
コメント