Kev Rice (KR)/Dave Smith (DS): Why are there no tangible figures in your photographs?

Matthew Pillsbury (MP: My photographs are a record of my subject’s relative activity or passivity while watching television or working at their computer. If someone were to sit completely still they would be completely tangible. However, that is very rarely the case. I am interested in photography’s ability to capture time and movement in ways different than we perceive. Whether it’s the Muybridge studies of motion, or the long exposures of Abelardo Morrell.

KR/DS: The blank screens in your photographs are reminiscent of depictions of supernatural communication, as for example, in films such as Tobe Hooper’s Poltergeist. Is this kind of reference relevant?

MP: I think the quality of light created by the screens is extremely relevant. For some people, it takes on an almost painful glow that burns the eye. For others, it’s a beautiful illumination onto our everyday lives. I do think it was important to convey communication, whether supernatural or not. I was also not interested in having an image on the screen. I didn’t want to choose a defining image for each show that we watch, and I knew that if I were to attempt a dialogue between the room and the image on the screen, that I would never match the wit of Friedlander’s little screens. Also, I figure the viewer can read the title of the show watched and use their own experience to fill the light.

KR/DS: The screens take on the quality of personification. Do you think of these appliances as being ‘intelligent’?

MP: Well I think the screens take on an individual quality. In many ways individuality is a sign of intelligence.

KR/DS: Why don’t you make portraits?

MP: I think I do make portraits.

KR/DS: In your work, the light source and the subject matter coincide within the objects you depict. Why are the photographs illuminated by their own subject matter?

MP: Well here again, to me the subject matter is more than the screens. It’s about the relationship we have with the screens. That includes the people and the room in which they engage these screens.

KR/DS: Why aren’t they in colour?

MP: Well I have always liked black and white photography. Also, in New York, where the project started, there are many different light sources interplaying in each image: street lamps, traffic lights and stores all cast different coloured lights into the rooms I photographed. Black and white photography has the ability to combine these light sources into a unified experience. I wasn’t interested in having those different light sources competing for the viewer’s attention. I felt like they became a distraction.

KR/DS: Does the idea that the objects surrounding us are less subservient than we think, have any relevance to your practice?

MP: I am not sure I understand this question. I think the objects are very important in each image. In fact, each item is like a piece to a puzzle. So if in my photographs the people are partially defined by their objects, are they, in fact, subservient to their belongings?