I wondered how to deal with the complexity of the institution, already charged with affective connotations, experiences, tensions and conflicts. How to intervene in that context, which was also the workplace of those I was addressing, with all that was at stake for them. If I was attentive, responsive, respectful enough. Or if anyway my invitation to take part in the project was always already a burden. If my intention to consider the individual specificities was contradicted by targeting a specific group of workers, the members of which are necessarily defined on the basis of their position in the institution. If I was already imposing an ‘identity’, as cleaners, technicians and maintenance workers, to the individuals I was addressing. And, in any case, how to bring forward the specificities of each person without their institutional roles being deliberately removed or ignored. If, after all, such removal would be so bad. If all portraits operate a reduction of the complexity of the sitters (and if so, what then makes a good portrait). If I was able to avoid misrepresentations. If I was able to look at my own biases, if they were sufficiently acknowledged. If I succeeded in activating forms of subjectivity that were respectful towards (but not reduced to) the social roles prescribed by the institution. If these words will be able to express my gratitude to those who offered a glimpse of possible answers: Abas Ali Malik Lunde, Anita Nygård, Annika Isaksson Pirtti, Emil Gustafsson, Kaja Glenne Lund, Julie Søbo, Marianne Kristin Fjeld, Nan Seng Ngin Thanhtun, Nicholas Kristoffer Fox, Oddvar Røsten, Ove Lidvard Gjøsdal, Sigurd Schiøth, Tom Trøbråten, Tone Kristin Veisten, Unni Luqman, Vidar Iversen.
- Gallery of Emmployees, 2020