Lina Selander.

* 1973, lives and works in Stockholm, SWE 

studied at University of Gothenburg,SWE, Royal Institute of Art, Stockholm, SWE, and at Valand School of Fine Arts, GöteborgGothenburg, SWE


Exhibitions [Selection]:

2012 Selected work 2007-2011, Skånes Konstförening, Malmö, SWE
Anteroom of the Real, Subjective Projections, Bielefelder Kunstverein, Berlin
2011 Lenin’s Lamp Glows In the Peasant’s Hut, Index – The Swedsish Contemporary Art Foundation, Stockholm, SWE
Light Box – Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris, FRA
2010 Around the Cave of the Double Tombs, Vita Kuben, Umeå, SWE

Anteroom of the Real

Date: 2012
Length: 14:00 min.
Format: 16:9
Specifications: Colour, No Sound, Single Channel
Courtesy the artist



In “Anteroom of the Real” Lila Selander uses photographs to tell a tale running backwards in time. The photographs are stacked on a black background, which gives the appearance of a passe-partout frame. Every few seconds the topmost picture is removed by a woman’s hand, revealing the one underneath. Lina Selander takes the viewer “by the hand” and leads them through a sequence of photographs back to the starting point of the tale.

Bit by bit, the viewer is confronted with the catastrophe of the Chernoby atomic power station and its effects. To start with, they see pictures of the deserted, ruined city Prypjat: The camera’s journeys through the empty rooms of a school or a factory show the destruction of the settlement. The tension rises as the sequence of photographs runs towards the final picture. This shows a hand on one of the power station’s control switches, visualising the instant which led to the far-reaching catastrophe of April 26 1986. The film is notable for the absence of sound and its unmoving pictures. In this way the emphasis lies on the photographs shown and their inherent tale.

Daniela Pöstinger





► 1. Your work has been chosen among over 2000 festival entries to participate in VIDEONALE.14. In which context do you prefer to present your work, festival/cinema context or exhibition? And what kind of difference does the respective mode of presentation mean for you / your work?


Generally, I prefer a context sensible to the spatial aspects of the installation of the work. Even if I'm just going to show a video on a screen or a projection, the spatial relations to other objects, how people move in the room, etc., tend to be important. A cinema context, on the other hand, can make it easier for the audience to focus on the film/video, from beginning to end.



► 2. Art can be seen as a mirror that registers and reflects life or as a tool that transforms it. Is there a particular theme, concept or problem your art addresses the most?


I work with questions of representation, history and memory, around topics such as media archaeology, recording techniques, visibility and invisibility.



► 3. In which way is the video medium an excellent possibility to express your intended subjects, especially in contrast to other media you use? Or do you work exclusively with video?


I like the editing involved in making a video; representing and creating time, connecting still and moving images, sounds, texts … I like the montage. I work mainly but not exclusively with video, and even with a video as the main thing, I often relate it to other elements in the room: photos on the wall or in a vitrine, sound from a reel-to-reel tape recorder, a certain type of furniture, curtains, etc.



► 4. If you have the chance to ask the visitors of the VIDEONALE.14 exhibition questions about your own work, what would be your question?


What is a (moving) image? How is (filmic) narration produced? What does the image want?