Rohkeus-blogi luettavissa säätiön verkkosivuilla

Rohkeus-blogiamme voit lukea nykyään osoitteessa http://www.koneensaatio.fi/rohkeat-avaukset/rohkeus-blogi/

You can read the boldness blog at http://www.koneensaatio.fi/en/bold-initiatives/boldness-blog/

Is knowledge of Russian an advantage or disadvantage in the Finnish labour market?

The answer is not as obvious as you may think. It all depends on your ethnicity.

If you were born and raised in Finland, and you have a Finnish name and Finnish qualifications then knowledge of Russian will be an advantage if you are looking for a job. However, if you have a Russian-sounding name and foreign qualifications then knowledge of Russian will often be a disadvantage, even if you are looking for the same types of jobs.

This is what Inga Jasinskaja-Lahti, researcher of social psychology at the university of Helsinki, told us.

Leif Jakobsson/Swedish Cultural Foundation in Finland gave the opening speech at the Fram med språken (Languages out in the open) seminar on 27 April. Jakobsson explained that Finland has always been a multilingual country. In today’s multicultural Finland, when it comes to both the old and the new minorities, it is especially important to broaden our horizons, discover the problems and prepare a strategy with respect to the future.

It was a very interesting forum. Even though I am sufficiently familiar with the problems faced by minorities as I am both Russian and a Swedish-speaking Finn, there was a lot of new and useful information.

The Estonian participants at the seminar had some interesting observations. Järvi Lipasti from the Tuglas society pointed out that the Estonians in Finland often “disappear into the crowds”. You don’t see this as much with Russian speakers, for example. Perhaps, Estonian culture is not considered anything “big” or exciting by the majority population? Estonia is a small country. I, myself, have always had the idea that people with Estonian as a mother tongue do not merge very easily into the rest of the population in Finland and that it is an advantage to have Estonian as a mother tongue, considering that it is related to the Finnish language. But it is not that easy.

The Russian speakers in Finland do not just come from Russia, they also come from Ukraine, Estonia and other countries. There are also Ingrians. In Russia they were known as tjuchna, but in Finland they suddenly became “Russians”. This is a phenomenon that Jewish emigrants also know from personal experience: those who moved to the USA from the former Soviet Union are still known as Russians even after twenty years.    

Petr Potchinchtchikov/Faro criticised the attitude to Russians as a resource. The media often says that it is important for Finns to study Russian. At the same time the available resources are used ineffectively: the competent Russian-speaking people who live in Finland are not trusted enough regarding their knowledge of Russian. Instead, companies often want to employ Finns who can speak Russian.

Several participants explained that immigrants should not be represented by native Finns purely as other immigrants in different contexts. The political factors should not be misunderstood: among the Russian-speaking people in Finland there are people with different views who may not necessarily approve of Russian politics.

The discussions also dealt with identity problems and prejudices. If you have difficult neighbours, it is not enough to change your name: they will then find something else to complain about. As an immigrant you can never be sufficiently anonymous. Therefore you must face the prejudices and create your own strategies in everyday life. The police, social services and other structures in society should also employ people with immigrant backgrounds who have personal knowledge of the situation of minorities.

Zinaida Lindén, author, publicist, translator

The text is translated from the original text in Swedish:https://rohkeuskoneensaatio.wordpress.com/2015/05/12/ar-kunskaper-i-ryska-en-fordel-eller-en-nackdel-pa-arbetsmarknaden-i-finland/

Zinaida Linden, Photo: Andrej Scherbakov-Parland

Advertisement

Является ли знание русского языка преимуществом или недостатком на финском рабочем рынке?

Ответ не столь очевиден, как кажется. Он зависит от этнического происхождения соискателя. Для того, кто родился в Финляндии, а также имеет финскую фамилию и финский диплом, знание русского дает преимущества при поисках работы. Для обладателя русской фамилии то же самое место работы может оказаться недоступным.

Об этом с фактами в руках рассказала Инга Ясинская-Лахти, сотрудник кафедры социальной психологии Хельсинкского университета.

Семинар «Языки напоказ» 27 апреля открыли Анна Таласниеми (Фонд «Коне») и Лейф Якобссон (Шведский Фонд Культуры Финляндии). Финляндия всегда была многоязычной, подчеркнул он. В сегодняшней Финляндии особенно важно расширить горизонты, выявить имеющиеся проблемы, выработать стратегию с прицелом на будущее, учитывая интересы страны в целом, а также интересы старых и новых меньшинств.

Форум получился интереснейший. Будучи одновременно и русской, и «финляндской шведкой», я не понаслышке знакома с проблемами меньшинств, но на этом семинаре узнала много нового и полезного.

Участники родом из Эстонии – в частности, Ярви Липасти (Общество им.Тугласа) рассказали, что эстонцы в Финляндии нередко как бы растворяются в массе. Они не так заметны, как, например, русскоязычные. Может быть, культура эстонцев не воспринимается большинством населения как нечто «великое» и интересное? Эстония – небольшая страна. Я всегда полагала, что тем, у кого эстонский – родной, легко интегрироваться в финское общество, что языковое родство – это лишь преимущество. Однако, и здесь есть свои подводные камни.

Русскоязычные жители Финляндии происходят не только из России, но также из Украины, Эстонии и других стран. Здесь также есть ингерманландцы. В России их называли «чухной», в Финляндии называют «русскими». Это явление знакомо и евреям, переехавшим из СССР или России в США: они становятся «русскими» в глазах местного населения.

Петр Починщиков выступил с критикой отношения к использованию русского языка в обществе. Нередко СМИ подчеркивают важность изучения русского языка финнами. В то же время, уже имеющиеся человеческие ресурсы не употребляются. Компетентные русскоязычные жители, прекрасно знающие финский язык, не часто получают возможность использовать свои знания в работе. В Финляндии слишком часто стремятся взять на ту же работу этнического финна со знанием русского языка.

Многие участники семинара указывали на необходимость более широкого использования иммигрантов в структурах общества. Интересы иммигрантов должны представлять не финны, а люди иммигрантского происхождения. Политический момент не должен быть препятствием к восприятию русскоязычных в Финляндии: среди них есть приверженцы различных взглядов, далеко не все одобряют официальную политику нынешнего российского руководства.

В дискуссиях звучали также темы идентичности и предрассудков. Недостаточно сменить имя, если у тебя недоброжелательные соседи. Они всегда найдут, к чему придраться. Иммигрант никогда не станет «достаточно» анонимным. Необходимо вырабатывать собственную стратегию в общении с теми, у которых есть предрассудки. В то же время, полиция, социальные службы и другие структуры общества должны принимать на работу компетентных иммигрантов,изнутри знающих положение и проблемы языковых меньшинств.

Зинаида Линден

прозаик, публицист, переводчик

Är kunskaper i ryska en fördel eller en nackdel på arbetsmarknaden i Finland?

Svaret är inte så uppenbart som man skulle kunna tro. Det beror på vad man har för etnicitet.

Om man är född och uppvuxen i Finland, med finländskt namn och finländsk examen, är ryskan en fördel då man söker jobb. Har man ett ryskklingande namn och en utländsk examen är ryskan ofta en nackdel då man söker samma jobb.

Det berättade Inga Jasinskaja-Lahti , forskare inom socialpsykologi från Helsingforsuniversitet.

Seminariet Fram med språken 27.4 invigdes av Leif Jakobsson/ Svenska Kulturfonden. Jakobsson påpekade att Finland alltid hade varit flerspråkigt. I dagens mångkulturellla Finland är det särskilt viktigt att vidga våra horisonter, kartlägga problemen, utarbeta en strategi med tanke på framtiden, när det gäller både de gamla och de nya minoriteterna.

Det blev ett engagerande forum. Trots att jag är tillräckligt insatt i minoritetsproblemen, eftersom jag är både rysk och ”finlandssvensk”, fick jag höra en hel del nytt – och nyttigt.

De estniska seminariedeltagarna kom med en några intressanta observationer. Järvi Lipasti / Tuglas seura påpekade att Finlands ester ofta ”försvinner i mängden”. De syns inte lika mycket som t ex de ryskspråkiga. Kanske upplevs esternas kultur inte som något ”stort” och spännande av majoritetsbefolkningen? Estland är ett litet land. Själv hade jag alltid trott att folk med estniska som modersmål smälte in så lätt i Finland, att det var bara en fördel att ha estniska som modersmål, med tanke på språksläktskapet. Så enkelt är det inte.

De ryskspråkiga i Finland kommer inte bara från Ryssland utan också från Ukraina, Estland och andra länder. Dessutom finns här ingermanländare. I Ryssland hade de kallats tjuchna, i Finland blev de plötsligt ”ryssar”. Det är ett fenomen som även judiska utvandrare känner inifrån – de som flyttat från det forna Sovjetunionen till USA: efter tjugo år i landet kallas de fortfarande för Russians.

Petr Potchinchtchikov/ Faro kritiserade inställningen till ryskan som resurs. Ofta påpekar medierna att det är viktigt för finländare att studera ryska. Samtidigt används de befintliga resurserna ineffektivt: de kompetenta ryskspråkiga personer som är bosatta i Finland anlitas inte tillräckligt ofta som ”ryskkunniga”. I stället strävar man ofta efter att anställa finländare med kunskaper i ryska.

Flera deltagare påpekade att invandrare borde representeras inte av infödda finländare av andra invandrare i olika sammanhang. Det politiska momentet får inte missuppfattas: bland de ryskspråkiga i Finland finns folk med olika åsikter som inte nödvändigtvis godkänner Rysslands politik.

Diskussionerna handlade bl a om identitetsproblem och fördomar. Det räcker inte att byta namn om man har besvärliga grannar: då hittar de på något annat att ta fasta på. Som invandrare kan man aldrig bli anonym nog. Det gäller att bemöta fördomarna och utarbeta egna strategier i vardagen. Samtidigt borde polisen, socialtjänsten och andra samhällsstrukturer anställa personer med invandrarbakgrund som känner minoriteternas situation inifrån.

Zinaida Linden, foto: Andrej Scherbakov-Parland

Zinaida Lindén,
författare, publicist, översättare

Jumps on ice, in our thinking and in language

The other week I visited my grandparents in Prague, the place where I was born. There was a big party: my grandmother had received a very important medal of honour for her life’s work as a doctor. At the same time the World Figure Skating Championships were being held in Shanghai. My grandmother, who is a huge fan of figure skating, spent her mornings in front of the TV watching the various stages of the championships. One morning I sat there with her and wondered why. Why don’t I enjoy watching figure skating as much as she does?

One aspect that I think prevents me from enjoying figure skating is the commentator. The thing is, I don’t understand what they are saying. The skater jumps and the commentator says:“Double Salchow.” Or:“Triple axel.” Or sometimes even:“Quadruple toe loop.” I know these words as I have heard them many times before – therefore they are part of my language. But I don’t actually know what they mean. To me they mean pretty much the same thing, i.e. some kind of a jump, where the skater spins very rapidly in the air and then lands on one foot. I only understand the first parts of these words (double, triple and quadruple) and have naturally come to the conclusion that the higher the number the more difficult the jump. But for me, Salchows, axels and toe loops are shrouded in mystery. I know the words, but I do not know what the commentator is referring to with these words.

This got me thinking more generally about the significance of linguistic concepts regarding the way in which we analyse the world around us. So figure skating got me thinking about my own area of research! In my project I study the status of linguistic categories in our thinking and particularly their effect on how we perceive and remember what we have seen. I study this with cognitive tests carried out on test subjects in a psychological laboratory. The test subjects represent three different language groups: Finnish, Swedish and Czech. The purpose is to find out whether the speakers of these languages answer the tests in an identical way or whether there are differences which can be explained by the various manifestations of grammatical categories (grammatical gender, for example) in the languages in question.

The thing that draws me to this subject is that it is relevant to so many areas of life. Even figure skating. Even though I will not be studying the experiences of figure skating viewers in my project, many of the research questions in my project could, in principle, also be adapted to this purpose: Does my viewing experience differ from the commentator’s viewing experience because we use different words to describe a jump? If I were to learn the meanings of the figure skating terms would this automatically supersede my current primitive way of perceiving figure skating jumps? Would the fact that the grammatical gender of the Czech equivalent of the word toe loop is masculine while in Finnish it has no gender, for example, affect my viewing experience? If I were to learn all the terms used by the experts would I start to enjoy figure skating more?

I asked my grandmother whether she knows the names of all the different jumps. She said:“Personally, the figure skating jumps are not that important for me. I like to watch the graceful movements.” It was an excellent reply. It made me realise that I had, maybe slightly without reason, assumed that understanding the terms had a positive effect, in general, on the viewing experience. However, in the same way, learning the meanings of these new terms could also spoil my aesthetic experience. Perhaps understanding these terms would force me to watch figure skating mainly on the basis of individual technical elements, which would take my attention away from the overall experience. Perhaps my current level of enjoyment is the highest that I can achieve when watching figure skating.

My research is not likely to provide an answer to this particular question, but that is not the purpose either. It is just nice to think about such associations that are linked to my research.

I will now take back what I said about not enjoying figure skating. Because I enjoy thinking about the relationship between language and the mind, figure skating did, somehow bring me enjoyment in this way.

Tomas Lehecka
(Translated to English from the original text in Finnish: https://rohkeuskoneensaatio.wordpress.com/2015/04/16/hyppyja-jaalla-mielessa-ja-kielessa/)

Photo: Niclas Rantala

PhD. Tomas Lehecka received a grant from Kone Foundation in autumn 2014 for his project The Effects of Grammatical Categories on Cognition: Are All Allomorphs Cognitively Equal? (Kieliopillisten kategorioiden vaikutus ajatteluun: Ovatko kaikki allomorfit kognitiivisesti samanarvoisia?) 

Hyppyjä jäällä, mielessä ja kielessä

Olin toissa viikolla käymässä isovanhempieni luona synnyinkaupungissani Prahassa. Kyseessä oli iso juhla; isoäitini sai merkittävän kunniamerkin elämäntyöstään lääkärinä. Samaan aikaan Shanghaissa kisattiin taitoluistelun maailmanmestaruuskisat. Isoäitini, joka on suuri taitoluistelun ystävä, istui aamupäivät television ääressä katsellen kisojen eri vaiheita. Yhtenä aamupäivänä istuin siinä hänen seuranaan ja mietin miksi. Miksi minä en nauti taitoluistelun katsomisesta yhtä paljon kuin hän?

Yksi asia, jonka luulen minua estävän nauttimasta taitoluistelusta, ovat kommentaattorit. En nimittäin ymmärrä, mitä he sanovat. Luistelija hyppää ja kommentaattori toteaa: ”Kaksoissalchow.” Tai: ”Kolmoisaxel.” Tai joskus jopa: ”Neloistulppi.” Tunnen nämä sanat, koska olen ne kuullut monta kertaa; ne ovat siis osa kieltäni. Mutta en oikeastaan tiedä mitä ne tarkoittavat. Minulle ne kaikki merkitsevät suunnilleen samaa, eli jonkinlaista hyppyä, jonka aikana pyöritään hurjan nopeasti ilmassa ja sitten tullaan yhdelle jalalle alas. Ymmärrän vain sanojen alkuosat (kaksois-, kolmois– ja nelois-) ja ajattelen luonnollisesti, että mitä korkeampi luku, sitä vaikeampi hyppy varmaan on. Mutta salchowit, axelit ja tulpit ynnä muut ovat minulle hämärän peitossa. Minulla on siis sanat, mutta minulla ei ole käsitteitä, joihin kommentaattori näillä sanoilla viittaa.

Tämä sai minut miettimään yleisemmin kielellisten käsitteiden merkitystä tavallemme jäsentää maailmaa. Siis taitoluistelu sai minut miettimään omaa tutkimusalaani! Projektissani tutkin kielellisten kategorioiden asemaa ihmisten ajattelussa sekä erityisesti niiden vaikutusta siihen, miten havainnoimme ja muistamme näkemäämme. Tutkin tätä kognitiivisin testein, joita koehenkilöt tekevät psykologian laboratoriossa. Koehenkilöt edustavat kolmea eri kieliryhmää: suomea, ruotsia ja tshekkiä. Tarkoitukseni on selvittää, suoriutuvatko näiden kielten puhujat testeistä identtisesti, vai onko heidän välillään eroja, jotka voitaisiin selittää kieliopillisten kategorioiden (esimerkiksi kieliopillisen suvun) erilaisilla ilmenemistavoilla kyseisissä kielissä.

Se mikä aiheessa minua viehättää on, että se liittyy niin moneen elämänalueeseen. Jopa taitoluisteluun. Vaikka en omassa tutkimuksessani tulekaan tutkimaan taitoluistelukatsojien kokemuksia, voitaisiin monet projektini tutkimuskysymyksistä periaatteessa mukauttaa tähänkin tarkoitukseen: Eroaako minun katselukokemukseni kommentaattorin katselukokemuksesta siksi, että me käytämme eri sanoja kuvaillaksemme jotakin hyppyä? Mikäli oppisin taitoluistelutermien merkityksen, syrjäyttäisivätkö nämä käsitteet automaattisesti nykyisen kehittymättömän tapani hahmottaa luisteluhyppyjä? Vaikuttaako katselukokemukseeni se, että esimerkiksi tshekissä vastine sanalle tulppi on kieliopilliselta suvultaan maskuliini, kun taas suomessa se on suvuton? Jos sisäistäisin kaikki asiantuntijoiden käyttämät käsitteet, tulisinko silloin nauttimaan taitoluistelusta enemmän?

Kysyin isoäidiltäni, tietääkö hän kaikkien eri hyppyjen nimet. Hän sanoi: ”Minusta hypyt eivät ole taitoluistelussa niin tärkeitä. Minä pidän sulavan liikkeen katselusta.” Vastaus oli erinomainen. Se sai minut huomaamaan, että olin ehkä vähän perusteettomasti ajatellut käsitteiden vaikutuksen katselukokemukseen olevan yleensä positiivinen. Yhtä lailla uusien käsitteiden sisäistäminen voisi kuitenkin myös haitata esteettistä kokemustani. Ehkä nämä käsitteet pakottaisivat minut hahmottamaan luistelua liikaa yksittäisten teknisten elementtien kautta, jotka veisivät huomioni kokonaisuudesta. Ehkä nykyinen nautintotasoni onkin jo korkein, jonka minä voin taitoluistelua katsoessani saavuttaa.

Tähän kyseiseen asiaan tutkimukseni tuskin antaa vastauksen, eikä se ole tarkoituskaan. Tällaisia tutkimukseen liittyviä mielleyhtymiä on vain hauska pohtia.

Lopuksi otan takaisin sanani, että en nauti taitoluistelusta. Koska nautin kielen ja mielen välisen suhteen pohtimisesta, taitoluistelu tavallaan toi minulle tässä nautintoa.

Kuva: Niclas Rantala

Tomas Lehecka

Filosofian tohtori, kielentutkija Tomas Lehecka sai Koneen Säätiöltä apurahan syksyllä 2014 hankkeeseensa Kieliopillisten kategorioiden vaikutus ajatteluun: Ovatko kaikki allomorfit kognitiivisesti samanarvoisia?

Is the requirement for ecological photographic art narrow-minded?

Exhibition To the Third Generation at The Finnish Museum of Photography 30.1. –12.4.2015. Photo: Sanni Seppo

The Festival of Political Photography took a bold stand at the Finnish Museum of Photography. Most of the photos at the exhibition were printed on cotton-based paper and nailed to the wall unframed, without mounting. This style of hanging bewildered and offended some visitors. They felt that it was inappropriate for a museum and demeaning to the works of photographic art. The purpose, however, was to provoke discussion about ecological photography.

Awareness of the environmental impact of photography arose in the 1990s. Before that, photographers had casually handled chemicals in their darkrooms that were thick with cigarette smoke without giving a second thought to their environmental effects. In 1994, a working group of the Finnish Academy of Fine Arts published the handbook Ecophoto, a compilation of the basic principles of environmentally friendly photography: chemicals must not be released into the environment, respiratory organs must be protected, and each darkroom should be shared by several photographers. Recycling bins and respirators soon became standard features of darkrooms.

Today, in the age of digital imaging, photography is more popular than ever as an art form. With digital photography, chemicals have practically become obsolete and recycling and ecological issues have become figures of speech. However, the environmental effects of photography are rarely discussed, even though the endless need for new equipment, among other factors, burdens the environment. The newest cameras always allow for even larger, higher-quality prints. The previous models, even if purchased only recently, are not good enough even for charity.

The current view of photographic art has had a dramatic effect on exhibitions and the way in which the public views photographs in an exhibition space.

Photo: Sanni Seppo

Photographs have become works of art that are usually made available in editions. An edition is a commercial agreement on making a specific photograph available only in a predetermined, publicly announced number of copies. Its purpose is to prevent unrestricted copying and ensure that the work of photographic art retains its value. Photographs in editions are rare treasures, and exhibitions seek to showcase their quality as objects of value, in addition to displaying impressive images. Sturdy mounting, acrylic coating, smoothed frames and non-reflective museum glass create an impression of high quality.

An exhibition is a place where photographs can be placed on the stage. An exhibition space is supposed to highlight photographs as something other than images that can be copied and distributed infinitely. Impressive shapes enhance this effect by distancing a photograph from the daily stream of images that surrounds us.

People have specific expectations of exhibition spaces at museums, as museums are seen as places that show how works of culture that are exhibited and preserved for future generations should be appreciated and protected. Prints nailed to a wall – no matter how impressive they are – do not necessarily meet these expectations of appreciation, even if they allow visitors to perceive the feel of the material and the difference in tones in the best possible way.

In terms of environmental effects, these expectations make the choice of exhibition materials many times more difficult. The selection of printing materials is wide, and the materials are usually highly durable. The most significant problems are related to mounting. Aluminium and plastic compounds are the most commonly used mounting materials. The processing of aluminium is highly energy-intensive, and its extraction may cause local environmental catastrophes. The use of plastic compounds is equally questionable.

Photo: Sanni Seppo

Is the requirement for ethical and environmentally friendly art restrictive and narrow-minded? Are the environmental effects of art so marginal that choices of materials are not globally significant? Mounting companies do not seem to understand the question of more ecological choices. Not yet, anyway.

When works of photographic art are produced and exhibited, what should be the focus of attention? How should photographs be presented to make an impact on viewers? What are we looking at in photos on a wall in an exhibition space? These are the important issues that we discussed in conjunction with the Festival of Political Photography. If we agree that the questions of power and responsibility related to presenting and viewing photographs are important issues related to exhibitions, we will think carefully about how to present photographs in conjunction with each exhibition. Each time, we will ask who and what purpose the works of photographic art serve.

This discussion continues on our website. We challenge all those who are interested in participating and finding good answers.

When the Festival of Political Photography exhibition is dismantled and the prints are packed up and sent back to the photographers, we can be pleased with our carbon footprint once again. Transporting only prints consumes less fuel, and prints need less storage space. Small is also beautiful.

Anna-Kaisa Rastenberger and Sanni Seppo

The work group of political photography: Sanni Seppo, Anna-Kaisa Rastenberger and
Tiina Rauhala. Ulla Jaakkola is missing from the photo. Photo: Heikki Pölönen

Onko vaatimus valokuvataiteen ekologisuudesta ahdasmielistä?

Poliittisen valokuvan festivaalin Kolmanteen polveen -näyttely, Suomen valokuvataiteen museo 30.1. – 12.4. 2015. Kuva: Sanni Seppo

Poliittisen valokuvan festivaali otti rohkeasti kantaa näyttelyripustuksessaan Suomen valokuvataiteen museolla. Suurin osa näyttelyn valokuvista oli vedostettu puuvillapohjaiselle paperille ja naulattu suoraan kiinni seinään pohjustamattomina ja kehystämättöminä. Ripustustapa herätti joissakin katsojissa kummastusta ja paheksuntaa. Se koettiin hienoja kuvia halventavana tekona, joka ei sovi museon näyttelytilaan. Kyseessä oli kuitenkin keskustelun avaus valokuvataiteen ekologisuudesta.

Valokuvan ympäristövaikutuksiin herättiin 1990-luvulla. Sitä ennen valokuvaajat läträsivät tupakansavuisissa pimiöissä huolettomasti erilaisten kemioiden katkussa. Vuonna 1994 Kuvataideakatemian työryhmä kirjoitti oppaan nimeltä Suuri valokuvausvihkonen ecophoto (1994), joka kokosi perusasiat: kemikaaleja ei pidä päästää ympäristöön, hengityselimiä tulee suojella eikä jokainen tarvitse omaa pimiötä vaan kimppapimiöissä on hauskempaa. Nopeasti kierrätysastioista ja hengityssuojaimista tuli pimiöiden arkea.

Nykyään digikuvauksen aikana valokuva on suositumpi myös taiteen tekemisen muotona kuin koskaan aiemmin. Digikuvan myötä kemioista on päästy lähes kokonaan eroon, ekologisuus ja kierrätys ovat tulleet arkikieleen, mutta valokuvataiteen tekemisen yhteydessä niistä puhutaan hyvin harvoin. Kuitenkin tällä hetkellä valokuvataiteessa ympäristöä kuluttaa esimerkiksi loputon uusien laitteiden hankkimisen kierre. Kameroiden viimeisimmät mallit mahdollistavat suuremmat ja laadukkaammat printit. Eilen hankitut tuliterät laitteet eivät enää tänään kelpaa edes hyväntekeväisyyteen.

Nykyinen käsitys valokuvataiteesta on radikaalisti vaikuttanut myös valokuvanäyttelyihin ja yleisön tapaan katsoa valokuvia näyttelytilassa.

Kuva: Sanni Seppo

Valokuvista on tullut taide-esineitä, jotka on useimmiten editioitu. Editio on kaupallinen sopimus siitä, että tiettyä valokuvaa tuotetaan vain etukäteen sovittu ja julkisesti ilmoitettu määrä. Edition tavoitteena on taata valokuvateoksen arvon säilyminen estämällä valokuvien loputon monistaminen. Editioitu valokuva on harvinainen arvoesine, joten näyttelyissä halutaan esittää paitsi vaikuttavia kuvia, myös itse arvoesineen laatua. Jämäkät pohjustukset, akryylipäällysteet, hiotut kehykset ja heijastamattomat museolasit luovat tuntua laadusta.

Näyttely on paikka asettaa valokuva näyttämölle. Näyttelytilan halutaan korostavan valokuvan luonnetta muuna kuin loputtomasti monistettavana ja levitettävänä kuvana. Näyttävät muotoratkaisut tehostavat tätä antamalla valokuvalle etäisyyttä arkisesta kuvavirrasta.

Museon näyttelytilaan kohdistuu erityisiä odotuksia, koska museota ajatellaan paikkana, jonka tehtävä on näyttää miten näytteille asetettua ja jälkipolville säilytettävää kulttuuria tulee arvostaa ja suojella. Seinään naulatut printit – kuinka upeasti vedostettuina tahansa – eivät välttämättä vastaa käsitystä arvostuksesta, vaikka ne katsojille sallisivatkin materiaalin tunnun ja valokuvan sävyerojen näkemisen parhaalla mahdollisella tavalla.

Edellä mainittujen vaatimusten paineessa näyttelymateriaalien ekologisten valintojen vaikeus moninkertaistuu. Tulostusmateriaaleja on paljon ja ne ovat yleensä hyvin säilyviä. Suurimmat ongelmat koskevat pohjustusta. Alumiini ja muovisekoitteet ovat yleisimmin käytetyt pohjustusmateriaalit. Alumiinin jalostaminen kuluttaa valtavasti energiaa ja sen louhiminen voi aiheuttaa paikallisen ympäristökatastrofin. Muovisekoitteiden käyttö on yhtä arveluttavaa.

Kuva: Sanni Seppo

Onko vaatimus taiteen eettisyydestä ja ekologisuudesta rajoittavaa ja ahdasmielistä? Ovatko taiteen ympäristövaikutukset niin marginaalisia, että maapallon mittakaavassa valinnoilla ei ole merkitystä? Pohjustusfirmat eivät tunnu ymmärtävän kysymystä ekologisemmasta pohjustusvalinnasta. Vielä.

Kun valokuvateoksia tuotetaan ja esitetään, mihin sitten pitäisi kiinnittää huomio? Millä tavoin esitettyinä valokuvat vaikuttavat katsojiin? Mitä katsomme valokuvissa näyttelytilan seinällä? Nämä ovat tärkeitä kysymyksiä, joita olemme Poliittisen valokuvan festivaalin yhteydessä pohtineet. Jos ajattelemme, että valokuvan esittämiseen ja katsomiseen liittyvät kysymykset vallasta ja vastuusta ovat tärkeitä valokuvanäyttelyihin liittyviä asioita, tulemme jokaisen näyttelyn yhteydessä miettimään valokuvien esittämisen tapaa tarkasti. Pohdimme jokainen kerta, kenen ja minkä asian palveluksessa esillä olevat valokuvataideteokset ovat näyttelyssä?

Tätä keskustelua jatkamme myös nettisivuillamme. Haastamme kaikki kiinnostuneet osallistumaan ja etsimään hyviä vastauksia.

Kun Poliittisen valokuvan festivaalin näyttely puretaan, pakataan ja vedokset lähetetään kuvaajille, on hiilijalanjälkemme taas puntarissa ja voimme olla tyytyväisiä. Pelkkien vedosten kuljettaminen kuluttaa vähemmän polttoainetta, varastointi vie vähemmän tilaa. Pienikin on kaunista.

Anna-Kaisa Rastenberger ja Sanni Seppo

Poliittisen valokuvan työryhmä: Sanni Seppo, Anna-Kaisa Rastenberger ja
Tiina Rauhala. Kuvasta puuttuu Ulla Jaakkola. Kuva: Heikki Pölönen

Research throws light on the importance of darkness

Once again we are leaving the winter’s darkness behind us. Natural light, a symbol of growth and life, is becoming more abundant. Artificial light, on the other hand, sends a powerful message of technical expertise and progress towards a better future. Electric light especially has been a symbol of progress since the days of the incandescent bulb commercialised by Thomas Alva Edison.

Lately, however, cracks have appeared in the story of light. New concepts have emerged: disruptive lighting and light pollution. Some research papers have even expressed concern about the potential harmfulness of LED technology. LED lights emit short-wave bluish light to which many organisms are sensitive. Another threat is the unbridled increase in outdoor lighting as energy-efficient and easy-to-use LED lights become more common. Is darkness under threat?

We decided to expose the myth of the benefits of artificial light in our book Valon varjopuolet (‘The dark side of light’; Gaudeamus). The book won the Kone Foundation’s Vuoden Tiedekynä 2015 award in February. It was selected from a short-list of seven by Katja Bargum, a science journalist. In her reasons she emphasised the multi-disciplinary approach of the book. The dark sides of light involve physics, biology and medicine, technology, community planning and aesthetics.

Bringing together so many fields of research required long gestation and a few lucky coincidences. The range of studies examining the use of light from a critical stance has only recently reached a level that allows a reliable general overview to be constructed. To build a rich and varied mosaic you need a large variety of pieces.

The increase in artificial light in our environment has been evident for decades but only now have researchers around the world woken up to what is happening. The first bold moves will surely be followed by an expansion in research. Taking the first steps is not easy though. New environmental problems are easily branded as marginal. Unconventional ideas require not only open-minded researchers but also an open-minded academic community and funding organisations.

A researcher interested in a new kind of subject will have to wrestle with many difficult questions: How does the work relate to existing academic debate? Who would want to fund this research? Would it be better to concentrate on solving problems that have already been identified? Few people remember that climate change also used to be a new and a strange environmental problem. Only very extensive research has shown that climate change is threatening the whole of humanity.

We were also lucky to receive enough funding from Tieteen tiedotus ry to produce an entire book. The competition for funding is very tough, and the margins separating the losers from the winners are small and may seem arbitrary. We were lucky to have a funding organisation that had the courage to believe that the new approach we promised to a familiar topic would generate fertile results. We were equally lucky to have been deemed worthy of the Vuoden tiedekynä 2015 award.

Similar daring is needed elsewhere, too. Research and related development are commonly considered key to the vitality of the Finnish economy and society as a whole. Research is expected to lead to new, useful inventions, or what we call innovations.

While there is a demand for new and even radical ideas, most research seems to result in things which are new yet familiar. This is at least partly the result of researchers and funding organisations preferring to deepen existing knowledge. We are most likely to get results when we dig deeper into familiar areas with an increasingly specific focus.

Yet a narrow focus must also be part of a wider picture that combines knowledge from different fields. Multidisciplinary knowledge helps us to investigate major problems and challenges right from the early stages of planning and decision-making without having to wait until implementation when the big decisions have already been taken. Such a multi- or rather cross-disciplinary approach will help us to see more than energy efficiency when we develop, install and use new lights. A brighter future does not have to be taken literally!

Jari Lyytimäki & Janne Rinne

The authors work at the Finnish Environment Institute.
They won the Kone Foundation’s Vuoden Tiedekynä 2015 award

Janne Rinne & Jari Lyytimäki. Photo: Matti Lindholm

Communicating research results requires boldness to make yourself vulnerable

We organised training for environmental researchers at Korjaamo on 25 February 2015, focusing on communications and getting the message heard. At the #‎tutkijavaikuta event the researchers received guidance on communicating their own research. The event was organised by the Kone Foundation, Nessling Foundation, the Forum for Environmental Information and Kaskas Media.

Most researchers, including those attending the training event, feel that it is part of their job to contribute to social debate. They believe that researchers must play a role in society, including decision-making. Most research is never read though and is rarely referred to. How could researchers better communicate the results of their work to different sectors of society? These are the questions we set out to answer.

Eeva Primmer, Head of Environmental Governance Unit at SYKE’s Environmental Policy Centre, emphasised that communications varies according to the target audience. In other words, you must communicate differently to the media and to other researchers. Primmer’s advice was to look at the big picture served by our research instead of individual problems. The media finds the big picture interesting. You can also get your message heard by following social debate and offering your research results as a contribution at the right time. Primmer reminded us that decision-making takes place on many levels. You can enter into a dialogue with Parliament, government bodies, your own peer groups, businesses, landowners, etc. The Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities and MEPs are also excellent ways to spread knowledge.

Ville Niinistö, MP and chair of the Green League, explained political decision-making. Politicians are subject to a deluge of information and have trouble sifting out what is relevant. The easiest way for a busy politician is to follow social debate and the media, so be active participants in it, researchers! Niinistö noted that knowledge and research must be part of the debate, otherwise opinions with no research basis will take over.

What should research results look like then if they are to be usable? Research deals with difficult issues that people do not always want to hear about. People also easily feel guilty about issues like climate change. Discussion about difficult and complex issues places researchers in a situation where they become participants in political debate. This is why Niinistö fittingly described participating in the debate as “making yourself vulnerable as researchers”. Things that people find difficult and problematic must be communicated clearly. It always pays to include a message of hope when you present a problem. For politicians, calculated figures and economic and health-related information are important.

Niinistö follows research and he retweets about articles related to research and tweets by researchers themselves. Niinistö said that the academic community is too wary about social media and encouraged people to rethink whether their perceived integrity as researchers should confined them to their own four walls. He also urged researchers to contact decision-making bodies directly. Researchers, find out which ministry and unit makes decisions related to your work. Collaborate with researchers who are already cooperating with civil servants. Get in direct contact with Members of Parliament. They are unlikely to be familiar with who knows about which particular issue. Contact committee counsels and the MPs of the committee, ask to come and speak to the committee.

Environmental Expert Pirjo Jantunen talked about the importance of research data at the energy company Helen. Helen relies on such data daily, especially in development work and to provide background information for goals. Research becomes reality in everyday applications! Jantunen’s advice was to communicate clearly and concisely with energy companies, for example using Twitter. The event inspired journalist Jani Kaaro to analyse the sources that different science journalists use. There is considerable overlap. Many journalists use the US research news service EurekAlert! and use materials from other journalists. How can scientific journalism be improved? Kaaro suggested in jest that researchers should not give information to freelancers but should get involved themselves in the discussion.

In the afternoon it was the researchers turn to be heard. They formed groups to discuss communication problems and solutions to them. What worries you about communicating your research results and what are the challenges? Many were apprehensive about going in front of audiences, partly because of insecurity as performers and partly because of uncertainties concerning the results and quality of their work. Some felt that there is no time to communicate. Some were uncertain about communication methods and were afraid of become branded in some way. A worst-case scenario was the negative feedback received by Pekka Himanen, who according to one researcher was subjected to a “shitstorm”. Asking yourself why you should communicate may also lead you to ponder the chilling, personal question “What am I doing my work for?”

The groups found solutions to these fears. Researchers should think of social media and journalists as being on their side. With a little practice and a little less self-criticism communicating becomes easier. Using your time efficiently becomes easier when you know how to communicate. If you have Twitter contacts who work in communications, you can share a story with them without actually writing a press release. If you are worried about becoming labelled, create two Twitter accounts, one for personal use and one for research. In reality, the risk of a media storm is very small. You can enter debates at seminars related to your fields and by joining e-mail groups offered by the Forum for Environmental Information. If there is an economic angle to your research topic, reducing costs for example, or if it can enhance eco-friendliness, use that. The day concluded with Twitter exercises: search with the hashtag #tutkijavaikuta to read about the work of participating researchers.

The materials used at the event are available at http://www.ymparistotiedonfoorumi.fi/viestinta-ja-vaikuttamiskoulutus-ymparistotutkijoille/

Marjaana Larpa

The writer is a cultural production trainee at the Kone Foundation. The job description includes event production. As an outcome of the training day, the writer decided to join Twitter.