Framed and defanged: Steve McQueen’s Resistance

Resistance – co-curated by artist and filmmaker Steve McQueen after four years of research – follows the mutual shaping of photography and protest in Britain throughout history, debuting at Turner Contemporary and now on show at National Galleries of Scotland. Charting a century of activism in the UK, Resistance gathers a powerful archive of overlooked dissent. Yet, as Mark Durden writes, in stripping protest of its urgency and historical texture, it risks flattening its force through decontextualised display and selective memory.


Mark Durden | Exhibition review | 12 Dec 2025
Join us on Patreon

Photographs can fascinate because of what they are about. This is the guiding approach to photography in Resistance: How Protest Shaped Britain and Photography Shaped Protest, conceived, curated and branded by the acclaimed artist and filmmaker Steve McQueen, together with Clarrie Wallis and Emma Lewis of Turner Contemporary, currently on show at the National Galleries of Scotland. Beginning with the militant actions of the suffragettes, the show takes us through a century of protest, and includes the hunger marches of the 1930s, anti-fascist demonstrations, the battle of Cable Street, anti-racist marches and protests, the Miners’ Strike, Greenham Common Women’s Peace Camp, environmental movements, battles for gay liberation and against Section 28, disability rights campaigns. It takes us up to the historical moment of mass protests against the Iraq War in February 2003.   

Concentrating on a time before smartphones and the mass uptake of social media, the show is a powerful reminder of what we are in danger of losing in our world of media-controlling techno-oligarchs, misinformation and fake news. It is also very meaningful in light of the recent and disturbing acceleration of the criminalisation of protest in the UK. 

With this photography exhibition, everything is about content, what the images are showing us. It is a transparent show in this respect, not overly complex or fussy. Everything is stripped back to the basic and literal function of the photograph as document, to the point there is minimal distraction. And no colour. Everything is in black and white. I remember press pictures of the ‘Don’t Attack Iraq’ anti-war crowds as being in colour. They look a bit odd in monochrome. It is clearly an aesthetic choice. Just like the uniform and fairly neutral display: pictures set behind glass with white mattes and black frames.

As newly printed pictures, sourced from various public archives and personal collections, and with many previously unseen – though it is never made clear which ones they are – their display is without any traces of their original context. Wall captions give info about the protests and also some contexts for the pictures. Photographs are grouped in terms of causes and issues, which means historical pictures are shown in relation to pictures of more recent but related events. Many of the historical pictures are fascinating in themselves: a 1920 photograph of a march by blind people for ‘justice not charity’; a document of the inspection of crates of ostrich feathers at the ‘Port of London’ (to be seen in the context of protests against the use of exotic plumes for hats in the Victorian era); and from 1938, a photograph of the lie-down protest by the unemployed in the rain in Oxford Circus, their bodies partly covered by the signs of their protest: ‘Starved! Protested! Arrested!’        

The exhibition starts well with an array of pictures drawn from the campaign for women’s suffrage, opening with a press picture of Annie Kenney. She smiles to camera as she is being arrested, a mark of the complicity between press photographers who were often tipped off about planned actions. From the very outset we are shown how photography plays a part in the publicity of protest and a means of building public support.    

A secret press photograph taken of three suffragettes shows them bored and yawning in court as they attend yet another trial. While the photograph was taken surreptitiously, it looks like they are performing to camera, or if not, certainly to the crowd at court. What comes across from the selection of pictures about the suffragettes is how media savvy they were. 

While the mandate and driver of the show is what the pictures document, it is how events are pictured that engages us. There is no escaping the power of form here.  Certain images become memorable and moving because of the skills, the craft, of the photographer. Tish Murtha’s pictures of the unemployed in her hometown in Newcastle’s West End in the early 1980s, are a good example – raw but also intimate and lyrical in their disclosure of the neglect and waste of a generation.

The French photographer, Christine Spengler’s pictures taken amidst the heated conflict during the Troubles, introduce a subtle reportage: the tension and dynamic set up in her portrait of a young soldier in Belfast, standing in the sun on the corner, as a child adorned in a comical mask lingers in the shadows of the street behind him or the tender portrait of a young girl holding a black flag bearing a white cross, standing on a road closed off for an IRA funeral procession in Derry-Londonderry, with the dark presence of the blockade formed by armoured military vehicles and soldiers looming in the background.

A central picture for the show – used for publicity and on the accompanying book’s cover – is Paul Trevor’s depiction of a crowd’s collectivity, as people gather to block the route of a National Front demonstration in New Cross Road, London, August 1977. We are brought close to this crowd, shown not as an anonymous mass but as a gathering of individuals, shouting and cheering, some with raised fists. It is a utopian vision of what is possible through solidarity. In another remarkable picture, by an unknown photographer, a Black passerby is pictured as if he is at the head of a National Front march in support of Enoch Powell. His unfazed presence, and in white-tie formal dress, undoes the power of the rabble of racists behind him.

On 18 January 1981,13 Black people were killed in a fire during a house party in New Cross, London. It is suspected to have been a racist arson attack. The largest Black-led demonstration in Britain followed outrage over the silence that the tragedy was met with, both by the Conservative government and the national media.  Pictures of the protest, included in the exhibition, commemorate the dead – people held large photographic portraits of lost loved ones – and also serve to show the solidarity and resilience of those taking part. Geoffrey White’s aftermath picture, showing people gathered to look at the burnt-out three-story Georgian terraced house is one of the most painful and haunting documents in the show.

In 1977, during the first day of the mass picket by female Asian workers over working conditions at Grunwick film-processing laboratories, Andrew Wiard pictured strike leader Jayaben Desai confronting police. Its pictorial power rests upon the way in which it sets the inexpressive faces of two of the policemen against the expressive energy of her rage and anger. Their eyes are shadowed by their helmets, and both possess an uncanny likeness to one another (they must be twins, an odd doubling of the blank face of the Law). 

Protest itself is an action and signal, something done to be seen, to be looked at, and, of course, to be photographed. But there are also pictures of people who are not clamouring for attention, quieter moments that convey a sense of the everyday texture of lives and situations in Britain amidst all the protests and causes: the miner and his family watching Scargill on Channel 4 news; the women taking a break from a hunger march, tending to their sore feet, John Deakin’s portraits of delegates at the fifth pan-African Congress, in October 1945, in Manchester’s Chorlton Hall.

An intriguing inclusion in this show are documents, by Jill Posener, of culture jamming, pictures showing witty retorts scrawled over sexist advertising campaigns on billboards from the late 1970s onwards. In answering back to other representations, this sabotaging of marketing messages opens up a critical relation to the commercial image realm and in some respects takes us away from the people-focused documentary line central to this show.  

In a 1992 photograph by Samena Rana, a sign with the words ‘Piss on Pity’ partly covers a collection box figure of a bespectacled child by what was then known as the Spastics Society (now Scope). Like the graffiti-altered ads, Rana’s protest mobilises the power of language (the pithy and punchy campaign slogan adopted by disability rights groups) to counter misrepresentation, in this case the depiction of disabled people as helpless and pitiful. The power of protest through the use of language, on signs and placards, while present is not central in this show. Philip Jones Griffith’s picture of a ‘ban the bomb’ protest in Aldermaston, for example, rests upon the wit of a single handmade sign held aloft amidst the crowd bearing a drawing of a dinosaur between the message: ‘Too much armour/ Too little brain’.          

Resistance is good at introducing lesser known photographs drawn from a century of protest in the UK, as well as alerting us to less familiar moments of dissent. But it over-reaches itself, attempts to take on too much and has an oddly basic, utilitarian approach to the photograph throughout. Severing pictures from any trace of their original contexts, the show fails to give us sufficient sense of how some of the images sourced and scanned and printed for exhibition, were originally used and seen. Would seeing some of the leaflets, pamphlets, newspapers, police files, magazines, etc, in which some of these pictures first circulated, distract? Would it not add to the richness and impact of the photographs on show? On the matter of what is shown and not shown, there is almost nothing about the history of solidarity with the Palestinian cause in Britain. Among the sea of ‘Don’t Attack Iraq’ placards, in Andrew Wiard’s photograph of the February 2003 Anti-War mass protest, there is a small cluster of ‘Free Palestine’ signs, a recognition of the plight of Palestinians following the Israeli massacre in the Jenin refugee camp in 2002. But that is all. ♦

Resistance: How Protest Shaped Britain and Photography Shaped Protest runs at National Galleries of Scotland until 4 January 2026.


Mark Durden is an academic, writer and artist. He is Professor of Photography and the Director of the European Centre for Documentary Research at the University of South Wales. He works collaboratively as part of the artist group Common Culture and, since 2017, with João Leal, has been photographing modernist architecture in Europe.

Images:

1-Unknown photographer, Annie Kenney (an Oldham cotton mill worker) arrested in London, April 1913. © Pictorial Press Ltd/Alamy Stock Photo

2-Eddie Worth, An anti-fascist demonstrator is taken away under arrest after a mounted baton charge during the Battle of Cable Street, London, 4 October 1936. © Associated Press/Alamy Stock Photo

3-Paul Trevor, Anti-racists gather to block route of National Front demonstration, New Cross Road, London, August 1977. © Paul Trevor 2024

4-Chris Miles, Notting Hill Carnival, London, 1974. © Chris Miles

5-Keith Pattison, Police operation to get the first returning miner into the pit. Joanne, Gillian and Kate Handy with Brenda Robinson, Easington Colliery, Durham, 24 August 1984. © Keith Pattison

6-Keith Pattison, Biran, Paul and Denice Gregory watching Channel Four News. Cuba Street. Easington Colliery. County Durham. November 1984. © Keith Pattison

7-Pam Isherwood, Stop Clause 28 march, Whitehall, London, 9 January 1988. © Bishopsgate Institute

8-Henry Grant, Anti-nuclear protesters marching to Aldermaston, Berkshire, May 1958. © Henry Grant Collection/London Museum

9-Andrew Testa, Protesters against the construction of the Newbury bypass occupy trees to prevent their destruction, Berkshire, 1996. © Andrew Testa


1000 Words favourites

• Renée Mussai on exhibitions as sites of dialogue, critique and activism

• Roxana Marcoci navigates curatorial practice in the digital age

• Tanvi Mishra reviews Felipe Romero Beltrán’s Dialect

• Discover London’s top five photography galleries

• Tim Clark in conversation with Hayward Gallery’s Ralph Rugoff on Hiroshi Sugimoto

• Academic rigour and essayistic freedom as told by Taous Dahmani

• Shana Lopes reviews Agnieszka Sosnowska’s För

• Valentina Abenavoli discusses photobooks and community

• Michael Grieve considers Ute Mahler and Werner Mahler’s posthumous collaboration with their late family member 

• Elisa Medde on Taysir Batniji’s images of glitched video calls from Gaza


Join us on Patreon today and be part of shaping the future of photographic discourse


 

Chloé Jafé

I give you my life

Essay by Emma Lewis

The women in Chloé Jafé’s I give you my life described to her their motivations for getting their tattoos and they’re mostly about love and strength – being in love, falling out of love; feeling strong, needing to feel strong. “I want to live like the man I’m in love with,” says Anna, “I don’t regret anything. In one word, I think they’re really cool!” June got hers at forty because the man she was with had them and “looking at my naked body without any tattoos made me feel weak.” Yuko was thirty-eight, divorced, and she saw them as a way to mark her independence and “discourage certain guys from approaching me […] For the remainder of my life I’ve decided I want to live independently.”

The men to whom these women refer are members of the Yakuza, the international crime syndicate that originated in Japan some four centuries ago and today has around 100,000 members. You’ll have seen these men in photographs: with distinctive tattoos that extend from the neckline down to knees and wrists, they are as photogenic as they are intriguing. Not surprisingly, the organisation and the subculture that surrounds it also make compelling subject matter for film – the Yakuza genre is almost as old as cinema itself.

Despite this pop-culture representation, women’s association with the Yakuza seldom features in any meaningful way. In part this is because, historically, and unlike some other criminal organisations, very little has been known about what their lives are like – though recent memoirs by wives and daughters have gone some way towards lifting the veil. The acclaimed Yakuza Moon by the daughter of an oyabun (family boss), Shoko Tendo – the first autobiography of it is kind to be translated, in 2007, to English – even inspired a glamorous, if wildly inaccurate, movie series.

In 2014, the criminologist Rie Alkemade addressed this lacuna in knowledge with the publication of her study on the wives and girlfriends of the Yakuza, Outsiders Amongst Outsidersto which she refers in her essay for I give you my life. In her research she found that, with few exceptions, the idea of a Yakuza ‘lady gangster’ is a fiction: their role takes place behind closed doors, managing finances and acting as peacekeepers and mother figures. The term she uses is ‘glue’. To the wives and girlfriends, this work is integral to the running of the clan. But to the men, it is peripheral – and so too are the women.

Throughout I give you my life, Jafé highlights this disconnect between how the women perceive themselves and how they are perceived by men. Interested less in the gangster stereotype than the day-to-day life of the clan (who live together under one roof), she shows us scenes to which we are privileged to be privy, but which remain opaque. A group of men, seated and serious. A mealtime, the women in the kitchen. A group of men again, bowing to a man in the back seat of a car. Where mixed groups appear, the women appear to be – as indicated by body language or proximity – subservient. One exception is a photograph taken at the beach, where an ane-san (boss’s wife) is front and centre, tens of tattooed men standing behind her. The hierarchies between a wife and their husband’s subordinates can be complicated.

In this portrait, as in those of the tattooed women – intimate, nude studies and pairs or group shots taken at a traditional festival, where their designs can be seen creeping beyond their clothing – ‘subservient’ and ‘peripheral’ are hardly the first words that come to mind. These women appear self-possessed, independent, formidable even. As Alkemade points out, to tattoo their bodies takes courage not only because in conveying an allegiance to the Yakuza they place themselves outside of mainstream society, but also because the Yakuza men will never truly accept them as members. If her title Outsiders Amongst Outsiders highlights this limbo, then Jafé’s I give you my life begs the question: and for what?

In many ways, Jafé’s is a project about access – how the photographer found her way to her subject, and the dynamics that played out when she got there. When she arrived in Tokyo, she didn’t speak the language or have a fixer, only the determination to reach the women who orbited the world that she had watched in so many films and read about in Yakuza Moon. She also knew that because women aren’t permitted to invite guests into their home, she would have to go through the men.

Jafé began her journey in the city’s red-light district, where she met men who were low down in the syndicate’s ranks and to her, felt more dangerous than useful. There were introductions and tip-offs from friends and acquaintances – a tattoo artist, a hairdresser. She got a gig as a hostess in a bar, the only non-Japanese person to work there, but had her bag stolen, didn’t feel safe. Two years down the line, it was a chance meeting at a festival that led her to the oyabun. Gradually, Jafé was allowed access to his inner circle and then, only when she gained his trust, she was granted access to his wife.

In a project where gender disparity appears to be so acute, it is interesting to consider the ways in which the photographer’s relationships with the men and women differed. To access the upper echelons of a Yakuza clan is no mean feat, but you sense there was a vanity involved on the men’s part. Jafé must have amused them. She had to be charming, deferent, and harmless. Yet to the ane-san, this young, foreign, woman that her husband was taking to dinner wasn’t necessarily such a benign presence. Aware that the wives and girlfriends viewed her with suspicion, Jafé worked her way in carefully, making friends and navigating through a very particular set of social codes and cues. The portraits that result from this gradually built trust are sensitive, considered and, importantly, they feel collaborative. “You work on luck,” she says, reflecting on that chance meeting with the boss at the festival. But of course, there’s more to it than that.

All images courtesy of the artist. © Chloé Jafé


Emma Lewis is an Assistant Curator at Tate Modern, where she organises exhibitions and displays and is responsible for researching acquisitions for Tate’s photography collection. Her book Isms: Understanding Photography was published by Bloomsbury in 2017.

Valeria Cherchi

Some of you killed Luisa

Essay by Emma Lewis

On 16 June 1992 a priest from the Sardinian region of Barbagia received an anonymous telephone call guiding him to a remote mountain road. There he found a package containing the following: a photograph of six-year-old Farouk Kassam, the upper part of the child’s ear, and a letter threatening his demise in horrific circumstances. Kassam, the son of hoteliers, had been held hostage for five months, in caves and other mountain hideouts. His kidnapping was by no means unusual: close to 200 people were held for ransom on the island between the 1960s and late 1990s. But his story precipitated an unusual wave of defiance against the ‘Anonima sarda’, the bandits who operate independently but in accordance with omertà, or code of silence. Hundreds of locals placed ‘Free Farouk’ signs in shop windows. White bedsheets were hung from balconies as a symbol of solidarity. Pope John Paul II appealed for the child’s release.

On 10 or 11 July – reports differ – Kassam was let go. Matteo Boe, one of Italy’s most wanted, was among those convicted of his abduction. Twelve years later, Luisa Manfredi, Boe’s fourteen-year-old daughter, was shot dead as she hung up washing outside her home. No one was ever charged for her murder though there remain several different theories as regards to the motive.

Most children, at some point or other, experience a fear of being taken from their parents. For Sardinian-born-and-raised Valeria Cherchi and her peers, this fear had a different gravitas. Cherchi was about the same age as Kassam when he disappeared, and has vivid memories of the white sheets that summer. She recalls, too, watching the news reports of Manfredi’s murder, and observing the contrast between the portrayal of her mother, Laura Manfredi’s, grief, compared to Boe’s. Over the years, Cherchi’s preoccupation with Sardinia’s kidnapping phenomenon intensified. Wishing to learn more about the history of her home island and – somewhat idealistically – ‘decode the complex structure of the kidnappings’, she began researching Barbagia’s small and closed communities in relation to omertà. Over time her focus narrowed to, as she describes it, ‘the desperation of two mothers: one unable to control the fate of her young kidnapped son, and the other unable to find justice for her murdered daughter.’ Both had pleaded for people – women especially – to speak out. One day, Manfredi walked into her town square and graffitied in broad daylight: ‘Qualcuno di voi hanno ucciso Luisa’: ‘Some of you killed Luisa’.

Part of the narrative around these events, of course, is that there is no reliable narrative. News reports from the time note the uncertainty surrounding the chronology on the 10 and 11 July. ‘Almost immediately after the boy’s release,’ described one New York Times article, ‘questions and discrepancies began to intrude.’ Details had to be ‘pieced together’ by the police, the victim and his family. According to Cherchi’s written accounts of her interactions with the Barbagia people, inconsistencies remain a key characteristic.

It is apt, then, that Some of you killed Luisa takes the form that it does: a combination – piecing together, if you will – of television and VHS stills; staged portraits; mise-en-scènes inspired by Cherchi’s own memories and those of the kidnapped; and reports of her investigation, including transcripts of oral testimony by kidnap survivors and those in the local community. The mood is unsettled, unsettling; the atmosphere enigmatic. This approach to conveying real-life events, prevalent in contemporary photography for a number of years now, is one that I think of as a kind of collaged approach to the documentary form: assembling a many-layered, multi-textured picture from disparate sources that may not otherwise be in close proximity. Regine Petersen’s Stars Fell on Alabama (2013), Jack Latham’s Sugar Paper Theories (2016), and Mathieu Asselin’s Monsanto: A Photographic Investigation (2017) are a few acclaimed examples. Often executed over a long period of time, the photographer embedded in the community, a case could also be made for them operating as part of the cult revival of investigative and long-form journalism.

And yet like the collage elsewhere in art, literature, and documentary film, this approach remains deeply subjective. Archival material is, by definition, decontextualised; selected or omitted according to personal criteria. This is the narrator’s prerogative, to convey the story that they wish to tell, in the manner in which that they wish to tell it. It almost goes without saying, too, that bringing a story alive after the fact requires imaginative use of non-documentary material – be it archival, staged or otherwise.

If this collage form grants freedom – in treatment of content, and in style – it also highlights the photographer’s responsibility to their audience and subjects. Certain questions have to be asked. What does it mean, for example, for a photographer to state that they are ‘investigating’, especially where criminal activities are concerned? What is motivating the protagonists to speak out? Is this the only the way that they feel their voices will be heard, and if so, whom do they believe to be listening?

The most robust examples of such projects – and I include Cherchi’s, and the three aforementioned, in this – address these questions by making the photographer’s position clear. Asselin’s project is, without ambiguity, an exposé. Latham and Petersen, by contrast, each state that their primary interest is photography’s relationship to the events in question. Some of you killed Luisa is successful because Cherchi makes it clear that she is delving into a subject that has needled into consciousness for decades. The inclusion of stills from her own family’s home videos – a nod, she explains, to her pained awareness that her life continued, while Manfredi’s did not – is a particularly effective way of introducing her presence. Likewise her reports: by turns factual statements on the how, why and when, of her research, and poetic but lucid accounts of time spent with Barbagian communities, as she navigates the regional differences, and the secrecy. As an outsider, this is fascinating: mysterious without ever becoming nebulous. One gets the feeling of being guided through the dark, almost, as Cherchi shares what she knows about this unknowable place – and what she is only just beginning to piece together.

All images courtesy of the artist. © Valeria Cherchi


Emma Lewis is an Assistant Curator at Tate Modern, where she organises exhibitions and displays and is responsible for researching acquisitions for Tate’s photography collection. Her book Isms: Understanding Photography was published by Bloomsbury in 2017.