Literature and photography - Brunet PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Literature and photography - Brunet PDF

Description

LITERATURE AND PHOTOGRAPHY – F. Brunet INTRODUCTION First decade of existence: PHOTOGRAPHY vs PAINTING: mechanical character vs artist’s freedom. In its history it was always been see as something new, in contrast with the old art of literature. Photography is only considered in relation to what it has brought to literature in the association of the two. Brunet has 2 main goal: 1. Attempt to reverse the angle of vision by looking at photography’s encounters with literature from the point of view of photography and photographers. Shadowy and fragmented subject. Extrangement of photography from literature until the wake of Modernism and the recognition of photography as a distinct art form. Growing interest of writers in photography. Emergent meeting between photography and literature. 2. Attempt to draw attention to the coincidence of the invention of photography and the idea of photography as a technically and socialy based standard of (visual) truth. Photography associated, in the early 19th century, with realism and its various brands. In contrast with Romanticism (force of assertion of the “one” vs individual expression). Early 20th centurty: “photo-literature”, exploration of photography’s structures and practises. CHAPTER 1: WRITING THE INVENTION OF PHOTOGRAPHY • “PHOTOGRAPHY”: world which resembles the print tradition. Many of the first experiments involved the copying of written or printed documents, so the historians the photograpy’s dawn is largely a matter of exploring the written sources: BUT the genealogical narratives often resort to literary sources and devices to substantiate the newer medium. Finally the amount of written discourse that accompanies early photographic images tesfies to the ancillary status of photography: many photographers served indeed the literary and scientific agendas of others with more or better opportunities for writing. Thus the invention of photography must be envisioned squarely in his written condition. BEGINNING OF THE HISTORY OF PHOTOGRAPHY: 1839. Series of factsç 1. Inaugural session of the French Academy of Science, 7.01.1839. The physicist Argo gave the frist description of Daguerre’s result. Talbolt’s successively communicated to the English learned bodies the event. 2. Rivaltry between England and France, attended by a phenomenal amount of sensation in the press of the industrialized world. 3. France that granted a state pension to Isidore Niepce and Daguerre in exchange Sequence permeated by discourse and writing! Between 1838 and the fall 1939 very few people had access to various kinds of pictures produced, althought more practical details emerged >>> Daguerre: one needs to see the process, detailed descriptions are not enough. Only in August 1839 a joint session of the academics of sciences and the fine arts divulged Daguerre’s process, even thought few people saw it. Meanwhile Talbot showed some of his photogenic drawings at the Royal Institution the 25.01.1939. Many inventors’claim were supported by written descriptions, of a fragile and elusive nature. Moreover the guarded behaviour was also motivated by the inventors’ protectiveness of their secrets and Daguerre’s irge to capitalize financially on the process. These facts reflect the logic of evaluation: legal factors = legal language. Because the photography was earlier seen as an invention, not a form of art, the first stages of photography were manifested in a series of legal proceedings to which the the Franco-British rivalry added nationalisic and ideological dimensions. LANGUAGE, written and oral, WAS THE PRIMARY CHANNEL OF COMMUNICATION OF PHOTOGRAPHY. Moreover photography was experienced as an event, and in writing, before it was encountered visually. It was early received as an idea or text rather than as a picture. The process of affiliation, while registering the invention of photography squarely in the realm of science, ofter communicated its movelty in the language of literature.

P.L. Roubert: “Arago’s partial disclosures lent the daguerreotype the aura of a cultural creation, rather than a scientific discovery” • J. Janin. L’artiste, 27.01.1839. Considered photography’s most influentialearly account. Daguerreotype as a modern realization of the biblical Fiat Lux and admiration of its ability to record the most minute detail as well as “the shadow of a passing bird”. • Letters of some viewers of Daguerre ‘s plates to correspondents in different parts of the world. Efforts to mediate the experience: oscillation between the language of science and that of poetry. o Alexander von Humbolt, to C.G.Carus, 2.02.1839. General sober tone and quasi-magical revelation of vivid detail by daguerreotype. Glass applied to a view of the Loure court reveals “blades of straw at every window” o Samuel F.B. Morse, to his brother. 9.03.1839. After having visited Daguerre’s studio during a stay in Paris. Published in the New York Observer of 20.04.1839 it functioned as a public announcement of the invention in the United States. Morse used the most incongrous superlatives about Daguerre’s lates (“they are Rembrandt perfected”) and situated them in the realm of the marvellous and of the fantastic. Description of a photography of the Boulevard du Temple (pg.18): incidental inauguration of photography’s connection to death (R. Taft) The fascination of detail registered by the exclamation in the letters, along with the sensous appeal and the inner resonances of a seemingly natural process of landscape-making, echoes recurring concerns of Romantic literature and aesthetics. • Lampelie et Daguerre, by Nepomucene Lemercier. o Preface: writers’ duty to celebrate the achievements of their times in the eternal language of mythology. o Daguerre’s invention written as an episode in a quarrel between two daughters of Apollo, Lampelie (goddess of light) and Pyrophyse (goddess of fire). The poem treated the destruction of Daguerre’s Diorama on 6.03.1839 as an act of vengeance on the part of the jealous Pyrophyse. It concluded with the marriage of Lampelie and Daguerre, bearing fruit in the daguerreotype and opening the way for the photographic exploration of the empire. •

Lemercier's poem is not only the inauguration of a mythological way to see photography, but it also shown the accademic culture that shaped the reception of photography. This invention waspublicized as a new paradigm, questioning the accepted relationships of art and science and foregrounding invention itself as a marvellous phenomenon; but because it escaped the reach of full scientific explanation and was presentes as beneficial to society as a whole, it seemed to compel its champions >>> Evident in the speech made by François ARAGO to the Chamber of Deputies in June 1839: • Walter Benjamin:“it pointed out photography’s applications to all aspects of human activity”, but with a few references to the practical technique, it was mainly an abstract discourse. • Tannegni Duchatel, Minister of Interior, said that it was more an idea than an invention, which is why it could not be patented • Arago: photography as a precious asset, which could serve a programme of state-supervised modernization, but it supported the advancement of democratic ideals for which the notion of a self-generated representation could be an appealing metaphor. • Discourse with a adopted non-specialized stance, a kind of layman’s discourse, which posited photography as universally accessible, an addition to culture rather than science. He had also stressing the estrangement of invention, inventors and practice from the ideal logic of science. • Anxious to make the idea of photograhy as generic and accessible, Arago recurred to literary references and devices: need for an history of the invention. Rationalist narration: photography as a positive brainchild for modern science, terminating centuries of fruitless speculation + its realization as the serendipitous fulfilment of an “old dream of mankind, displaying the logic of desire and a marvellous character that numbed science and its verifiable procedures = photography as the end of “literature” and simultaneously literature is the image of photography --- “dream

•

•

that has just been realized” + photographic aurora heightened by the sketch of a whole prehistory of photography: • Alchemical lineage of photography. Erroneus attribution of the invention of the camera obscura to Giambattista della Porta, based on a biased attribution: a 17th century portrait of Porta was indeed discovered in Daguerre’s papers. Invention considered a chemical one rather than an optical one. • Allusion to a contrario to “the extravagant concepition of a Cyrano or a Wilkins” --- References to “Voyage dans le Lune”(1657, Bergerac) and to John Wilkins’ books about “a world in the moon”(1638-1640): important for the link of photography to a classic epitome of scientific fantasy but also because there were fairly unspecific --- highlight of the decisive separation between photography’s reality and its literary limbo. o Mid-1840s commentators: argumentation of the “literary premonitions of photography” with the novel “Giphantie”, about an imaginary travel. Elementary spirits’ fixing mirror images with a special coating --- champions of the prophetic powers of literature. Arago also presented photography as a revolution. Unexpected as as a source of inventive progress. Combination of the vast perspectives of world scientific history and the individual merits of the inventors: spotlight on Mr. Niepce and his history (“a retired landowner… who devoted his leisure to scietific researches”)--- display of populist and Balzacian image of a solitary, provincial genius privately working out wonders that illustrious scientists had failed to approach. Vision of the inventors as a sort of modern hero. Later commentators expanded on the inventors’ biographies creating a whole legend around the invention of photography. Last passage of the discourse: advantages of photography. Reference to the founding moments of the French Romanticism, the Napoleonic era and Napoleon’s Egyptian expedition. Past conditional and nostalgic tone. Echo of the mood of Romantic texts (A. De Mussets “Confession of a Child of the Century” – Stendhal “Chartreuse de Parme”). Backdrop for the Franco-British rivalry over the invention of photography, not just in France:

>>> TALBOT. In his papers we find reference to “Napoleon” and “Wellington”referred to a variety of chemicaly prepared papers + “Waterloo papers”: he hoped to use them to establish his revenge over the daguerreotype + 1839. Photograph reproducing the autograph manuscript of a stanza of Byron’s “Ode to Napoleon” Talbot was also aware that the scientific and diplomatic contest over the invention of photography was also a contest of narrative: “Some Account of the Art of Photogenic Drawing”, discourse at Royal Society, 31.01.1839: account = anticipate that the discourse will be genealogical as much as descriptive: • Photogenic drawing: process of birthing and becoming or appearing. The term was later drop at the advice of Herschel. • Continous descriptions of the experiment in many passage of the discourse. Descriptions of effects and methods are regularly interspersed by autobiographical statements. • Declaraion of the invention as a different, original and (English) process + use of the first singular person = personal matter involving both experiment and experience + private dream and a solitary adventure. • Marvellous and magical character of photography – “On the art of fixing a shadow”: the thought and the process of fixing are more seductive than the result on paper Later on… Fascination on history of photography … • Pope Leon XIII, 1867. “Ars Photographica”, poem. • Josef-Maria Eder, Austria, ca 1900. Researches on the prehistory and history of photography --Collection of literary premonitions • Helmut Gernsheim. Broad narrative of the origins of photography: the greatest mystery in the history of photography was that it was not invented earlier

• •

Brian Aldiss, 1976. The Malacia tapestry. History of Dalmatia with the incorporation of the invention of photography. Odette Joyeux, 1989. Biography of Niepce. Invention of photography inspired by the reading of the fantasy novel “Giphantie”

Confrontation between Arago and Talbot ARAGO TALBOT Invention of photography recorded in writing and narrative form, with acknowledge links to literary genres, concerns and tates. Narrative that gains influence over much of the Narrative that emphasizes the photography as social usage and later historiography of the an experience and as an expression of the self invention. CHAPTER 2: PHOTOGRAPHY AND THE BOOK Much of the photos produced in the 19th century designed for and published in books. This is a symptom of photography’s subjection to literature. Books as art costrued as evidence of the library realigning itself with the museum. BUT primary means of its cultural recognition: 1839 vast nrs of photographically illustrated books + photobook: medium’s premier mode of circulation, combination of mass distribution and creative expression. →but photographic book remained for the longest time a technological oxymoron. Talbot inaugurated the alliance between books and photography (photographer as author!) --- “THE PENCIL OF NATURE”, Talbot. Published between 1844 and 1846. Invention of photography as tools for copying and/or printing (same thought as Niepce)1. Through the 19th century photography estranged itself from the logics of reproduction and publishing. Until the introduction of half-tone printing and photogravure, the life of photography was limited to private uses or to luxury editions with tipped-in photographic prints. Only after the advent of digital photography the photographic quality matched in print. THE PENCIL OF NATURE. Milestone. Photographic book. Large plates + combination image, title and caption. Interpretation of this book that emphasizes its linkk to “pictural tradition” of the medium. • Introduction. Book seen as the first specimen of the (new) art of photography. Talbot’s iconographic choiches point to emulate painting (The Open Door, plate VI). The final name he adopted for his perfected paper negative process, calotype, was based on kalos (= beautiful, good) • “The first meeting of photography and reading” (Huberts von Amelunxen). Relational creative practice engaging images and words + Talbot inscribed a copy of the book with the annotation “words of light”: biblical echo, pencil natural as a dialogic tool, a bipolar medium in which nature served as a field of projection for the self. • Epigraph. Shows the aesthetic ambition of the work. Quote from Virgil’s Georgies (= artist’s aspiration to plough a new field). Announce of an author’s persona • The author presented himself as a mere commentator of “self-representation” + comments that evinced the persona of an artist or, rather, a writer. • Plate VIII, A scene in a Library. Classical representation of photography’s alliance with literature + exercise in the interlay of light and shadow as the constituent language of photography. • Book as a self-representation of photography, its applications and possibilities and its inventor’s choice SUN PRINTS OF SCOTLAND, 1845, Talbot. Based on Walter Scott’s work. • More objective-bound, thematic, more picturesque and less reflexive. • Specialized application of the broad programme outlined in the previous book. 1

Daguerre: picture as self-contained object and semi-anonymous spectacle. Printing technique, photography as a technology of imaging.

•

It inaugurated the dominant model of the 19th century photo-book (geared at illustration and collection). Nancy Armstrong: photograhically illustrated book arise mainly from scientific or documentary projects.

Most of the hundreds of photographic books and so published in the secondo half on the 19th century followed the technical formlua established by The Pencil of Nature. They combined printed text with tipped-in photographic prints. Purposes of thematic illustration or encyclopaedic: NO emulation of Talbot’s reflexive insights into photography and photographer. Moreover from the 1850s photography and photographic illustration became standard accessories in an increasing number of investigation in the various scientific fields. Series of photographs commissioned specifically were published in scientific treatises. + tradition of the sketchbook: amateurs or professional workers, who worked “independently”, carried out by literati and independent travellers: eg. Excursions daguerriennes, by Noel Lerebours. France, 1850s. Boom of photographic projects and publications. • LOUIS-DESIRE BLANQUART-EVRARD. • MAXIME DU CAMP, 1852, “Egypte, Nubie et Palestine”. Recounter of his travel in the Middle East in 1849 with the company of Gustave Flambert. One of the first Oriental travel books. • FRANCES FRITH, 1857. “Egypt and Palestine”. It inaugurated commercial exploitation of Oriental photography. o Use of the collodion process + more explanation in defending photography as an art of its own and spelling out his ambitions. With Frances Frith the photo-book became a concious medium for exposing and promoting photographic achievements (F.Bedford, D.Charnay, F. Beato, A. Gardner). Closely related to these voyagers were early explorers of city life (C.Marville, T.Annan, J.Thomson). There also were significant works by self-conscious author-photographers in the 19th century. Convesely the culture of archiving did not vanish in the 20th century. 19th century’s photography: • Scientific, historical or commercial documentation • Operative mode: survey or archive • Product: book or album America. Reference to Gustave Le Gray’s model. Flourishing of landscape and Indian photography: sponsor for economic and political reason --- 1870: photo-books of the American West became a favourite genre among explorers, railroad magnates, mining or logging concerns, and western politicals. Little care for issues of authorship or style. ➢ TIMOTHY O’ SULLIVAN. Incorporation of reflexive aspects and authorial hints. He never put it in words. It was his employer who came closest to expressing the aesthethic of his views. Even when photographers were emloyed by artists the survey structure tended to preclude the verbal expression of a photographic discourse: ➢ WILLIAM BRADFORD. The Artic Regions. 140 albumen prints from negatives by L.J.Dunmore and G.Critscherson. Bradford’s layout went far in forging a dynamic relationship betweem text and pictures, but it did not offer much of a reflection on photography. Although it would seem that this collaboration between photographers and scientists declined after 1900, things are not so clear-cut: 1. With the advent of cheap and easy amateur equipment, projects increasingly relied on their own resources. 2. Rise of reliable photomechanical processes, whether cheap and popular or expensive and elitebound. Elimination of photographic books and accessibility to photographically illustrated publishing.

3. Social transformation. Photographies more ubiquitous, more culturally significant and more semantically autonomous.This transformation can be see in the American photography of 19001920 (photographers that take at least partial responsibility for big projects): 1. Alfred Stieglitz’s direction of the magazine Camera Work 2. Lewis Hine’s work for the National Child Labor Committee and the Pittsburgh Survey 3. Edward S.Curtis’s survey of Native American cultures. Interwar period. “documentary genre” identified itself with the emergence of the “photo-essay”. New publishing form + new discursive space for photography. Origin in the late Weimar Republic: • Paris de Nuit (1933) and Paris vu par Kertesz (1934) by Brassai • Atget photographer de Paris The photo-essay could be seen as adapting the earlier pattern of the survey to the emerging taste for photography of the literary and cultural avant-gardes after World War I. On the other hand it was largely conditioned by the rise of the mass picture magazines, which in some cases pre-published photographic projects, but also by avant-garde illustrated magazines and collections. The photo-essay often deviated from the earlier archival and tended ins...