Helena Adams 13c

Did Pictorialist photographers help to establish photography as an art form? 

 

Photography was invented in 1839; it was established as a means of scientific documentation. Photography was not respected as an art form, mainly because it was perceived by critics not to require artistic skill to create a photo. At the time of its invention, art was going through a period known as Romanticism –where the unique individuality of the artist’s creation was highly valued, art itself was “characterised by its distance from the contingent features of the actual world” this was seen to “ signify an active intelligence” [1]  by society at the time– Photography which directly recorded what was in front of it did not fit into this niche and was regarded as not requiring an intelligent operator ( another key feature of art in the early 1800s). However some photographers were not content to stay within the narrow definition of photography and began to take the process further into what would finally establish it as a respected art form.

 

In the 1860s a new genre of photography emerged which was later given the name Pictorialism by H.P.Robinson (1969) in his book Pictorial Effect in Photography: Being Hints on Composition and Chiaroscuro for Photographers[2] . Pictorialism is defined by its use of tonality, composition and technique which focuses on the beauty of the overall image rather than the straight documentation of reality. The first photographer to really be credited with her use of Pictorial effects (though her style was not appreciated by her contemporaries) was Julia Margaret Cameron.  Cameron’s photographic career started in 1864 when she was given a camera, though she had never used one before she had great enthusiasm for the arts. Her work is unique in its time, as Cameron, pursued “ the idea of photographic art more inventively than anyone else during this period”[3] The defining feature of her work, that really puts it under the roof of Pictorialism was her free use of focus - her belief that there were no rules governing focus “what is focus and who has the right to say what focus is the legitimate focus?” [4] , This gives her pictures a soft artistic atmosphere rather than the stiff formal poses that typify photography in the Victorian period.

 

Cameron’s photographs depict popular heroines from Victorian literature; for example her “Study of Beatrice Cenci”, an Italian noble woman sentenced to death for her involvement in a plot to kill her abusive uncle (which was rewritten as a popular play). Cameron’s composition, when compared to an original portrait of Cenci, is in the same positioning, with the same clothing ( a slight difference being that in the painting Cenci, looks over her shoulder at the viewer, whereas Cameron’s model faces the lens) .  Cameron composes her models to look like replicas of the painted originals, making “ full use of the dressing up box”[5] to complete her set up  .She has an active vision of what she wants, using her personal view of the character in the painting to create her own version. The model in Cameron’s reworking looks down coyly and her neutral face suggests a demure maturity beyond her years. Perhaps the model was instructed not to look directly at the camera to suggest that she holds an awful secret and that one look could cause it to burst out, dooming her entire family – or maybe in this picture she already faces the prospect of a humiliating public death in which case Cameron gives her version of Cenci a kind of quiet strength. She gives away none of her feelings at this injustice to her at the hands of the corrupt papal rule.  The soft focus Cameron uses is quite painterly and gives the image an eerie atmosphere, unlike a traditionally sharp Victorian portrait and this serves to emulate an oil painting’s appearance.

 

Cameron seemed fascinated by historical female figures; her subjects include the Virgin Mary and Elaine of Astolat, from the Arthurian legends. She also made a rendition of the Greek goddess Circe. This is perhaps one of her most interesting creations because in the Greek myth Circe is the villain who seduces hapless men who stumble upon her island and then transforms them into pigs. The symbolism surrounding Circe sees her as a temptress who keeps docile lions as pets, this perhaps embodying the way she emasculates her male prisoners -as the powerful lion is reduced to a docile lap cat. However the Circe in Cameron’s picture does not embrace this typically patriarchal view of an empowered woman and in fact the Circe is portrayed by an adolescent girl- suggests to the viewer that Circe is not a promiscuous woman as she is portrayed , but is in fact an adolescent protecting her homeland from invaders. The model has a headdress of grapes and while they may suggest fertility and promiscuity implying Cameron’s distaste for Circe’s liberal lifestyle. It could also represent Circe’s closeness to nature and therefore the naturalness of her liberated behaviour – is Cameron suggesting that women should have more power than their lowly place in Victorian society? Or is she agreeing that Circe is the villain?

 

Stieglitz was born in 1864 to a wealthy New York family. He rose to photographic fame through his mastery of “photographic tone and texture”[6] he was lucky to be working in the early 20th century when America and the art world were going through huge changes – America was modernising, a prelude to its rise to be a super power , and art was entering modernism , allowing Stieglitz to further his already blooming Pictorialist career and push photography into the fine art world.

 

He began as a Pictorialist – emulating the styles of impressionist painters, (an art that emerged in the 1860s paralleling and perhaps allowing the rise of Pictorialism). In fact in one of his most famous photographs “The Hand of Man” Stieglitz uses an urban landscape – an idea first introduced by the impressionists. The photo, taken in 1903,  depicts a steam train moving along the tracks in an industrial setting. This picture is remarkably similar to Monet’s train in the snow – painted in 1875 and may in fact be emulating its cold gloomy atmosphere that surrounds the steam train.  The whole of “The Hand of Man” points to the influence of man, - the stream train changed the lives of thousands of people and had a huge effect on the landscape, the picture, was created by a camera – at the time , cutting edge technology, Stieglitz is demonstrating mans ingenuity but also his folly –ever expanding and exploring but also destroying, this emulates the tone of death in Monets picture – the trees to the right are stripped of leaves and while some may argue that his is a natural consequence of the wintery setting could it not also be said that Monet could be suggesting the end or death of mans links with the natural world . The huge smoke plume that fills the middle of the frame in both the painting and the photograph draws the viewer’s eye and could be an example of man’s destructive nature it stains the colour of the sky perhaps suggesting an immovable stain caused by man but then again – smoke will disperse and blend with the landscape so maybe the images are implying that even though we make advances in human technology we are still insignificant in the grand scheme of the world. In toning the photograph, Stieglitz has deliberately used a warm brown tone as opposed to “the train in the snow’s” cold bluish hue, perhaps signifying his appreciation of the help humanity has gained from technology as he said himself “the goal of art was the vital expression of self”[1]- does he see himself in this image?  In some ways it would have been harder for Stieglitz to record his perfect image than it was for a painter such as Monet, as he could create the scene in their imagination exactly how they wanted, whereas Stieglitz had to wait for his moment and had only one chance to capture it.

 

 

Stieglitz was not only known for his photographic landscapes, but also for his portraits. In a later photo “Experiment 27 – 1907” [7]the subject is blurred. At first the picture looks more like a charcoal drawing than a duplicate of the reality in front of the photographer - in this way Stieglitz again is influenced by popular art at the time, and he perhaps took photos in this way in order to increase attention from the public. Stieglitz clearly carefully thought of his desired composition before capturing the image. The subject herself is a woman dressed in white with a crystal ball – the whole photo is the embodiment of the delicate and fragile, while taking this photo Stieglitz captured” another person’s mortality, vulnerability… precisely by slicing out this moment and freezing it”[8] the outline of the figure is wavering like it could dissipate at any moment and her white dress only serves to complete her waif like appearance. Is Stieglitz here suggesting that women are frail and delicate- the use of a fragile crystal ball in the image further implies this. However the body language of the model is interesting – she looks down at the ball pensively as if gazing into the future- this leads to the question: what does she see? The meaning is ambiguous.  Again Stieglitz uses a warm brown tone to colour his image, but this time it is softer – unlike the hard brown tones of the “hand of man” the toning of the image means that the figure blends in, looking effortless in her surroundings – almost as if the photographer is intruding on a personal intimate moment , the viewer feels as if they are sharing a secret with the subject.

 

In the early years of the 20th century Stieglitz underwent a change in artistic philosophy from the Pictorial movement to the Modernist. This is seen in his O’Keefe images, one taken in 1918 shows O’Keefe in soft focus much like a painting, and another in 1920 exhibits pin sharp detail – It is almost as if it is a proud photo not hiding under the guise of a painting. This extreme detailing would dictate the next trend in photography and produced famous artists such as Ansel Adams. This trend followed another societal trend; the outbreak of WW1 and the emergence of America as a world power. This, combined with the later Great Depression threw the society into wanting change – realistic, truthful photographs. Photography was finally becoming an accepted art form through the great work of Alfred Stieglitz who took advantage of technological and social advancement.

 

Stieglitz did more than just take photos to promote his art, he used his wealth to create galleries. These galleries were responsible for the rise in popularity of many of the new arts and introduced now famous names to the American public for example Pablo Picasso who was a little known artist in America until his paintings were shown in 291 – the first of Stieglitz’s galleries[9]. Stieglitz is partially responsible for the rise of Ansel Adams, after meeting him in New York where he was so impressed by Adams’s portfolio he exhibited his pictures in “the American Place “ , another of his galleries [10]. Galleries such as Stieglitz’s would have served to give the art displayed their importance in the eyes of the public – if something is displayed for public view then it must by default be special. This in some ways may have influenced the rise of photography as an art.

 

One of Stieglitz contemporaries, Edward Steichen, was another great Pictorialist turned Modernist. He was born in Luxemburg in 1879 but his family emigrated to the US in 1880. A proficient artist Steichen brought his first camera – a Kodak in 1895.[11] He met Stieglitz in 1900 and soon became a regular contributor to Stieglitz’s photographic magazine “Camera work”. In 1904 Steichen created what was to become one of the most expensive photographs in the world.

 

It is called “The pond – Moonlight” it depicts an incredibly still pond with a background of trees. The image resembles an oil painting through Steichen’s use of soft focus and blue toning. Pictorialism’s direct connection to fine art is clear in the image and perhaps is used by Steichen to prove to critics that with photography it takes creative vision -the photographer has to see the image and capture it perfectly while a painter can tweak an image to fit the desired specifications - and technical skill to make photography great. Perhaps it is the difficulty of obtaining these perfect pictures and the experimental printing techniques used by photographers that helped boost it into the art world. However we must question whether the desire to imitate painted art made photography more respected or merely proved that all it could do was mimic the work of others – whether it is straight images of reality or copying popular artists of the time. Maybe the fact that Pictorialism was too close to a facsimile was the reason photography was pushed into modernism.

 

The texture of the pond is like a canvas – the only thing giving away its photographic root is light curved like a camera lens on the right side of the photo. The moon is just rising over the ridge and casts a soft blue-green light. The entire picture emits an eerie glow and feels quiet - it is a pastoral scene , nostalgic of the romantic landscapes of the early 19th century; thus showing the education behind the composition of the photograph. The reflection in the pond feels almost like a portal to another world , perhaps Steichen here is suggesting through his camera that photography (though it captures what is in front of it) can change the world into something new.

 

Steichen also shot portraits, such as “Portrait 1903”. This, like many pictorial renditions looks much like a charcoal drawing only in a dark brown ochre tone. The background of the picture around the main subject is alternately shaded but the viewer is able to discern what looks like a window or a mirror behind the model – does this serve to light the model or is it part of the composition?  As in many pictorial portraits the subject is female. Is this because the Photographer being male wanted to uphold the socially accepted heteronormative world view and objectify the female form – all of these women are photographed in such a way that they look soft and passive. In Steichen’s “portrait” the woman looks at the camera neutrally she is almost like a still life only there to look pleasing to the eye. Like in Stieglitz’s “experiment 27”  the model almost seems to melt into the background suggesting that the woman herself is part of her surroundings – in  harmony with them.

 

Although Pictorialism always emulates fine art there are some photographers who combined the two together, such as Robert Demachy . He was a French photographer, born in 1859 just before the rise of Pictorialism. He was born into a gentrified family but became involved in the bohemian Parisian culture. In the 1870s when Pictorialism was growing as an art form , he became involved in photography and being wealthy was able to devote much of his time and money to the art , quickly becoming  proficient .

 

One of his most famous prints ,“Struggle 1904” is a nude created via the gum bichromate process which allowed the artist to rework the photograph using brushes and colour[12] his photo is the extreme of Pictorialism’s use of “ the camera to get painterly images”[13] and it almost seems as if Struggle is a hybrid between fine art and photography .The photo itself invokes movement not only in the harsh scratched background which curves around the subject suggesting continued movement but also in  the positioning of the subject – she has her back to the lens and appears to be fighting against the charcoal of the background – is Demachy suggesting that photography should fight the boundaries it had been set by the art world? Or is he depicting the struggle between the woman and her position in society - women in 1904 were second class citizens with minimal rights. It could be a depiction of the internal struggle to find self that many people face – the use of a nude figure puts the model in a vulnerable position, there is nowhere she can hide within the photo , the background only serves to bring immediate attention to her plight.

 

Pictorialism spans a large and influential epoch of photography, it was the age when photography went from a scientific interest to a art form. Alfred Stieglitz, a huge influence on the photographic world must be credited with bringing photography into society’s eye as an art. He helped overcome the idea that science and art could not mix – as science is fact and art is creativity – photography breaches the boundaries of this by being both a creative outlet and a technical process – one that was particularly hard in the days of Pictorialism as there where many different ways to print , for example Julia margeret Cameron made albumen silver prints from wet collodion ( a flammable solution) glass negatives [14] . It may have been that these difficult technical processes justified photographers status as an art by proving it took genius and dedication to make each print. Pictorialism as a movement began to slow in the 1920s when modernism and pin sharp images began to filter back into fashion but it didn’t truly disappear until the 1940s, after the second world war when society entered an entirely new world where anything could be possible – perhaps the public felt they didn’t need the fanciful images of Pictorialism anymore. However even after photography was accepted into galleries it wasn’t fully embraced until the 1960s- and with the emergence of digital which further reduces the manual work required to produce a picture photography still struggles to be considered an art.

 

 

 

 

References:

 

 

[1] (Edwards, 2006)

 

[2] (H.P.Robinson)

 

[3] (Edwards, 2006)

 

[4] (Cameron)

 

[5] (Edwards, 2006)

 

[6] (http://www.theartstory.org/artist-stieglitz-alfred.htm)

 

[7] (http://www.artgallery.nsw.gov.au/collection/works/425.1977/)

 

[8] (sontag, 1977)

 

[9] (Alfred Stieglitz (1864–1946) and His Circle)

 

[10] (People & Events: Ansel Adams (1902-1984) )

 

[11] (Rosenblum, 1997)

 

[12] (Pictorialism: 'Struggle,1904' By Robert Demachy)

 

[13] (sontag, 1977)

 

[14] (http://www.vam.ac.uk/)