I like reading about the history of photography, but I've been haphazard in pursuing the subject. I was pleased recently to locate a copy of Beaumont Newhall's The History of Photography at a library book sale for just a couple bucks. This last edition looked nearly twice the size of earlier ones.
Newhall was a pivotal figure in drawing attention to the "straight photography" style as practiced by such notables as Adams and Weston. His "History" first appeared as a companion publication to an exhibit at the Museum of Modern Art in 1939. Besides a stint as a curator of photography at the MOMA, he also got the photography gallery under way at the George Eastman House in Rochester. Newhall spent years as a teacher at the University of New Mexico and developed the school's photography program.
As an art historian Newhall developed an early interest in photography and brought a scholarly focus to the subject. His recounting of photography's heroic 19th Century phase gives a clear view of the technical developments of the period along with the amazing stories of the major actors who took their giant wet plate cameras into the wilderness along with their darkrooms on wheels pulled by mule teams. As a curator, Newhall championed the work of Stieglitz, Strand, Weston and many others whose stylistic innovations dominated fine art photography into the mid-Twentieth Century.
Newhall endeavored to keep his history up to date with four editions after the first, but in reading the later parts of the book questions seem to pile up faster than answers. An overview is provided of major trends such as the development of documentary and photojournalistic work and some of the major players are mentioned, but there is not the same focus on style and substance which Newhall brought to examining the luminaries of the 1930s and '40s. Newhall lists the well known names of early Life magazine photographers and ticks off the war reporters such as Capa and Duncan. He pays attention to those who struck out in new directions such as Cartier Bresson, Winogrand and Arbus. However, in the final edition there is, inexplicably, no mention of the whole Civil Rights era and its chroniclers. Where, for instance, is Gordon Parks and his history with the FSA and Life? Where is Roy Decarava who was a fine arts star promoted by Szarkowski with solo exhibits at the MOMA? Based solely on Newhall's account, one would have to assume that there were no black Americans who owned cameras. By 1982 when the last edition of Newhall's "History" appears such omissions are unforgivable.
I think there are at least a couple important factors which contributed to the inadequacies of Newhall's final "History". Firstly, the book is not really a history of photography. It is a history of the elitist fine arts establishment; there was a lot more to photography than that by 1982. The other likely source of problems is that the book was promoted by the publisher as a text book and it was likely used widely in university photography programs. Such texts are typically updated annually with additions of dubious value to ensure that students buy new books rather than relying on the second hand market to meet class requirements. I do not know to what extent teachers in higher education relied on Newhall's book as a basic source for instruction, but I would hope that they drew on other sources to supplement the view offered by Newhall's text.
7 comments:
It's amazing that this book made it all the way into a 1982 edition with such lack of diversity.
I think Newhall and the academic establishment get to share the blame equally. I'm hoping to find something more recent on the history of photography, but haven't come across anything yet. Browsing the web is not very productive as history topics are so muddled by speculation unsupported by evidence.
HI,
I have a question. I have a Kodak Retina IIa. What product would you use to restore the leather covering? The leather is in good shape, just a little worn and discolored. I want to keep the Retina logo, etc.
I read your blog often and enjoy it very much!
Thanks
John
Thanks for dropping by, John.
If the leather is not too dry and stiff I would likely just use some Kiwi Parade Gloss shoe polish.
The IIa is one of my all-time favorites, though I really like all the Retinas. Today I put a roll of TMAX through my Retina Reflex which has the same fine Xenon lens as the IIa.
Fun to read a review of an older book. Amazon lists a 2012 paperback edition at $50, so if I buy one it will be a yard sale or used book store find. I have noticed the "fine arts" slant to a lot of older photography books, seems there was something of an inferiority complex prevalent among the writers of the period.
Hi, Paul. Always pleased to hear from a fellow film photog. Very nice color work on your site.
Hi Mike - thanks for the comment on my site, I have to say it is all digital. I shot film starting with a Brownie back in the 1960s, had a Pentax by the late 1970s, converted to digital in 2000. I'm here because I love all aspects of photography, the pictures, black and white or color, the medium, film or digital, the cameras of all sizes and vintages, the theory, the application, fine arts, photojournalism, documentation. I currently shoot mostly with a Fujifilm X-T20 because the short flange distance means I can easily adapt my old Takumars from Pentax days. One great thing about the Fujifilm body is that it will emulate all the old Fuji roll films, and I almost always use Velvia emulation. When I combine that with the distinctive color rendition of the Takumar lenses, I get something that is very pleasing to my eye. So I guess in a way I am a fellow film photographer, it's imprinted in my mind and it influences every shot I take.
Post a Comment