Anda di halaman 1dari 16

Drawing and Shooting: Causality in Depiction

Author(s): Patrick Maynard


Source: The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Vol. 44, No. 2 (Winter, 1985), pp.
115-129
Published by: Wiley on behalf of The American Society for Aesthetics
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/430514
Accessed: 22-08-2019 00:28 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

The American Society for Aesthetics, Wiley are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
PATRICK MAYNARD

Drawing and Shooting:


Causality in Depiction

I. Brady's "Shadow" of Lincoln in the critical examination and attempted inven-


tion of influential images-not just of argu-
ments
IN APRIL 1860, redirecting a request forand
a theories-it is a philosophical task
photograph of himself, Abraham Lincoln to examine
wrote the nature and influence of our
an admirer that while in New York, "I was images of photographic and other pictures, and
taken to one of those places where they get up to suggest changes.
such things, and I suppose they got my shadow, Lincoln's shadow metaphor for photographs
and can multiply copies indefinitely."' Thatis not original. It is in fact prevalent in the
trip had been made just over a month earlier tonineteenth century, and at first dominant. It
deliver the Cooper Institute lecture. Only a fewtakes not much imagination to see what it
hours before a reportedly nervous Lincolnwould have meant at that time. Besides a
faced an impressive Eastern audience assembled nineteenth century interest in the mortally fleet-
out of a snowstorm, he had visited Brady's newing, it stood for a kind of likeness, and for a
studio at Broadway and 10th. Lincoln's darkmethod of reproduction which seemed to them
broadcloth suit was badly wrinkled; the lines natural. Just as examination of a photograph
in his face very harsh. His hair had beenof Lincoln reveals much about that time, so can
notoriously unkempt in previous photographs; a sympathetic study of his metaphor for the
his left eye rolled upwards. Brady had trouble photograph. If we keep in mind its two connota-
disguising a neck "sticking out of his collartions, one regarding appearance and the other
like a turtle's," and Lincoln was too tall for his regarding causal or productive processes, we
head brace. Although the photographer remarked will see more clearly into not only the sociol-
that he "had great trouble in making a naturalogy but the aesthetics of nineteenth century
picture," he clearly did his jobs of positioning,photography.
exposing, developing-and retouching-well. Several questions about such "shadows"
His "shadow" of the beardless Lincoln, "mul- would have been logical. How aesthetically
tiplied" in carte de visite prints, on campaign interesting can they be to look at? Should one
buttons and magazine covers was impressive,consider them as pictures of things and, if so,
and Lincoln was later to remark that the pho- are they aesthetically interesting as such?
tograph together with the speech that day madeNext-a rather difficult question-should we
him President (Figure 1). count them as works of pictorial art? Suppose
My purpose in retelling this story is not sowe title the two connotations of the shadow
much to stress the significance of Brady'smetaphor, rather loosely, as aesthetic (having
photographic image of Lincoln as to draw to do with appearance) and formative (having
attention to the significance of Lincoln's to do with causality or mode of production). If
"shadow" image of Brady's photograph. Nowwe go over the history of such questions with
that the land of Lincoln is politically one ofthis distinction I suggest that we find, for
"photo opportunities," the former idea hardlyexample, that although the aesthetic factor is
needs mention. But since philosophy consistsinvolved in discussion about whether pho-
tographs of things should be considered as
PATRICK MAYNARD is associate professor of works of fine art, the formative factor weighs
philosophy at The University of Western Ontario. more heavily by far. For central to ideas about

© 1985 The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
116 M A Y N A R D

Figure 1: Matthew Brady, Portrait of Lincoln (1860). Reprinted


by permission of George Eastman House.

considered
fine art at the time was the reasonable belief not to be sufficiently satisfied b
photographs
that works of art are things made or formed by during Lincoln's century.
The reasons are interesting in themselves
people. This, then, is a "formative" require-
but they
ment2 for fine art which, as I shall illustrate inalso throw a long shadow over l
discussions
the next four sections of this paper, was widely in our own time. In fact, so domina

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Drawing and Shooting: Causality in Depiction 117

has been this particular formative or causal in this controversy at all, saying that all that
aspect of photography that it has entirely mattered was that shadows could make compel-
obscured a group of quite distinct formative or ling visual forms. The history of ideas about
causal questions important to the aesthetics not photography in the nineteenth century runs a
only of photography but other kinds of pictures similar course.
as well. These concern what shows up-or, as At first, the photographer does not appear
I shall say, manifests itself causally-in a given to get much formative credit. This is perhaps
photograph or other picture, and the final four not surprising. It may be surprising that initial
sections provide a case for such questions. So credit went not to the camera but rather to
we can identify two aspects of the formative "Nature." In answer to the relevant sense of
connotation of Lincoln's metaphor, a picture the question, "Who made this?", this is decid-
credit issue about what made a picture, and a edly the response, even from the inventors of
manifestation issue about which of its causal early photographic processes.4
factors show themselves in it. Each will be Niepce, the first inventor ever to fix a
photographic image, tried out in his 1832
shown to interact forcefully with the aesthetic
papers a set of Greek jaw crackers, such as
component, influencing the very appearance
of the picture to us. "iconotauphyse" and "phusalethotype," etc.,
meaning "painting by nature herself," "copy
II. "Nature's Picture" and the Agents of by nature herself," "portrait by nature her-
Apollo self," "to show nature herself," "real Na-
ture," and "true copy from Nature," many of
The "picture credit" issue applied to pho- which represent nature as the maker of the
tographic pictures becomes that of "photo picture.5 His eventual choice, "heliograph,"
credit." Based on the research of photo histori- is more explicit about the form of nature's
ans, we can tentatively sketch a history of ideas agency though less definite about nature as the
with three main orientations, in overlapping maker, as opposed to some maker's medium,
sequence. Although Lincoln's shadow met- in the formation of the picture. But when his
aphor likely expresses only one of these, it may junior partner, Daguerre, advertised to market
be used to sketch the whole sequence. Imagine the process by subscription six years later, the
a society for which shadows upon continuous broadside described the daguerreotype as involv-
surfaces in the environment have become objects ing a "chemical and physical process which
of visual curiosity and appreciation. Such gives Nature the ability to reproduce herself."6
"skiaphiles" might at first take shadows pri- The process was of course instead bought by
marily as effects of ambient light, like the the French government, and a public demon-
sparkle of light on water.3 Or they might rather stration being arranged, The New York Star
consider these lovely, transient creatures main- described the details of the operation, through
ly as the effects of the objects which cast fixing: "This finished it, and the picture thus
them-with, of course, the aid of light literally executed by the sun, was handed
sources-and about whose natures they are rich about."7 Public ownership in France did not
in information. Others might emphasize how prevent Daguerre from taking out patents else-
completely media of transmission, and particu- where as the new portrait enterprise sprang up.
larly the inclination, textures, topologies of the For example, one George Fuller, writing his
shadowed surfaces control the effect. Given father in 1840 about a demonstration of the
process in Boston, thought it a good business
control of these variables, they might point out,
any shadow one wished could be manufactured investment for an excellent market, since for
from any light source and any object. Eventu- $7.00 the sitter would have "a complete im-
ally, aware of wider powers by manipulating pression of a man's countenance, perfect as
any of these causal factors, some might claim nature can make it.' 8
that the best effects were artifacts of minds and More research would be required to estab-
hands. Of course, others might observe that anylish what is only suggested here, that from the
shadow is due to the collaboration of several beginning, photographs were usually consid-
factors, and still others would not care to join
ered as works of nature, as striking for their

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
118 M A Y N A R D

whichin
origins in nature as for their appearances: makes
the the picture, given other causal
words of Samuel Morse, "portions conditions.
of natureThis is the depicted object itself.
herself."9 The sun, as we have seen-or at The causal ambiguity of the situation is caught
least light or its sources-would be the aspect
in his remark that "I made in this way a great
of nature emphasized, though admittedly, as number
in of representations of my house . . .
the term "heliograph" or the later "sun pic-And this building I believe to be the first that
ture," "photogenic drawing," "photogram," was ever yet known to have drawn its own
and "photograph" (all applied to Talbot's picture."'7 Talbot saw photography as a "nat-
processes) these are not necessarily taken to ural
be process" not much "resembling the produc-
makers, as opposed to the media, of depiction.tions of (the artist's) pencil," and subtitled his
formal paper to the Royal Society (arguing
"The pencil of the sun" has just this ambiguity.
The elder Oliver Wendell Holmes, in 1863, precedence against Daguerre's claim): "The
writes of "the way of working with the sun- process by Which Natural Objects May be
beam," but also that "the honest sunshine 'isMade to Delineate Themselves without the Aid
Nature's sternest painter, yet the best."'10
of the Artist's Pencil." This third conception
of "nature's picture" is also expressed by
Lady Elizabeth Eastlake a few years earlier
wrote that in a photograph "light is made toHolmes, and has come down to our time.'8
portray with a celerity," but the object of her
essay was "to decide how far the sun may III.
be "The Machine"
considered an artist" rather than an art
The
medium." It is within this context that we moder and better known rivalry for
may
understand Lincoln's metaphor. As an advertis-
photographic authorship is of course that between
persons
ing slogan for daguerreotype portraiture and technology, as embodied in camera
put it,
"Secure the shadow 'ere the substance fade / systems. So well known is it, that it was
Let Nature imitate what Nature made. "12 necessary in the previous section to document
A second, less popular, identity for nature the older, less equal rivalry with nature. Further
as artist was the optical image. One newspa- research would have to determine at what point
per's conception of Daguerre's demonstration photochemical processes, but particularly camera
was that he had "found a way to fix the images optics and action, came to be seen as what
which paint themselves within a camera "made" the picture. As already indicated, the
obscura."'3 Holmes wrote that with pho- pioneers of photography recognized their chal-
tography the "image is suffered to delineatelenge as strictly photochemical. Talbot wrote
itself, "1 and the inventor of the negative-that in October of 1833 "the idea occurred to
positive process, Talbot, wondered whether by me-how charming it would be if it were
means of a solar microscope one might "cause possible to cause these natural images (of the
that image to impress itself upon the paper, and camera) to imprint themselves durably, and
thus let Nature substitute her own inimitable remain fixed upon the paper."9 The image in
pencil, for the imperfect, tedious"5 medium the camera had been, after all, a result of
of the draftsman. Holmes was a popular but aartifice in Europe for at least three centuries,
knowledgeable writer on the photographic pro- and had long before that been observed to occur
cesses, whose verbal images may be takenspontaneously. The early pioneers of pho-
seriously as expressing conceptions, not merely tographic processes could understandably con-
journalistic excess, as when he, too, writes ofceive their task as devising means for fixing
the astronomer "causing the heavenly bodies images already available, rather than as devel-
to print their images on the sensitive sheet he oping media for forming them-as, for exam-
spreads." Once again, the photographer is seen ple, had been the case at the beginning of the
as a causal condition of the picture, but it is century
a with lithography. Thus The Athenaeum
picture made by nature.16 This is the formative issue reporting the presentation of Talbot's
conception. abstract remarked that "the most fleeting of all
More impressive, I suggest, are Talbot'sthings-a shadow, is fixed and made perma-
verbal images, among which we find a surpris-nent."20 The ensuing optical and photochemi-
ing third aspect of nature taken as the agentcal evolutions could be viewed, rightly or not,

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Drawing and Shooting: Causality in Depiction 119

merely as refinements of this process-that is, of causal variables in a complex causal situa-
until they reached a point of striking effect in tion, so as to ascribe authorship. From that
the appearance of the picture, most obviously perspective, what was at issue was a psy-
through shorter exposures. chological matter of identifying a relevant
Niepce's heliographs required exposures result, and then feeling that one or other of its
of around eight hours; Daguerre's first pro- sets of causal conditions was rather more or
cesses needed 15 to 30 minutes. And while less the significant one for producing it. This
reveals some of the complexity of the loose
George Fuller described the accelerated version
distinction
as taking two minutes, by the early 40's it could between aesthetic and formative
be down to much less than a minute. Talbot's
questions with which we began. As certain
first "photogenic drawings" needed betweenfeatures of a picture's typical appearance be-
an hour and a half of one, though with hiscome more striking to us, we become more
impressed with the set of variables which
invention of development the exposure times
for "calotypes" were soon down to a few govern that range of results. But this impres-
minutes. With the advent of glass plate pho-sion of what made the picture look the way it
does in turn affects the way it looks to us: as
tography in the late 40's and early 50's, it was
a matter of seconds, and Brady's exposure an
of effect of nature, a result of optics and
photochemistry, or a physically or mentally
Lincoln likely took four of these, which helped
crafted object-which is one of our most per-
with the gravity of Lincoln's look.2' Fractions
of seconds were obtainable at least by the
sistent requirements for a work of art. 24
1870's, so that a newspaper could report by
1880, concerning Muybridge's famous instan- IV. Emerson: Aesthetic and Formative Factors
taneous photographs, on "the grand discovery
of an eye which could catch, and a plate which Photo historians do not agree about the
would register the most evanescent of move- significance of Peter Henry Emerson's case,
ments. "22 near the end of the last century, for pho-
The resulting famous static images of tography
a as a fine art-and his renunciation of
it.2 Nevertheless, Emerson's theories are worth
running horse would not likely be any more
attributed simply to "Nature." The shape before
examining briefly as a means of drawing deeper
conclusions from the material we have so far
us is clearly an artifact of a process whose
outstanding causal variables concern exposurebeen examining historically. Given the position
times. With the advantage of this realization,
stated in the previous section, it is possible at
audiences could begin to look back at theany time for someone to view a photograph
earliest photographs in the same way.23 Butmore it or less in terms of one or other of its
would be hasty to conclude that the machine formative
at variables. But the question, "Who
that point simply supplanted "Nature" or the made this?", will have different answers, depend-
sun, etc., as the picture maker in photography. ing not only on one's choice of relevant causal
For with faster exposures came mobile, "leg-factors as argued above but also depending on
less," or "detective" cameras. And as camera the assumed reference of "this."
positions and moments of exposure become to Nineteenth century discussions about the
our thought more relevant variables, control- status of photography as an art seem always to
lable by the photographer, it would be natural concern exactly the two factors with which we
that this person would vie with the machine for began: There is first the "aesthetic" question
our attention. Apollo's agents are now free. whether photographs can look sufficiently the
This, I conjecture, was the situation in which way drawings and paintings look. It is not quite
the photography as art controversies arose fair to represent this as a requirement that
toward the end of the nineteenth century, and photographs look like drawings and paintings.
continued into our own. Thoughtful and informed critics like Lady
This (with an "aesthetic" reservation soon Eastlake-and there are numerous others-crit-
to be made) seems the simple source of the icized the photographs of their day for lack of
whole art of photography controversy: a ques- what were called "broad effects," especially
tion of emphasizing one or another relevant set of tone distribution and separation.26 If it is

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
120 M A Y N A R D

objected that this or some other misgiving


trol over isthese particular variables, and finds it
simply based on criteria for existingsignificantly
media of wanting.27 It is therefore rather
depiction, it can be replied that the misleading
very ideaof him to have declared baldy in his
that photographs are pictures of thingsretraction wasof 1892 that "the photographer does
not make his picture-A MACHINE DOES IT
itself based on a far from necessary association
of them with existing visual habits. ItALL FOR HIM." The rest of his published
is possi-
ble, for example, to treat shadows of argument,
things like though equally off balance, is still
pictures of them, but this is not at all
ofour usual
interest to this discussion. Emerson imagines
practice nor was it implied in thesomeonefanciful summarizing the case against to the
"skiaphile" story before. Plant, particularly
photographer:
floral, forms have a long history in design in
most cultures, but there is no simple answer tothe view: that was art. You arranged it
You selected
the question whether they thereby occur as it well: that was art .... Then you
well, focused
started a machine, and that machine drew the picture
depictions of plants and flowers. The history
for you; you merely fixed its work by chemicals, which
of photo-aesthetics should show the course of
is ... not art. You selected some ready-made paper,
any new medium: attempts of assimilation
and the tosun printed your picture .... That is
existing media, with their current aesthetic
photography, with an iota of art in the selection of the
standards, an unease about the lack of fit,
paper. the
We find you have not proved . . . you are an
artist, for you can execute nothing. You cannot even
development of (different) movements for auton-
draw a cube fairly .... If you think photography to
omy, involving perhaps a radical secession. It you must decide who is the artist in the case
be an art,
is even possible to consider a photograph to
of an be
automatic machine-the penny, the person who
an artwork which is not a picture at all. drops the penny in the slot, or the automatic
All this
machine ...
is what we in fact observe.
Second, there was the question in that cen-
tury whether photographs are made sufficiently "Make," "drew," "execute," etc., are the
enough the way a relevant class of artworks are crucial terms in this case against photography
made. This is the "formative" question, and it as a fine art. But like many detective stories,
was most urgent in the aspect we have been this "whodunit" has become complicated as
discussing, and over which Emerson, photo much by shifts in identifying the thing done,
art's most forceful polemicist of the 1880's, as in deciding about its relevant causes: given
renounced his view. Photographs, Emerson that what was relevant about the artist's act for
said, could look better than paintings-even Emerson was not that of producing readable
better than nature itself-in the sense of "look" individual figures in a picture, but rather that
he considered relevant to art. Here he disagrees of controlling value distributions, relative reso-
with Eastlake, and it may further be said that lution, etc., Emerson remains nonetheless ex-
he continued to urge this photoaesthetic. plicit about the formative factor, with its causal
Emerson even continued to hold that artists variables, as the deciding one. In photography,
were more likely to make better photographs unlike art, he concluded "under the same
than other people-or, that aestheticallyphysical good conditions the same results will always
photography is a test of artistry. Nevertheless, follow."
for Emerson, photography fails to be a fine art,
because of a shortcoming in the formative V. Stieglitz and "The Resistant Dead Eye"
requirement. Photographers, he thought, lack
sufficient control over relevant variables of the Crude though Emerson's argument may ap-
picture's appearance, notably (once again) tonal pear, the anatomy of his little interactive aesthe-
scale. This is not simply the earlier idea of tic system might be useful for categorizing the
"Nature's picture." Something more subtle is range of opposing and largely subsequent posi-
at work, illustrating the interaction of our tions about photography as art, especially since
aesthetic factor and causal, formative factor. the field bristles with arguments at cross pur-
Given an aesthetic assumption about how goodposes. One might reject his identifications of
pictures should look, Emerson then considers what a photographic artist would have to make,
the evidence for photographers' formative con- by means of this medium. Or one might grant

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Drawing and Shooting: Causality in Depiction 121

his general causal case and argue either for now be made by new criteria, as we find, for
weakening or for reinterpreting the formative example, in a 1921 article by Paul Rosen-
requirement-generally for art, or as a special feld.32
case for photography, still or moving.This very For Rosenfeld, Stieglitz is a genius, a trans-
last recourse, for example, is the one urged by forming magician capable of dominating any
Siegfried Kracauer28 and varieties of each of medium for his self-expression, but having
the others could be documented now-if we chosen to express himself through a "[machine's]
resistant
wished to follow further an analytic history of dead eye." Stieglitz's triumph over
the aesthetics of photography. the camera is symbolic of modem man's tri-
umph over the machine, in general, which
Fortunately, there is one path of defense,
very close to Emerson himself, which cantended
lead at first to overwhelm him. This con-
us gracefully away from these causal issuesception
to of photography has of course wide
the set which chiefly concerns us here: issues
popular currency today, as well as eloquent
of manifestation. Emerson's own well-appointed
expression in the ideas of contemporary art
photographers such as Duane Michals. A less
heir to leadership in the fight for photography
as a fine art had been Alfred Stieglitz. excited
Now version of it is also useful at a time
Stieglitz had argued against Emerson's reluc- when Nikon advertises, "We take the world's
tant conclusion by drawing upon the latter's greatest pictures," while Venus pencils makes
earlier assertion that the making requiredno forparallel claim.
art need not be so much a physical "as a mental We must, however, defer a critical, histor-
process." This is in the spirit of a principle ical
ofexamination of this current in modem
ancient origin, as well as of contemporary photoaesthetics and its apparent antagonist, the
influence, including the photographic aesthe- schools of "straight" and "documentary" pho-
tics of both "pre" and "post-visualization." tography. The idea of self-expression in pho-
(As Emerson wrote, "You selected the view.") tography arises, as we saw, in a debate about
Besides this, Stieglitz also favored a casephotography
for as an art. But the issues of self-
the photographer's physically causal role. What expression and of being the author or creator
is most significant is that behind these tactics of an artwork are distinct. Of course, self-
rises a romantic strategy of self-expression.expression
For normally carries a causal condition.
Stieglitz, Emerson's case for photography To as aexpress oneself in something it is necessary,
fine art appeared to rest on proving it a medium though not sufficient, causally to affect that
for the "expression of individual and original thing, in relevant ways. Some relevant state of
ideas in an original and distinct manner."29 that thing must be functionally related to some
This is in fact not Emerson's own stated view: other state of oneself, so that the latter can
all "pictorial art is man's expression by means show up, or manifest itself, in the former. None
of pictures of that which he considers beautiful of this, however, entails that one receives
in nature."3' Emerson's is the classic idea that credit or blame for having made the thing
an artist is someone who makes something ofthrough which one's states are expressed. To
a certain kind, and we have seen evidence that argue the logical independence of these two
he shifted positions on both "making" and ideas would, of course, require space: how-
"kind." For Stieglitz, however, the artist is ever, our topic is not self-expression in pho-
one who expresses his or her conceptions.tography but rather one necessary causal require-
Media allow this or do not, according as theyment of it.
are artistic or not. The point, one must hasten
to add, is not that Stieglitz needed a differentVI. Shadow Play
criterion of art to get counted as a photo-artist.
Emerson considered him a considerable artist. In the 1920's and '30's, Stieglitz made a
To quote Gertrude Stein, "If anything is donedemonstration of self-expression in photography
and something is done, then somebody has towith his famous "equivalents." Using (what
do it. / Or somebody has to have done it. he/ called) a "snapshot" camera and standard
That is Stieglitz's way. / He has done it."3methods of developing and printing, and avoid-
By any criteria. The point is that the case will
ing the smooth platinum papers which both he

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
122 MAYNARD

and Emerson had favored istics. But


for shadows,
a kind like photographs,
readilyare
available to the public,made
he by means of light pictures
produced sources, media of
(usually of clouds with transmission,
skylines) projection
as surfaces.
what When he we
called equivalents for his makethought
shadow plays, and
we treatfeeling
the results rather
states. Stieglitz showed in this manner
like depictions of such things that itfaces,
as animals,
was the variable of sensibility, etc.-none of which,notof course, cast the of
those shad-
technical virtuosity, special ows. Whatequipment,
is shadowed and what subject
is "depicted"
matter (or control of it) which
are there entirely had
distinct.all along
But often we take
made the difference in his art.33 The demon- part in rather spontaneous shadow plays, when
stration is successful. The framing of the im-
in imagination we treat the shadows of objects
ages, their tones, internal movements, pictorial
exaggerated or distorted by the spreading rays
spaces, make them compelling-well named of street lighting at night, or the slanting rays
by him "songs of the sky."' of the sun against broken or oblique surfaces,
Of one of these artworks the followinglike depictions of them. What is manifested
might well be true. It is a photograph or
then in a shadow may be identical with what is
portrayal of altocumulus perlucida clouds at"depicted,"
an although its properties are strik-
altitude of about 5 km. It depicts these clouds
ingly different. (A shadow of this sort might
be called "documentary," to the extent that
in their characteristic white and grey colors and
whatever is depicted is also shadowed.)
fibrous texture as part of the sky. It manifests
the resources and skills of an artist. Although There are countless examples of similar
ordinary usage is not altogether clear in sucheffects in photography, starting from the well
known "cheese effect" in amateur work, where
matters, each of these statements uses a rather
distinctive concept to make a different claim. a depiction of someone smiling is made by
One of them is about manifestation. Suppose photographing someone doing something else.
we consider a few of their relations, beginningMore interesting cases, akin to Brady's, in-
with "photograph of" and "depicts," then two clude Karsh depicting Churchill as determined
more combinations.34 by irritating him with a snatched cigar, Haas
The distinction between a photograph producing
of a portrait of the profound Einstein
something and a photograph which depicts by having him try to remember where he left a
something has an importance to our time far book, Tames depicting Kennedy under the
outstripping aesthetics. Here, where this dis- weight of "the loneliest job in the world" by
cussion began, with Lincoln's photograph and photographing him behind, leaning on a table
to relieve his back, reading a newspaper.
its place in political history, we encounter the
large social issue of image management. Tak- (Kennedy told Tames that he had learned from
ing photographs of things in modem societyNixon is the trick of pointing a finger at whom-
largely a technology of forming depictions and ever he was talking with, in order to look
dominant in the resulting picture.)35 By a true
pictorial representations. The thing photograph-
ed, rather like the lens, may be viewed as partrepresentation we usually mean at least a repre-
of a mechanical system for structuring light, sentative one, and portrayals such as these are
which is employed to form a picture to taste. sometimes defensible on grounds that each
depicts its subject as he characteristically
Such might be a socially as well as aesthetically
useful way to think of photographic depictions was-whether or not he was so or appeared so
in our time. Then, rather than presuming
at athe particular time of the photograph.
photograph of something will be a depiction of If photographic pictures, or photographs as
it, we might wonder under what conditions this depictions, were called "photographs about,"
in fact will occur. An exaggeration of Lincoln'swe might say simply that a photograph is
metaphor might be helpful; we may liken frequently not of what it is about. This is an old
photographic depiction to games of shadow story. Price's popular 1857 albumen print "Don
play (Figure 2). Quixote in His Study" is a photograph about,
Shadows of hands, like hand prints on walls, not of, Don Quixote, about his book and armor,
in snow or wet sand, are traces or manifesta- though of another book and armor, etc.-and,
tions of hands and their actions and character- of course, most advertising photography can

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Drawing and Shooting: Causality in Depiction 123

these pictures apart from those made by hand.


Elsewhere I have suggested, in this connection,
that non-Western societies frequently treat hand-
made representations as manifestations of what
they represent.38 Without argument, I will here
suggest as an empirical hypothesis that Western
societies often do treat photographs as manifesta-
tions of what they are photographs of, but
hardly ever treat hand-made pictures in this
way. Of course, even on this construal pho-
tographs will manifest much else besides. Causal
factors like use of a 4x5 camera, the texture and
tone of gelatin-silver, relative underexposure,
diagonal positioning of the camera, a weak
front aloft and, as already discussed, Stieglitz's
art or his sensibility, may all be said to manifest
themselves in one of his "equivalents." But it
is not a photograph of any of these things-nor
is it in the sense just described even a pho-
tograph about any of them.
Just as the photograph, as a picture in which
what is shown also shows up, may be the
special case by which we discover a widespread
function of visual images which has been
previously neglected in our reckonings, so
might it liberalize our settled notions of causal
Figure 2: Hand shadow picture of Abraham manifestation in art. Freed of its usual context
Lincoln from The Art of Hand Shadows by of discussion in definitions of art and theories
Albert Almoznino. Reprinted by permission of of self-expression, the artist's causal con-
Stravon Educational Press. tributions may take their place with other causal
factors, such as the ones just listed for a
be described in the same way. But as some Stieglitz photograph.
photographers are philosophic, we must not
suppose that the description following "of" is VII. Causal "Self-portraits"
always independent of that following "about."
Photographers such as Bullock, White, Michals, There is a single instance in the traditions
have metaphysical ideas which may be taken of Western conceptions of arts of depiction
seriously. When Bullock photographed boul- before photography where the coincidence of
ders to seem like processes, he wished to show what is shown with what (indirectly) shows up
us that they were processes. According to his in a picture has not only attracted our notice
Heracleitan metaphysics, those particular pho- but held it as a permanent category. This is the
tographs about processes should reveal to us genre of the artist's self-portrait, and we may
that all photographs are photographs of pro- use it to consider combinations of portrayal,
cesses. 36 depiction, and manifestation. Many artists have
Mention of Minor White, who called his of course portrayed themselves in the acts of
pictures manifestations,37 raises the question drawing and painting-even of drawing and
of whether photographs are also manifestations painting themselves. (It need not be empha-
of the things photographed-the things they are sized how often, wittingly or not, photographers
photographs of. This is the next pair of ideas do the same.) Thus we can see the likes of
to compare. Velasquez, Rembrandt, Bonnard, and many
The first part of this paper argued that such others drawing and painting that very picture.
is a long established notion about what sets Now it was of course as a joke that Talbot

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
124 M AY N ARD

remarked that his house was the first ever to and the relative neglect of it is an abiding
do a self-portrait: the concept of a self-portrait
shortcoming of existing theories of representa-
is stronger than that of merely an imagetion.
of
something, made by that very thing, with
collaboration of other factors. But as the first
VIII. Capa: Depiction by Facture
part of this paper argued, it was a joke with a
point. It would be even more farfetched now Two discussions in this paper began with
to call a picture a self-portrait of one of its
works of great photographers: so shall this last.
many causal conditions, simply because that
The few of Robert Capa's surviving frames
condition is both depicted and manifestedfrom over a hundred taken of the Omaha Beach
there, but again the metaphor would havelanding
a on D-Day depict the combat which
point. Obviously, most of the causal conditions
Brady's war photographers never could.39 When
we compare the war pictures of the two eras, it
of pictures' being the pictures they are are not
would be insufficient to say that the Capa's
depicted in them. Many of those conditions
could not be said even to be manifested in miniature hand-held Contax cameras and fast
them. So there could be a particular interestlenses
in and films allowed him to "capture"
what Brady's bulkier apparatus, slower
pictures in which both conditions are satisfied,
and these we might call "causal self-por- mechanisms and wet glass plates could not. It
traits." With this liberalized idea of self- would have been physically impossible for
portraits we might begin having shows and team to take photographs of the sorts
Brady's
editing books about pens and brushes which
of things which Capa did. But the artifacts from
depicted themselves. Some of these pictures
Capa's cameras were not only photographs of
would involve as well images of the artists, of and events, but also depictions of them,
things
and these depictions of soldiers struggling
course, but we will not favor Velasquez's
likeness of himself in "Las Meninas" over that
through heavy seas towards the beach from
landing craft are artifacts of an interaction of
of his brush. Leading off such collections might
be works in which distracting details of the causal factors, some of which are parts of the
artists are left out altogether. situation photographed, and some of which are
These might feature Saul Steinberg'sthe workings of the camera and the film. For
"Rodozahari Watercolour" of 1974, in which example, they have a shallow depth of field,
pencil, straight edge, and watercolour set are they are grainy-and they are blurred. Blurs
depicted, but not even the shadow of the are, of course, often made by motions: relative
artist-unless in fact all those tools of trade are motions between the camera works and the
facsimiles whittled out of wood, in which case things photographed, during the periods of
one is as mistaken as one might be in thinking exposure. They are then traces or manifesta-
the figure down left from Socrates in "Thetions of such relative motion. When, as often,
School of Athens" is a self-portrait of Raphael. they are used to depict what made them, they
But besides speaking figuratively, and whimsi- are causal "self-portraits," but of a special
cally, we have been speaking loosely. Neitherkind. A blur manifests not only the causes of its
Raphael nor Steinberg's pencil are strictly appearance but an event or process: the work-
speaking causal conditions of their presumed ing of those causes in the picture's production,
self-portraits. What makes the drawing the wayfor which we may reserve the term "facture"
it is is not the pencil but something about it-its (Figure 3).
movement, the sharpness of its point, the "Facture" is an existing artist's term, sig-
softness of the lead, etc.-characteristics only nifying signs of the method or manner of an
some of which are self-depicted in the picture. artwork's construction, which here receives
By attending strictly to the traces of such causal semi-technical form. By facture, we will mean
factors, we may approach a connection between not just the manifestation or showing up in the
what is depicted in a picture and the traces of work of a productive factor, but the manifesta-
its production which show up in it, which, far tion there of the event of that production.
from being metaphorical or whimsical, is cen- Facture signs in a picture would indicate not
tral to all our arts of depiction. This is facture, causal agents such as pens, soft brushes, quills,

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Drawing and Shooting: Causality in Depiction 125

Figure 3: Robert Capa, The Omaha Beach Landing on D-Day. Reprinted by permission
of Magnum Photos, Inc.

an f/16 aperture, the rough finish of Classico changes of pressure, etc., all these are easily
Fabriano hot press paper, artist's skills, tempera- detected in many pictures, and of course the
ments, intentions, etc., nor only causal condi- same holds for the manifestations of pencil,
tions, such as a reed pen's being split or pen, burin, or hand actions-as well as for
flexible, an engraving plate's being newly those of the camera. A great point of contro-
formed or well worn, a greasy surface's hold- versy between the "pictorial" photographic
ing ink, the tendency of silver ions to migrate aesthetic of this century and the opposed
in straight paths to Polaroids, but also causal "straight" school was precisely that of real or
events or processes, typically registered by simulated hand facture in the print. But even
event descriptions, such as the dragging of a "straight" shooting allows for facture. Appar-
sharp steel etching point across a soft copper ent camera handling becomes quickly evident
plate; the building up of shadows by a series to the practiced eye: Winogrand's for example
of cross hatching strokes; the scumbling action are as aggressive as Bresson's are unobtrusive.
of light, opaque oil over dark, translucent Such judgments, like any others concerning the
glazes; the slanted cradling of a 35mm camera looks of things, may be mistaken or at least
in the artist's hands; the area by area develop- contestable, but they are prevalent and gener-
ing of a fresco cycle; etc. Whether scorned or ally valid.
admired by a particular medium aesthetic, it is It is important to see that they are not
an empirical fact, well confirmed, that facture particularly subtle or refined, the province of
is not only discernible in pictures but frequently connoisseurs. The human visual system natu-
hard to miss, even by unpracticed eyes. rally classifies states of things in terms of how
Direction, rate and sequence of brush strokes, they were made, and there is good biological
their sharpness of attack and finish, hesitancies, reason for this. Leaves appear to be newly

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
126 M A Y N A R D

fallen upon what appears as a mowed lawn


possible and The second is to allow, even
separate.
freshly spaded earth; the yellow strip on the
to exploit, their interactions. The first strategy
would
road seems to be sprayed over the be to count facture appearances as
asphalt
patching; a crumpled bit of plastic adventitiouslooks like byproducts
it of the making of a
was carelessly dropped on concrete representation,
which bearswhich may be admired aestheti-
imprints, is worn, broken, cracked by
cally or tree
expressively, or simply neglected, but
roots, etc. With special kinds of acquaintance are in any case kept separate from the representa-
with processes, appearances change: tional
metalinterpretation.
may Pictorial appearances for
come to look not only shaped but this rolled or habit will have a dual aspect,
sort of visual
extruded. In post-industrial societies and in
it is pretty clear that much modem art
which
productive procedures are so numerous, criticism, tech-
theory, and practice have developed
nical, and specialized there is probably varieties ofwider
this approach. One variety of this
scope for difference in perceivingstrategy in fact takes facture appearance as an
such visible
characteristics than ever before in human his- intrusive distraction for picture interpretation:
tory. This general phenomenon applies specif-a confusing element of noise interfering with
ically to signs of production in pictorial worksthe legibility of the representational signals.
of art. On one aesthetic, such evidence of "handling"
is scorned in favor of "finish"--on another,
IX. Sequence Facture: Drawing and Shooting "traces of the brush" are favored, as usurping
depiction.
Facture, as one kind of causal manifestation Although this dualistic assumption in one
in a picture, may now be treated in its connec- or other of these forms has been very influential
tions with depiction. In the Capa examples, I in modem art and theory, artists themselves
have suggested that facture makes its causal have never abandoned the interactive strategy.
"self-portrait," that the presumed relative mo- Schematically stated, the strategy is to use the
tion of the camera at the scene not only facture byproduct of depiction itself to depict,
apparently shows up in the picture but is or to enhance depiction. Technologically, this
depicted there, as such-adding to our sense phenomenon may be recognized as the familiar
of being vivid eye-witnesses to the event. This human efficiency strategy of turning byproducts
is part of the power of camera documentary of productive processes back into production,
imagery over more traditional kinds. But I may rather than to lose them as waste. Use of the
be mistaken about this case. Perhaps some of visible evidence of the process of the making
us read the image blur entirely in terms of the of an image may greatly enhance the image
shock of the scene depicted, and not at all in itself, as may be demonstrated from some
terms of the action of the instrument which simple cases. Drawn lines formed with appar-
portrays it. In that case, the picture does not ent speed or degrees of firmnesses may add to
depict movement relative to the film's exposure the depicted speed or strength of the thing
depicted. Apparently clumsily made strokes
(the relevant causal event), and therefore is not
a causal "self-portrait" of that event.40 Even may help make the depicted object seem more
then it is portrayal via facture and such por- clumsy, etc. These are scarcely more that
trayal need not be self-portrayal. Manifesta- cartoon instances; more subtle cases are easy
tions of one thing may be used to depict to find. For example, the depiction of a human
another, we saw; facture traces of one event form as an all-over shape articulated by sec-
(the making of a picture) may help depict ondary
a forms-rather than as modular con-
distinct event or characteristic of another situa- struction out of separate forms-is frequently
tion. This phenomenon obtains widely in every managed by facture traces which show the
visual art. figure to have been drawn in that sequence
Hypothetically, there are two basic strategiesrather than in the other.
for treating depiction and facture, each having Sequence facture marks one of the large
its own varieties, and I think we will find each differences between drawing and shooting. Ear-
of these well instanced. The first is to keeplier I quoted from Talbot's Pencil of Nature,
these two visible aspects of a picture as far as and we may conclude this discussion with

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Drawing and Shooting: Causality in Depiction 127

another remark from that rich and intelligent 64 and 73. In the same essay he says, "The sun is a
source. Talbot was struck by the fact that in a Rembrandt in his way" (p. 70), and that "the truthful
sunbeam has delineated" (p. 71), etc.
portrait group "the Camera depicts that all at " "Photography" (1875), in Newhall, E & I; pp. 84
once."4' Except in the case of specialty scan- and 88.
ning or photofinish cameras, or "painting with 12 Newhall, History (5th ed.), p. 32. Masses of other,
light" procedures, Talbot's remark is near like, cases, literal or picturesque, may easily be gleaned
from standard histories and anthologies, or more slowly
enough to the truth, and might appear amusing-
from nineteenth century sources. A George Eastman House
ly naive to modem readers. But it carries an exhibit in Rochester quotes a poem by William Doty, "On
important perception for understanding the dif- a Photograph," from Peterson's Magazine of 1868, which
ference between shooting and drawing-and begins, "Sweet life-like shadow, by a sunbeam printed."
more traditional depictive processes. To even A pictorial version of this image often found in daguer-
reotype advertisements shows the sun painting a portrait of
the contemporary eye there is little sense of a the earth. Apollo was likened to Apelles, and Cruikshank
sequence of forms being built up in a pho- called the photographer "Apollo's agent." Were the early
tograph, largely because we know roughly how inhibiting attempts to derive direct positives and then
photographs are made. The difference of fac- "colours direct from nature" due to this passive image of
"Nature's picture"?
ture makes a marked difference in our proce-
13 Gazette de France (Jan. 6, 1839), in Newhall, E &
dures for interpreting this modem kind of 1, p. 17. This article also comments on "the faithfulness of
picture. It is one of many causal, productive nature's image reproduced in the camera."
phenomena which require more detailed study, 14 Holmes, "Doings of the Sunbeam," in Newhall, E
once we have liberated our interest in the &, p. 7.
15 Talbot, "Some Account of the Art of Photogenic
causality of pictures from the engulfing con-
Drawing ... ," a paper read for him to the Royal Society
cerns of "picture credit" and artisticonself-
January 31, 1839, and published as a booklet; reprinted
expression. in Newhall, E & 1, p. 27.
16 The Journal des Artistes of 1835 had advance
knowledge of Daguerre's processes, and remarked that he
had discovered a method whereby "a landscape or view of
' C. Hamilton and L. Ostendorf, Lincoln in Pho- any kind, projected upon this plate by the ordinary camera
tographs (Norman, Okla., 1963), p. 35f, shows a picture obscura, leaves its impress there in light and shade ..
of the letter, tells the story, and provides the turtle Newhall, E & I, p. 18.
description. Other details are provided by Roy Meredith, 17 Talbot, The Pencil of Nature ([1844, 1846] reprinted
Mr. Lincoln's Camera Man, 2nd rev. ed. (New York, N. Y., 1969), ch. xv, for this and the following quotation.
1974), p. 59, and the remark by Lincoln is from Brady's Talbot there refers to the Lacock Abbey pictures as
reminiscences of 1891, reprinted for example in Beaumont"curious self-representations," and he was evidently pleased
Newhall (ed.), Photography: Essays and Images (New with the "self-portrait" jest since he had used the identical
York, 1980), p. 48: "Mr. Lincoln answered in his ready
phrase in "Some Account .. ." as well as in an article in
way, 'Brady and the Cooper Institute made me President.'"Literary Gazette 1150, (Feb. 2, 1839). As Helmut Gemsheim
2 The term "formative" in this essay is derived from points out (The Origins of Photography [London, 1982],
Siegfried Kracauer's usage in Theory of Film (Oxford, p. 54), Ni6pce's house was first!
1960), passim, and its structure reflects the division of the 18 Aaron Scharf's description of the camera as "a
introduction of that work. machine by which nature could take her own picture" (Art
3 William Henry Fox Talbot wrote in his notebook ofand Photography, p. XIII), is ambiguous. But Rudolph
1835 about the "Photogenic or Sciagraphic process":Arnheim's statement ("On the Nature of Photography,"
Beaumont Newhall, The History of Photography, 5th rev. Critical Inquiry 2, no. 1 [Sept. 1974]: 155) that in
ed. (New York, 1982), p. 20. photographs "the physical objects themselves print their
4 The following historical sketch is original and tenta- image by means of the the optical and chemical action of
tive. Most of the sources cited may be found in Newhall, light" is explicit. The present discussion presents empirical
Essays and Images (hereafter called "E & I"), the best ofevidence against the historical claim of J. Snyder and N.
the historical anthologies. Allen ("Photography, Vision, and Representation," Crit-
5 Aaron Scharf, Pioneers of Photography (London,ical Inquiry 2, no. 1 [Autumn 1975]: 145) that in this
1975), p. 35. Amheim is part of a distinctively "moder position." The
6 Aaron Scharf, Art and Photography (London, 1968), tenor of the present paper is in cheerful opposition to the
p. 6. main theses and arguments of their article.
7 Beaumont Newhall, The History of Photography, 4th 19 Talbot, Pencil ofNature.
rev. ed. (New York, 1964), p. 19. 20 Athenaeum (Feb. 2, 1839), from G. Buckland, Fox
8 Beaumont Newhall, The Daguerreotype in America, Talbot and the Invention of Photography (Boston, 1980),
3rd rev. ed. (New York, 1975), p. 32. p. 44.
9 Morse quoted in R. Sobieszek and O. Appel, The 21 These times are approximate, of course, and largely
Spirit of Fact (Rochester, 1976), p. ix. drawn from Gernsheim's table on p. 582 of his and Alison
10 "Doings of the Sunbeam," in Newhall, E & I; pp. Gersheim's The History of Photography . . ., 2nd ed.

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
128 M A Y N A R D

(New York, 1969). not photographs as all, (2) that they are aesthetically bad
22 Newhall, E & I, p. 142. things, or (3) that they are bad works of art. Thus for
23 Of course, people had all along marked example in 1924, Emerson wrote to Stieglitz: "'Gum' and
the empty
skies (and streets), the blurs (in Lincoln's 'oil'
foot, arecaused
neitherby
photography. They are bastard processes
his pulse), the darkness from reds (for example in faces), and no photographer with artistic feeling
using photography
would ever
the flipper-like hands, etc., of early photographs have touched either" (p. 128), etc.
as defects
of the process, and humorists such as Busch had 28 Kracauer,
fun with Theory of Film, p. 23, holds that "the
them. Besides this Talbot had explicitly predicted
formative (Pencil
tendency" of the artist must so give way to the
essential "realistic
of Nature) not only high-speed but UV photography, and tendency" of photo media that we
his calotypes were noticed to have different should call photographs art, but by "an extended usage."
characteristics
from daguerreotypes. Perhaps however the29 Gazette
Stieglitz,de
"Pictorial Photography," in Newhall, E
& I, p. 165. "Mental,"
France's initial comment on Daguerre summarizes the "individual," and "originality"
earlier attitude toward such phenomena: "Nature
are keyin motion
terms in this short article from Scribner's Magazine
cannot reproduce herself" yet (Newhall, E &26I,(Nov. 1899). James Borcoman remarks that "by the turn
p. 17).
of the century,
24 At the end of this brief history of "Nature's picture"photographers who considered themselves
it must be stressed (1) that all along (as in our agreed
artists opening
on one thing: that photography was as capable
of transmitting
quotation from Brady) photographers were also said to havethe personal feelings of the artist as was
made photographs, (2) that in various sensespainting"
of the("word,
135 years war," 77).
30 advertise-
they were frequently called artists-especially in Emerson, "Photography, a Pictorial Art," The
ments-and some case was made for them Amateur Photographer (March 19, 1886), reprinted in
as fine artists,
Newhall,
although Edward Weston was later to hold that theyE were
& I, p. 160. I admit that in his pamphlet of
all the better as artists for not seriously thinking
1890, The Death of
of Naturalistic Photography (reprinted in
themselves as such. B. Newhall, On Photography [Watkins Glen, N. Y.,
25 The Newhalls, Beaumont and Nancy, hold his1956]), Emerson classed photography as the lowest of the
importance high, in various publications. The Gemsheims,arts because, due to the photographer's lack of control, "the
Helmut and Alison, however, consider him a minor crank.individuality of the artist is cramped, in short, it can
These are extremes between which most histories fall. scarcely show itself" (p. 127), and so would have to argue
26 Standard references on this subject of photographythe difference between him and Stieglitz on self-expression
as a matter of emphasis.
as "a picturesque agent" capable of "artistic effect" begin
with Sir William Newton and Lady Eastlake (both in 31 Stein, "Stieglitz," in America and Alfred Stieglitz,
Newhall, E & I). James Borcoman ("Purism versus ed. W. Frank et al., rev. ed. (New York, 1979), p. 136.
pictorialism: the 135 years war," Artscanada [Dec. 1974]: 32 Rosenfeld, "Stieglitz," in Newhall, E & 1, pp.
192-225), relates the history of the battle between the209-218.
"fuzzy-wuzzies" and the "sharp and shinies," and here 33 Stieglitz: "Through clouds to put down my philosophy
of life-to show that my photographs were not due to
and elsewhere emphasizes the distinctive aesthetic look of
different photo processes, and shows us that these have subject matter-nor to special privileges, clouds were there
been appreciated from the beginning. Recent photo-history for everyone ...." ("How I Came to Photograph
Clouds," The Amateur Photographer 56 [1923]: quoted in
books, by text and by production efforts, are stressing such
aesthetic issues more these days. Newhall, History, 5th rev. ed., p. 171).
The human visual system seems rapidly to pick up 34 For brevity in the following discussion, photographic
distinctive new looks from new classes of things, and can depiction and photographic representation will not be dis-
soon produce the impression of the "essences" of such, andtinguished, and only pairs of the resulting three ideas will
thereby new versions of "purity." It is interesting to be treated, in the order: photograph of/depiction of; pho-
observe the comedy of successive purisms in photography,tograph of/manifestation of; manifestation of/depiction of.
and I consider Kracauer's question, "How can we trace the 35 For the Karsh story, see Yousef Karsh, Karsh
nature of the photographic medium?" a fallacy of two Portraits (Toronto, 1976), p. 46. In The Concerned Pho-
"the's." tographer 2, ed. Cornell Capa (N.Y., 1972), unpag., Haas
tells
27 Excerpts from Emerson, "Photography Not how he accomplished his Vogue editor's assignment
Art,"
to get
The Photographic Quarterly (January 1892), repr. in "a picture of Einstein thinking," despite the fact that
Nancy
Newhall, P. H. Emerson: The Fight for Photography as a "always was posing and looking at my camera."
the latter
On Tames, see Francis X. Clines, "Images," The New
Fine Art (New York, 1975), p. 98f, for this interpretation
York Times
(and for the following three quotations from Emerson in Magazine (Oct. 14, 1984): 60. Other cases of
this section). Briefly stated, Emerson's aestheticcoursewas
abound.
36 For
"naturalism," naturalism for him entailed a certain kind of Bullock's philosophy see Barbara Bullock,
Wynn Bullock (San Francisco, 1971).
value distribution, and the Hurter-Driffield characteristic
37 Minor White, Mirrors/Messages/Manifestations
curve result of 1890 convinced him that such values could
not be much controlled by the photographer during (Rochester,
devel- 1969).
opment: "The vital powers of selection and elimination38are
Maynard, "The Secular Icon," JAAC 12, No. 2
fatally limited" (p. 93). (Winter 1983): 156-69. There the idea of a manifestation
function for pictures and other images is presented, but
Given this distinction between aesthetic requirements
for good photography and stronger requirements for"manifestation"
art, is widened beyond the causal form dis-
cussed
Emerson could (and did) consistently maintain three formshere. Turnabout being fair play, we might also
of attack upon highly manipulated works: (1) that consider
they arethe many situations in which a drawing or other

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Drawing and Shooting: Causality in Depiction 129

representation figures in the causal explanation of some- move his camera and blur picture."
thing else-including what it is a drawing of. They may 40 The example was in fact mischievous. In Slightly
even manifest themselves in such artifacts. John Willats andOut of Focus Capa tells us how only eight out of the 106
Fred Dubery point out that "with the invention of printed frames he shot on D-Day survived a technician's melting
circuits the drawing and the object became consubstan- the emulsions during processing. What the blur manifests
tial.... Many modern artists have attempted this same therefore is an event in England, not France, and no event
conjunction of object and image" (Drawing Systems [London either photographed or depicted by the pictures. We are
and N.Y., 1972], p. 9). Designers' and architects' drawings frequently mistaken, sometimes by design, about what is
have less direct influence, but as Saul Steinberg has depicted in a picture, what is manifested there, and about
remarked, "The frightening thought that what you draw what something is a photograph of.
may become a building makes for reasoned lines" (Saul 41 Pencil of Nature, ch. XIV.
Steinberg and Harold Rosenberg, Saul Steinberg [N.Y.,
1978], p. 235). An earlier draft of this paper was presented at a 1983
39 Capa described his experiences of this in Slightly aesthetics colloquium at the University of California,
Out of Focus (New York, 1947). His photographs of the Berkeley, which I thank Hans Sluga for suggesting. Partial
landing appeared in Life for June 19, 1944 (v. 16, no. 25), funding for reproduction of photographs is due to a research
from which one famous (and variously reprinted) picture is grant from the Faculty of Arts, The University of Western
directly reproduced here. The Life editors (p. 27) wrote: Ontario.
"Immense excitement of moment made photographer Capa

This content downloaded from 144.122.26.81 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:28:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms