Camera Work: A Photographic Quarterly (1906 (Heft 13))

HUGO HENNEBERG —HEINRICH KÜHN — HANS
WATZEK
IT is one of the ironies of fate that she frequently
permits persons of merely mediocre ability to become
instrumental in spreading new ideas by blending the
strange and new with the old and familiar, and by
administering this mixture to the public in slowly
increasing doses, the public thus taking in a diluted
form the wine which in its pure state was too strong for
it. This thought, which was originally applied to the
development of modern literature, is equally true of
the growth of artistic photography. Without passing
through any transition stages, beginners frequently employ new technical
means or copy outward appearances which to them seem " artistic,” and
immediately believe that they have placed themselves in a class with those
they imitate. All our exhibitions, as well as our illustrated periodicals,
furnish abundant proof of this tendency. In artistic photography the
“ Mache” is everything. It is not artistic expression but artistic appearance
that the amateur photographer strives for. Like the untutored theater-goer,
he admires the virtuoso, not the poet.
It is not surprising that even those exhibitions of artistic photography
which are distinguished by the high standard of the exhibits, as were those
of Dresden in 1904, of Vienna and Berlin in 1905, are not as successful
as one would expect. The visitors have not been properly prepared for the
contrasts to other exhibitions, and hence do not understand them. Among
the German, English, French, and American exhibitors there are hardly a
dozen artists who see clearly, have a thorough command of the technical
means, and are capable of recognizing and bringing out the essential points
in a picture; while, on the other hand, there are hundreds of amateurs who
acquire whatever can be learned, and, for the mere praise it brings, employ
their new acquirements to deck out in a " modern" garb their views, their
sweet portraits and favorite landscapes. In such a situation no one can
separate the chaff from the wheat, except those of the initiated who are at
the same time craftsmen enough to understand the technical part of the work,
and critics capable of discerning the relative importance of things. Criticism
can do more good and more harm than people generally believe. Our one
great daily paper whose utterances are entitled to some consideration has
not treated the offerings of the artistic photographers in an objective and
serious manner. It is regrettable that in many cases this paper should have
bestowed upon mediocre talents an amount of praise which ought to be
reserved only for the masters of the art; while, as a matter of fact, it hardly
noticed the latter class. It has allowed itself to be misled by appearances
and by accidentals, which in many cases are not all due to any conscious
effort on the part of the amateur, and it has mistaken them for intended
results. Such errors, however, might easily be avoided if the journal were
21