International studio (32.1907)

The Photo-Secession in America

author unaided by catalogue or signature. Not
that the works themselves are necessarily dis-
tinguished by reason of the impress of those who
bring them forth, yet, through the study of works
of this order it is that the individualities of their
creators are perceived.

Such an exhibition was held, and, in referring to
it as “ An Exhibition by the Photo-Secession,”
Mr. Stieglitz unconsciously offered the most fitting
name for the organisation that was destined to
spring from that initial movement. There was no
jury, the work simply having been presented in
response to the invitation by Mr. Stieglitz. Later,
when the proper conditions arose, the “ Photo-
Secession ” was regularly organised.

The members now composing its fellows are :
John G. Bullock, Wm. B. Dyer, Frank K. Eugene,
Dallet Fuguet, Gertrude Kasebier, John T. Keiley,
Robt. S. Redfield, Eva Watson-
Schiitze, Eduard J. Steichen, John
Francis Strauss, Clarence H.

White, Alvin Langdon Coburn,

Mary Devens, W. F. James, Wm.

B. Post, Sarah C. Sears, and S. L.

Willard. Of these, the first twelve
represent the founders of the
“ Photo-Secession,” who serve as
the council for the first three years.

Besides this group, there is a list
of over fifty names now compos-
ing the associates.

As stated officially, “the aim
of the Photo-Seccession is loosely
to hold together those Americans
devoted to pictorial photography
in their endeavour to compel its
recognition, not as a handmaiden
of art, but as a distinctive medium
of individual expression.” That
this creed has proved its claim for
respectful recognition has already
been demonstrated in consequence
of numerous successful exhibitions
held both in Europe and America.

It is one of the policies of the
society that its members never
exhibit under its name, except
through invitation and as a unit,
although, of course, individual
members are free to exhibit inde-
pendently if they choose, in which
case, however, their works would
not appear with those of the
selected group. And the gospel

of progress, as an innate conviction with the frater-
nity, is evidenced in the widening interest that
these collections attract among the aesthetic circles
of true art lovers. Exhibiting thus in a concerted
body, the separate works of a collection escape
contact with a jury. Indeed, standing for principle
as they do, those in authority strive for the reputa-
tion of never allowing work that is unworthy to
pass their hands, and, from the nature of their
peculiar training, the accredited representatives of
pictorial photographic art feel that they are able
not only to judge more accurately than the painter
(unless he is also a photographer and understands
photographic quality as a vital character of the
print) concerning examples in their own field, but
that they are equally competent in criticising
certain elements in the painter’s own work.

The important principle appears to be that a

200