DOI issue:
Nr. 174 (August, 1911)
DOI article:Laurvik, J. Nilsen: Alfred Stieglitz, pictorial photographer
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.43447#0128
Alfred Stieglitz
SPRING
BY ALFRED STIEGLITZ
which was destined to exert a powerful influence
on art. It was part of the same thing that Whis-
tler was then fighting for, only attacked from a dif-
ferent angle. Whistler contended that mere rep-
resentation was not to be considered as art, and
every canvas from his brush was a protest against
this fallacy. To him the power of synthetic vis-
ualization was the prime factor in a work of art.
Stieglitz came along and maintained that if these
nose-near copies of nature were art, then photog-
raphy, which did the same thing much better,
must also be considered art. Here the extremes
meet, and it would seem that Stieglitz did much to
help the case of Whistler, who, by the way, in his
frank praise of the work of D. 0. Hill, the Scotch
painter-photographer, was one of the first to ac-
cord recognition to pictorial photography.
Stieglitz enforced the lesson that a mere ability
to copy forms correctly does not constitute an
artist, though for a long time this microscopic,
matter-of-fact reproduction of the appearances
of things has been regarded as the sole function
of photography, and what was generally accepted
and admired as one of the cardinal virtues of
painting was just as generally regarded as one of
the cardinal vices when accomplished with the
inimitable certainty of the camera. And if
Stieglitz had done nothing more than this there
would be no particular reason for writing about
him and his work. He would then merely be
one of many who have misused the camera in
precisely the same manner as countless thousands
make a travesty of painting with their inept,
matter-of-fact productions that pass for art. In
his early work he demonstrated in a series of
story-telling pictures, such as The Truant, Music
in the Tyrol and Back from the Hunt, that photog-
raphy could successfully compete with the an-
ecdotal pictures painted by Meyer von Bremen,
Verbroeckhoven, Achenbach and Sir John Gilbert,
whose works were then the vogue. In a large
measure this accounts for the widespread interest
aroused by these early photographs. Their main
virtue consisted in exhibiting most of the faults of
the generally accepted art of the day and both art-
ists and public promptly accorded him their
praise. However, I am inclined to believe that
these conventionally arranged story-telling pic-
XXIII
SPRING
BY ALFRED STIEGLITZ
which was destined to exert a powerful influence
on art. It was part of the same thing that Whis-
tler was then fighting for, only attacked from a dif-
ferent angle. Whistler contended that mere rep-
resentation was not to be considered as art, and
every canvas from his brush was a protest against
this fallacy. To him the power of synthetic vis-
ualization was the prime factor in a work of art.
Stieglitz came along and maintained that if these
nose-near copies of nature were art, then photog-
raphy, which did the same thing much better,
must also be considered art. Here the extremes
meet, and it would seem that Stieglitz did much to
help the case of Whistler, who, by the way, in his
frank praise of the work of D. 0. Hill, the Scotch
painter-photographer, was one of the first to ac-
cord recognition to pictorial photography.
Stieglitz enforced the lesson that a mere ability
to copy forms correctly does not constitute an
artist, though for a long time this microscopic,
matter-of-fact reproduction of the appearances
of things has been regarded as the sole function
of photography, and what was generally accepted
and admired as one of the cardinal virtues of
painting was just as generally regarded as one of
the cardinal vices when accomplished with the
inimitable certainty of the camera. And if
Stieglitz had done nothing more than this there
would be no particular reason for writing about
him and his work. He would then merely be
one of many who have misused the camera in
precisely the same manner as countless thousands
make a travesty of painting with their inept,
matter-of-fact productions that pass for art. In
his early work he demonstrated in a series of
story-telling pictures, such as The Truant, Music
in the Tyrol and Back from the Hunt, that photog-
raphy could successfully compete with the an-
ecdotal pictures painted by Meyer von Bremen,
Verbroeckhoven, Achenbach and Sir John Gilbert,
whose works were then the vogue. In a large
measure this accounts for the widespread interest
aroused by these early photographs. Their main
virtue consisted in exhibiting most of the faults of
the generally accepted art of the day and both art-
ists and public promptly accorded him their
praise. However, I am inclined to believe that
these conventionally arranged story-telling pic-
XXIII