Studio: international art (16.1899)

The Truth about Lithography

etching, engraving, transferring, preparing, and stone paper, so called, for stone. No one was
printing." Rival claimants disappeared. No one quicker than he to recognise the cumbersome and
took up Schlichtegroll's challenge and disputed unwieldy character of the stone, but he recognised
Senefelder's right to the invention, or even his also that the stone gave a more uniform result in
definition of the word lithography; no one claimed the printing press than anything he had found to
to have hit upon the same idea at the same time, replace it. But before he thought of lithography,
Senefelder's story, in its simple straightforwardness, he knew that if a large drawing were wanted, the
left no possibility for doubt, and from the date of weight of the stone was a great drawback, and he
its publication—1818—until the present day, his invented transfer paper as a light, portable substitute
history and definitions were never questioned, for the stone, in order to transfer his drawing, or
Many great lithographers also wrote upon the writing, to the stone, and then engrave it, and
subject — Engelmann, Hullmandel, Doyen. A also to save the mechanical trouble of reversing,
crowd of independent witnesses, and every scientific He himself speaks of his invention of transfer
body in the world that paid any attention to the paper as leading up to the discovery of chemical
matter, accepted Senefelder's statement as true, and printing. He says, these experiments - several
proved his assertions to be scientifically sound, litho- thousands of them — with transfer paper, "led
graphy being based upon a scientific discovery, its me to the discovery of the present chemical htho-
results, like those of etching, being due entirely to graphy" (page 31 of "A Complete Course of
chemical action. But within the last few years it has Lithography "). He registered his patent for htho-
been suggested by one or two people in France and graphy, among other places, in England, and
England, who probably never heard of Schlichtegroll transfer paper is specially included in clause 15 of
nor read Senefelder, that artists who practise one the specification. When he wished to demon-
branch or one "manner" of the art, as Senefelder strate to visitors to his shop the methods and
defined it, are guilty of " commercial immorality " ; capabilities of his new art—for lithography is not
that this manner, drawing on paper, is inferior to a process, but one of the Graphic Arts—he asked
the others ; that it should not be classed with what them to draw or write on transfer paper. _ His
they consider genuine lithography, that is, drawing Royal Highness the Crown Prince of Bavaria wrote
on stone; or that, at any rate, some new name with chemical ink the following words on a piece of
should be invented for it. It would be admitted, I paper: < Lithography is one of the most important
imagine, in other forms of art, even by these critics, discoveries of the eighteenth century,'" which,
that when an artist produces a work of art, its Senefelder adds, " I transferred in his presence to
excellence as a work of art is dependent on the the stone and took impressions from it " (page 65).
result obtained and not on the methods used, so Nor was this a mere concession to royalty,
long as these are legitimate, and that before one From the beginning of his book until the end,
can pronounce judgment as to whether methods Senefelder continuously insisted that paper may be
are legitimate or not one must be familiar with drawn upon as well as stone, and that lithography
the technical history' and practice of that art. may be practised in the "tracing or transfer manner,"
Because of the recent suggestions which, foolish as just as in the " chalk manner » and the " engraved
they are, have led to confusion in the minds of manner," and many other "manners." Hence it
those who do not look into things for themselves, willbe seen that there never was the slightest attempt
and who would like to save their souls or grind at concealing the fact that paper was used, never
out copy by discovering some inferiority, not to the slightest hint that its use was an inferior method,
say deception, in the lithographs made on paper, even in the very early days of the art.
it may be just as well, once and for all, to state Senefelder's own words should be quoted. There
distinctly and briefly the truth about lithography. is, he says (page 256), " another manner in htho-
Senefelder did not invent the term "lithography"; graphy "-not an inferior swindling process de-
he did not invent the art of drawing and engrav- manding another name, but another manner in
ing on stone. He invented chemical printing, i.e., lithography—" where the drawing or printing with
surface printing, to which the name "lithography" the same unctuous composition—greasy ink—is
was given. Lithography, etymologically, means made on paper, and transferred from thence by
writing on stone; artistically, it means chemical artificial dissolution to the stone and printed from
printing—surface printing, not necessarily from it. This manner is peculiar to the chemical printing,
stone. Senefelder's latest experiments were to and I am strongly inclined to believe that it is the
substitute metal plates, or his newly invented principal and most important part of my discovery

39