Dimensión: Fase de Formalización Tabla N°

There were three categories of Emerson’s sources: those that he readily

acknowledged, such as Helmholtz, those he begrudgingly acknowledged, e.g., Roland Rood, and those he refused to acknowledge or denied, e.g., Francis Bate. It is likely that educated persons of his time would have more readily deduced his influences than we can from 120 years removed.

7_{For instance, the various articles inLife and Landscape: P. H. Emerson, Art & Photography in East}

Anglia 1885-1900and the three relevant chapters inBritish Photography in the Nineteenth Century, the Fine Art Tradition.

Emerson was heavily influenced by the researches and publications of Hermann Ludwig Ferdinand von Helmholtz, best known for the Young-Helmholtz trichromatic theory of color vision which hypothesized there were separate receptors in the eye for red, green and blue.9In the discipline of ophthalmology his inventions of the

ophthalmoscope to see into the eye and the opthalometer to measure how the eye focuses, are still in use. A German polymath, optics was only one small area of his wide ranging interest.

The ophthalmoscope allowed Helmholtz to see through the cornea into the human eye. By its aid he studied the eye in a depth that had never been equaled. In 1867 his 874 pagemagnum opus,Handbuch der Physiological Optics(Liepzig: Voss) was published

and is still cited today. He also published more ‘popular’ books as well, including

Popular Lectures on Scientific Subjects(London: Longmans, 1873, 2nded.1881). The

former deals with aberrations of the eye; the latter includes the chapter, “On the Relation of Optics to Painting.” It is tempting to consider that Emerson readHandbuch der

Physiological Opticswhilst studying medicine at King’s College, (M.R.C.S. 1879), and

that he readPopular Lectures on Scientific Subjectsin 1881 whilst studying for his M.B.

at Cambridge (1881-85). It is equally possible that his attention was first drawn to Helmholtz by a book in wider circulation,Modern Chromatics, printed in 1879 with a

second edition in 1883 (it went to a third edition in 1890). The ninth chapter is entitled “The Colour Theory of Young and Helmholtz” and gives the topic a most thorough discussion.10

9_{W. H. A. Fincham and M. H. Freeman,Optics, 8}th_{ed. (London: Butterworths, 1976) p. 274.} 10

Ogden N. Rood Modern Chromatics: Students' Text Book of Color with Applications To Art and Industry(1879) reprinted (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1967). Ogden Rood was the father of Roland Rood, an art critic whose writings appear inCamera Work.

Marien has proven that Emerson did not always consult the original text when quoting from it, noting that in the case of Huxley, “Emerson does not quote from Huxley's address, but chose instead to lift Huxley's ideas from an obscure science primer.”11Hence, his own understanding was often superficial or might even be

erroneous, given his failures to read the source material. This reinforces the view of Emerson as a pseudo-scientist, compared to the role he attributes to himself as a doctor and trained scientist (especially when criticizing other writers).Handbuch der

Physiological Opticswas not available in an English translation until 1924, adding to

doubts regarding Emerson having read it at King’s College.

Emerson also mentions Ogden Rood’s book as a source in “The Death of

Naturalistic Photography” but not in the original 1889 text.12Due to criticisms of the first

edition, he appears to have been more thorough in later editions regarding sources. Emerson sought to create an artistic photograph by emulating natural law; to deduce the rules of nature, he drew upon science “The best artists have always tried to interpret nature, and express by their art an impression of nature as nearly as possible similar to that made on the retina of the human eye, it will be well to inquire on scientific grounds what the normal human eye really does see.”13Although he sought to free

photography from “scientific realism,” he nonetheless drew on science to establish and justify his precepts;“All good art has its scientific basis.”14Helmholtz is certainly not his

only scientific reference point but is the key source for Emerson’s crucial theories on vision. As to the veracity of Emerson’s interpretations, that is beyond the scope of this

11_{Marien Summer, 1997, p. 106.}

12_{P. H. Emerson “Death of Naturalistic Photography “ (1891) inNaturalistic Photography3}rd_{ed. 1899,}

reprinted (New York: Arno Press, 1973), unpaginated fifth page.

13

Emerson 1899, p. 97,

thesis; they are important, regardless, because of their influence on the art of photography and the general discussion they stirred regarding the role(s) of photography.

Emerson’s collaborator in some of his canal adventures and portfolio productions was landscape painter Thomas Frederick Goodall (England 1857-1944). Goodall and Emerson met in the summer of 1885, before any known Emerson statements on focusing are known, nearly at the outset of his interest in photography. It could be suggested that Emerson’s introduction and perhaps master class in ‘naturalism’ were from the

uncredited Goodall.

Goodall was then a member of the New English Arts Club, whose members included Sir George Clausen (1852-1944), Henry Herbert La Thangue (1859-1929) and John Singer Sargent (1856-1925). La Thangue had studied in Paris during the 1880s when the paintings of Millet and his followers were the subject of much attention. Sargent was a confidant of Claude Monet and he was highly influenced by French Impressionism, of course. Both La Thangue and Sargent knew the work of Jules Bastien- Lepage (1848-1884), the most influential French artist in Britain in the 1880s.15Bastien-

Lepage’sLes Foinswas exhibited in London in 1880. Described as “Impressionist in the

background, but calling for greater naturalism in the foreground and figure,”16this

painting may have been seen by Goodall. This description of Bastien-Lepage’s technique sounds like a page fromNaturalistic Photography. Indeed, Emerson credits Bastien-

Lepage as one of the “pioneers who established the naturalistic trend.”17

15 _{Kenneth McConkey,British Impressionism(London: Phaidon Press Limited, 1989) p. 156.} 16

McConkey 1989, p. 28.

17

Kenneth McConkey, “Dr. Emerson and the Sentiment of Nature” inLife and Landscape: P. H. Emerson, art and photography in East Anglia 1885-1900(Norwich: Salisbury Centre for Visual Arts, 1986) p. 49.

When Emerson first met Goodall in 1885, La Thangue was with Goodall. These painters had already discovered the aesthetic potential of the Broads. Soon La Thangue moved to Norfolk in the late 1880s.18La Thangue’s painting,The Hedger(1888), with its

well formed figure against a most indistinct background forms an image almost precisely conforming to Emerson’s dicta. McConkey believes that Emerson could have met a number of young painters at Southwold as well.

Figure 3.1 : Henry Herbert La ThangueAn Autumn Morning1897. This treatment is the painterly analog to Emerson’s differential focus. The main subject is sharp throughout but the background visual confusion is such that the male figure nearly vanishes. The effect in the lower half background is very similar to astigmatism in a lens (Kenneth McConkeyBritish Impressionismplate 11).

18

Emerson knew Clausen personally- he had bought one of his paintings in 188619

and corresponded with him.20This is hardly surprising given that Clausen was J. Havard

Thomas’ fellow student in the South Kensington Training Schools (now the Royal College of Art).21Letters from Emerson to Thomas beginning in 1888 (post-Goodall

contact) show that Emerson “was in favour of the progressive rustic naturalists like

Clausen and La Thangue…”22Thomas was a close friend of Emerson’s and they

exchanged ideas in person as well.23

Figure 3.2: Sir George ClausenHoeing Turnips1884. Clausen’s figures and

arrangements are noticeably less obviously posed than Emerson’s photographs (Kenneth McConkeyBritish Impressionismplate 16).

19_{Mc Conkey 1986, p. 48} 20

Letters from Clausen to PHE, inLife and Landscape: P. H. Emerson, art and photography in East Anglia 1885-1900(Norwich: Salisbury Centre for Visual Arts, 1986) pp. 8-10.

21 _{Fiona Pearson, “The Correspondence Between P. H. Emerson and J. Havard Thomas” inBritish}

Photography in the Nineteenth Century, Mike Weaver, ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) p. 197. Thomas was one of Emerson’s few long term friends.

22

McConkey 1986, p. 56.

Thus it is obvious that much of Emerson’s critical thinking about subject matter, treatment and ‘differential focus’ originated with his contacts with contemporary painters, some in his immediate geographic locale. He was clearly sensitive to this possibility when in the Third Edition (1899) he specifically states that “Suggestions have been made that I get some of my ideas from a book, called 'Naturalistic Painting.' I have a letter in my possession from an artist wherein is stated clearly and exactly that Mr. Bate has read a paper of mine onNaturalistic Photography beforehis first article appeared in

the 'Artist.'“24Painter, teacher and author Francis Bate (1853-1950) wroteThe

Naturalistic School of Painting25and this may be the source of George Davison noting at

the time (BJPJanuary 30, 1891) that Emerson “merely adapted to photographic methods

ideas current amongst certain artists.” As noted in Chapter Two, Davison credits his own source of influence as Bate. According to Nancy Newhall, Bate was serialized inThe

Artistbeginning March 1, 1886;26Emerson immediately protested that his ideas were his

own. Robinson also wrote in 1889 that Bate “was the source of much that is written on the subject, and the principle isillustrated[emphasis mine] by example by Dr.

Emerson.”27

Perhaps the prime question left to be resolved regarding the painters’ influences is the extent of the role of Thomas Goodall in introducing and elaborating the concept to Emerson. It is probable that Goodall’s views in their cooperative publication,Notes on

Perspective Drawing and Visionin 1891 constituted the main contribution despite

Emerson’s listing as first author. Beyond that, it is impossible to determine how much of

24_{Emerson 1899, unpaginated.}

25_{Francis BateThe Naturalistic School of Painting(London: The Artist, 1887 2}nd_ed) 26

Nancy Newhall 1975, p. 94.

27

H. P. Robinson fromThe Amateur Photographerquoted in Nancy NewhallP. H. Emerson(Millerton NY:Aperture, 1975) p. 65

Emerson’s text is Goodall’s thoughts. Goodall was a career painter; Emerson was a career dilettante.

Emerson may have had at least one uncredited photographic influence as well: Frank Meadow Sutcliffe (1853-1941). Margaret Harker observed that “many of his photographs reveal that he used differential focusing well in advance of Emerson's pronouncement on Naturalistic photography in 1886.”28Sutcliffe was well known for his

‘naturalistic’ views of Whitby and its denizens by the time Emerson wroteNaturalistic

Photography. Emerson may have used Sutcliffe’s documentation of Whitby as a model

for his own documentation of the Fens. This needs to be investigated further to determine if a definite link can be established. He certainly was aware of, and approved of

Sutcliffe’s work.29

28 _{Harker 1979, p. 162.} 29

Emerson’s evaluation as a “complete triumph of naturalism” appeared inPhotographic Times, Feb. 13, 1891, p. 491, cited in Anne Hammond, “Naturalistic Vision and Symbolist Image” Michael Frizot ed.The New History of Photography(Köln: Könemann, 1998) p. 295.

Figure 3.3: Frank Meadow SutcliffeFetching in the Linedate unknown. Sutcliffe clearly used whatever depth of field seemed appropriate to the image and was not dogmatic as was Emerson. This is a fine example of his use of very shallow depth of field, also known as ‘differential focus.’ (Michael J. ShawEvery Now and Thenp. 23)