Surveys | Open College of the Arts: A log by Peter Hungerford

Banner image by the author (Empty quarter Oman)

The brief

Read Snyder’s essay ‘Territorial Photography’ which you’ll find on the student website
(see ‘Online learning materials and student-led research’ at the start of this course
guide). Summarise Snyder’s key points.
Next, find and evaluate two photographs by any of the photographers Snyder
mentions, but not specific examples that he addresses in the essay. Your evaluation
(up to 250 words for each) should reflect some of the points that Snyder makes, as
well as any other references.
Exercise 2.1: ‘Territorial Photography’

Introduction

This blog entry is a response to the brief. I summarise what I consider to be the key points from Joel Snyder’s essay, I do not attempt to list all of the points. Because of my interest in I then evaluate two photographs of Timothy H. O’Sullivan, discussing two of his works I found interesting. Finally I summarise the learning that I took from the exercise.

Discussion

Essay Territorial Photography

The essay by Joel Snyder appears as part of a book (Mitchell, 2009) Landscape and Power Edited by W.J.T Mitchel which considers landscape not just as an object to be seen or read about but as an instrument for cultural force. This book is on my reading list and I will be reporting on in due course.

In the essay ‘Territorial Photography’ Snyder explores how the American west is appropriated and domesticated by landscape photographers in the 19th Century and then (via the work of Timothy O’Sullivan) changes from being something that is for popular consumption to something of power that needs professional expertise to be comprehended. Central to this discussion is the analysis of two photographers: Oliver Wendell Holmes and Timothy O’Sullivan. I show some of the photographs discussed in the article below.

Timothy O’Sullivan; *Sand Dunes, Carson Desert, Nevada*; 1867; Albumen print, 199.90×270 mm

From reading the text I found the key points (in bullet form) to be:

By 1850’s photographs had there own distinct character – appearing to be machine made rather than simulating man made (e.g. painting).
Why was this change, it was because of the general alignment with general technical progress; There was a very distinct market for such photographs.
Iconic landscape photos were examined from an aesthetic view which was initially considered not applicable to photos.
The essay aims to look at motivating factors of 2 American western landscape practices of 1860’s and 70’s to understand why the photos look as they do
Until 1850’s landscape photographers followed pictorial conventions; aimed at a small audience and structured landscape in familiar terms.
A market came in 1850’s with travel, architectural and landscape photographs being provided to incoming tourists. This market grew and became nation wide
With new practitioners in 1850’s came changes to landscape photographs look and feel to more glossed, glass like surface, more like machine produced
In 1850’s there was still diverse views on the value of photography v. art
At this period landscape photographers became free from the convention of showing just accuracy
In the 1860’s there was a conundrum of producing true but beautiful landscape photographs
Carleton Watkins answered this conundrum by technical virtuosity combined
with picturesque & sublime modes of landscapes, examples are his images of Yosemite
Watkins work according to Oliver Wendell Holmes represented exactly what we would have seen
It was as if Watkins could produce work that supports the work of painters; they could refer to his work as illustrating their veracity.
Watkins worked on California state Geological Survey: created work where manmade objects are manipulated to harmonise with nature (e.g. Malakoff Diggins)
Watkins work reinforces the idea of an American Eden, he does not go deeper than the pictorial e.g. what happened to the original inhabitants
Timothy H. O’Sullivan photographed the US west in a “contrainvitational” manner
O’Sullivan worked for two major western expeditions. he was brought into photograph in a scientific manner in summer of 1867
Compared to Watkins, O’Sullivan had no commercial interests.
There is a discussion of where O’Sullivan fits in historical context: Rosalind Krauss say his work was scientific (see previous exercise). If this was not the case what was O’Sullivan doing? The answer was making images for a limited audience (the sponsors of the expedition)
O’Sullivan images discovered by Ansel Adams and sent to MOMA. The curator
described them as surrealistic and disturbing. They then became famous (e.g. Sand dunes near Carson City, by the way, the image was staged)
In O’Sullivan work figures appear not as yardsticks but as reinforcing relationships
to the barren landscapes.
O’Sullivan images are anti-picturesque being more sublime, mysterious.
Comparing Watkins to O’Sullivan is like showing the known v. unknown, O’Sullivan work illustrates a new, unknown territory that needs deeper understanding, a scientific approach?
O’Sullivan photos are not to be understood as scientific documents but as a sign (No trespassing) in which expert skills as needed to access.

Timothy H. O’Sullivan

I have chosen two photographs by O’Sullivan that caught by attention and discuss these using arguments from Joel Snyder’s essay.

In analysing these two photographs I will start by providing some context, move onto describing common elements followed by individual photograph analysis and finally summarize my findings.

Both photographs were taken in the southwestern United States while O’Sullivan was on the team led by Lt. George M Wheeler in his survey west of the 100th meridian. One of the goals of the expedition was to ascertain everything related to the physical features of the region. O’Sullivan’s role as photographer was to provide factual evidence.

In looking at the photographs we can see that they show scenes from the American west. We get an initial feeling of the vastness and harshness of the environment. People are not directly seen although on closer inspection we can see man made objects that give a sense of scale but also as Snyder has pointed out act as a counterpoint to the barren landscape. Both photographs have an aspect of the sublime: mysterious and awe inspiring. They have an initial focal point (tramway, towers) but they are soon forgotten and the eye wanders around the photograph picking up lots of small details. As in the analysis by Snyder one is left with more questions what the images are about rather than answers.

In the Tramway the image is dominated by the tramway in a strong aesthetic manner. More the photographs displays a high technical prowess with the image being in focus and the high resolution, again a point made by by Snyder. After a while we can discern the wagon on the tramway which gives us scale. The overall image is flat, with limited contrast which reinforces the feeling of bareness and barrenness.

In Cañon de Chelle again we can see a high aesthetic quality with the towers being echoed by the tents. there is also a strong technical aspect insomuch the exposure and focus is well controlled. The scale of towers gives feeling of the sublime, with their appearance of leaning towards the tents implying danger. This is reinforced by the dark cloud. This photograph has a wider dynamic range than Tramway and this is more in keeping with the image where the menace is more immediate and reinforced by the dark areas.

Both these photographs, as pointed out by Snyder, are very much in advanced of their time, being more than simple scientific records and would not have met another goal of the expedition: designed to attract settlers to the largely uninhabited region. the casual viewer would have puzzled by them and it would have required a more advanced audience – they certainly acted as a No Trespassing sign.

What did I learn

My main learning was the power of detail analysis and review. Images that I might have simply looked briefly at and passed on become much deeper and more interesting when they are studied.

References

Mitchell, W., 2009. Landscape And Power. Chicago, Ill: Univ. of Chicago Press.

Open College of the Arts: A log by Peter Hungerford

Photography: Landscape, Place & Environment – An exploration in photography by a journeyman

Category Archives: Surveys

Exercise 2.1: ‘Territorial Photography’