Modern Novels often Contrast the Photographer and Painter
IT TOOK A WHILE for photography in the nineteenth century to be called “art,” putting it in head-to-head competition with painting. But when that moment came, the art world changed. This theme of painting v. photography has provide great plot twists—and philosophic reflection—in some novels about art and artists.
Surprisingly,
when the French Impressionists first challenged the academic painting tradition
in Europe in 1874, their rebel exhibit was held in a photography studio. At
that time, photos were not seen as alternatives to paintings. Impressionists
were mesmerized by the new technology. Many of them—like Pissarro—were pro-technology
and pro-science, as in the new scientific study of the effect of colors.
In Irving
Stone’s novel on Pissarro (Depths of
Glory, 1985), the founding Impressionist holds that photography can never
replace a real “picture,” that is, a painting. They are two different
creatures. In one scene, Pissarro says to Vincent Van Gogh: “The reflection of
reality in a mirror, if it could be caught, would not be a picture at all, it
would be no more than a photograph.”
A mere photograph!
Still,
photos began to spell the doom of much painted portraiture. Later, mass
reproduction of artworks changed the very status of “masterpieces.” Today,
photos continue to undermine the sale of original art. Four modern novels
explore these effects with three different emphases (anti-photo, pro-photo, and
the economics of photography).
The French
author Michel Houellebecq’s novel, The
Map and the Territory (2010) is many elegant things, but in its character,
Jed—who wavers between high success in both photography and painting—it provides
a delightful jab against the camera and its advocates.
To wit: “For
a long time photographers had exasperated Jed, especially the great
photographers, with their claim to reveal in their snapshots the truth of their models. They didn't
reveal anything at all, just placed themselves in front of you and switched on
the motor of the camera to take hundreds of random snapshots while chuckling,
and later chose the least bad of the lot; that's how they proceeded, without
exception, all those so-called great photographers.”
Jed knew of
what he spoke, since in this story, he becomes an internationally known
photographer for his angled images of Micheline Maps.
Contrary to
Jed’s cynicism, the heroine in Rachel Kushner’s The Flamethrowers (2013) thinks photography is the greatest art.
She is Reno, a photography major who recently graduated from a college art
department. While she allegedly “draws”—making lines in snow with skies and
lines in dirt with motorcycle tires—she documents her conceptual art with a
movie camera. Indeed, central to the plot, her trip to Europe to photo-document
motorcycle-speed-as-art takes her into the world of 1970s riots and terrorist
kidnappings in Rome and Milan, Italy.
Pity not
Reno, however. Pity Kingdom Swann, a fictional artist who suffered the photo
revolution. Swan is a British portraitist of the old school. He also excelled
in old school paintings of the “heroic nude,” a tradition that drew upon
stories from mythology, the Bible, and ancient history. This is the setting for
the 1990 novel by British writer Miles Gibson, titled Kingdom Swann.
As one
character in the Victorian story says: “A painting emulates but a photograph
stimulates. That’s the difference. It’s magic. It’s witchcraft. It’s stealing
from life.” And so it was that Swann began to do staged photos for clients
dressed as heroic figures, and, eventually—under the guidance a mischievous
marketer—as naked heroic figures. Unbeknownst to the guileless Swann, his
partner is cropping the photos and selling them on the side as Victorian
pornography.
Gibson, the
author, has a libertine intent in writing this erotic novel. The plot shows how
Victorian prudes give Swann nothing but trouble. Speaking of libertine, the
novel allowed the BBC television staff to do a 2001 movie featuring lots of naked
women.
What Swann
discovered, of course, is that replication of images can make more money than a
single, time-consuming, painting.
This had
been the ideological insight of such European art critics as Walter Benjamin, a
Marxist thinker. He wrote on how the “fetish” or “magic” or “aura” of a single
artwork is changed by mass production imagery. On the good side, this puts a
masterpiece in Everyman’s grasp; on the bad, it leads to the further commodification of art, a Marxist no-no. Both these good and bad outcomes are fairly
obvious to common sense. But Benjamin plumbed all the subtle implications. (See
his essay, “The Work of Art in the age of Mechanical Reproduction,” 1936).
And so does
Katherine Weber’s exquisite short novel The
Music Lesson (1999), a title that refers to a fictional Vermeer painting
that is stolen by an IRA splinter group in a ransom caper. Patricia Dolan is
the woman holding the painting in an isolated village in Ireland. As an art
historian, she is forced to think deeply about the picture’s effect on her.
Deeper still, a replication of the real Vermeer was used to pull off the theft,
pointing out the difference between images and reality, the novel suggests.
Dolan even
quotes Benjamin: “What mattered was their [i.e. masterpieces] existence, not
their being on view.” This was the aura. Since prehistoric times, a painting is
“first and foremost, an instrument of magic.”
The Vermeer
certainly has a magical effect on the heroine, who reflects on this personal
impact across the novel’s narrative. The see-saw between real and imitation
becomes a principle that drives the plot: the thieves use a fake to steal the
real, and Dolan in turn uses another fake—a product of mass “mechanical
reproduction”—to recover the real. As Weber says in her comments on the novel, the
story is about the dynamics between perception and reality, a topic that the
battle between paintings and photos has surely complicated.
No comments:
Post a Comment