Like Nicéphore Niépce, we share a great faith in the secret link between words and things. No images? Click here <transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-e-sulqdd-mcujltt-k/> BIENNALE DI SENIGALLIA <transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-l-sulqdd-mcujltt-r/> Daniel Girardin gave his conference on Niépce, on the evening of Sunday 22nd of June, at the Rotonda a mare. He allows us to publish large extracts of his text :
“Despite his tragic fate, Niépce is a curious figure. Solitary—perhaps too far removed from the centers of power—he stands at the heart of what Walter Benjamin called ‘the fog surrounding the invention of photography,’ part of ‘the mystery of photography’ that is at the core of this Biennale. A ‘mystery’ with many layers, full of hidden drawers. Niépce’s fate is well captured by an image from a Melville film: a dead end, a forbidden zone, a false date, a hideous concrete wall—his story feels like a battle. Isolated, ruined, and poorly defended after his death by his son Isidore, Niépce was ultimately betrayed by Daguerre and Arago, who did everything they could to erase his name from one of the most brilliant inventions at the dawn of the industrial age: photography. Niépce turns out to be closer to the Balzacian characters of Lost Illusions than to the heroic scientists of Jules Verne’s novels. Fortunately, his honor—and the very existence of his invention—were saved from oblivion by numerous testimonies, sometimes in the most improbable ways. Such is the case with Iosef Khristianovitch Hamel, whose story was wonderfully told by Serge Plantureux in his excellent booklet The Spy and the Fern: Joseph Hamel’s Mission to Talbot, Niépce, and Daguerre, published in 2003. A fixed date, a marker, is certainly important from a historical point of view (1822, 1824, 1826, 1827); but the invention of photography is a long process, not a single date.
<transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-l-sulqdd-mcujltt-y/> « Photography is part of the Western tradition of image-making, a tradition that has been evolving since the Renaissance. Photography certainly sparked a revolution and expanded the possibilities of the image, even to the point of ‘liberating painting’—to use Cocteau’s phrase. But it did not appear out of nowhere. We must appreciate the detours, the Brechtian grains of sand in the well-oiled machinery of official narratives. Niépce is a perfect example. The historiography of publications about the invention is fascinating. It also reveals the complexity of the process and all the stakes surrounding this invention: economics, prestige, philosophy, nationalism, and more. I would like to share a few reflections on Niépce, focusing mainly on the cultural perspective, setting aside the scientific, economic, or political aspects. According to his baptismal papers, Niépce was born Joseph on March 7, 1765, and died Nicéphore on July 5, 1833. It’s important to note—not just as a symbol—the significance of Niépce’s adoption of the unusual first name Nicéphore, which carried a heavy meaning in the eighteenth century. After completing his studies (then called “Humanities”) at the Collège de Chalon, he became a fifth-grade teacher at the Collège d’Anjou, working for the Brothers of the Oratory in 1786. » (See illustration below of what was then the best college for sciences in the kingdom of France).
<transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-l-sulqdd-mcujltt-j/> « But in 1787, Niépce “was suddenly stripped of his fifth-grade class and relegated to the position of boarding school prefect.” He then signed a letter of protest to Father Latour, signing it « Nicéphore » Niépce. A certain Father Bonnardet, whose sources are unknown, wrote: “he was treated this way because of his frivolity and lack of authority over the students, whom he entertained with shadow plays instead of making them work.” Yet the inventory of the school’s physics cabinet proves that the school did indeed possess a magic lantern for projecting images from glass plates. Nicéphore is the new first name Niépce chose for himself in 1787, and he kept it, proof that it was not just a passing whim. Nicéphore is also the name of the future Patriarch of Constantinople, who at the Council of Nicaea in 787 championed the cause of the iconodules (friends of images) against the iconoclasts (enemies of images), during the great controversy over images that lasted in Christendom from the eighth to the ninth centuries. Nicéphore is a name loaded with meaning, synonymous with defender of images, linked to the Council of Nicaea, which met almost exactly a thousand years before Niépce’s letter, in 787. That council theoretically ended a hundred years of sometimes bloody bans on religious images. People were killed and tortured over images. In 820, just before becoming Patriarch of Constantinople, Nicéphore developed an argument with immense consequences: drawing is not circumscribing, and painting, he said in essence, relates only to resemblance. In other words, it is independent of its model (then called its archetype). It should be considered an act of sensory apprehension in the mode of resemblance alone. The image is only an imitation. At the end of the eighteenth century, there was a huge fascination with Greco-Roman culture, and a religious culture of which Niépce was perfectly aware. Throughout his life, he continued to cite Latin authors (in Latin), especially Virgil, and to draw on Greek for the neologisms he used to name his inventions. Nicéphore is therefore—though I cannot prove it—possibly a reference to a man of images, a thousand years to the day after the Council of Nicaea, in protest against an injustice brought about by his passion for images, through a magic lantern. Booed in Chalon… This was nothing compared to the uproar I caused by drawing a symbolic parallel between Nicéphore and Veronica—an angle that participants at the time were unable to grasp. »
<transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-l-sulqdd-mcujltt-t/> « A parallel between the names Veronica and Nicéphore, but also between the nature of photography, then in gestation, and the myth of Veronica’s veil in Catholic tradition. Here’s an explanation: In Christian tradition, Veronica is said to have wiped the bloodied face of Christ on his way to Golgotha. The imprint of his face remained on the cloth, making it a miraculous and sacred relic—what is called an acheiropoietic image, or “not made by human hands.” Veronica also derives from the Greek name Berenice, which, like Nicéphore, means ‘bringer of victory.’ Veronica is now also the patron saint of photographers; her Latin name corresponds to vera iconica, the true image… I won’t go into detail here. I simply want to place this image within the broader reflection on images in the West, with photography at the center. Let’s also note Niépce’s use of Bitumen of Judea as early as 1817—stercus diaboli to the alchemists (“devil’s dung”), a darkness conquered by light (lux in Latin). A paradox. Lux is also the name of the village where Isidore Niépce, Nicéphore’s son, settled in 1829 (pronounced “Lu” in the region). Niépce’s countless experiments place photography-in-the-making as the true heir to the Renaissance. It revived the camera obscura, incorporated linear perspective into its approach, and adopted—if not fulfilled—the ideology of “mimesis,” the perfect imitation of nature, the artistic ideal of the Renaissance. The camera obscura is already mentioned in Aristotle’s writings, described and revived by Leonardo da Vinci; by 1550, it was more than a simple pinhole device, equipped with lenses; by 1573, fitted with a concave mirror to right the image. The question of the machine is an interesting one. Camera obscura, camera lucida, drawing machines… Mechanical art, therefore trivial? Steichen had an excellent answer to this: would anyone reproach a musician for playing the piano instead of singing? Through the correspondence between Niépce and his brother Claude, we know that the idea seems to have come to them during a trip to Sardinia in 1797. There were many scientific, chemical, and optical precedents and unfinished experiments before Niépce. Photography could have been invented in the eighteenth century, after the German scientist Schulze discovered the properties of silver salts; we have seen that the camera obscura was already widely used since the sixteenth century. The time of invention was likely favored by the changing perceptions and perspectives at the end of the eighteenth century, and by the new industrial possibilities such an invention offered. This is also where Niépce stands, from the invention of the engine—the Pyreolophore (1806)—to his heliographic experiments, which were as much about reproducing engravings as about direct writing of viewpoints. One text draws our attention: that of Tiphaigne de la Roche, a Norman veterinarian, who in 1760 wrote a novella called Giphantie (an anagram of Tiphaigne), which tells of a world where mirrors remember. One also thinks of Leonardo da Vinci’s writings, who always advised artists to use a mirror to understand what a landscape or portrait would look like in two dimensions. A love of language and Greek words. At the heart of Niépce’s concepts, one could say their soul, their philosophy, the very meaning of their realization. Nature itself (archéïopète); imprint, drawing, writing; truth. An ambiguous concept, in fact, regarding the nature of photography as it would develop. This quick overview, I hope, has opened up new and original horizons for you. As Niépce wrote to his brother Claude, ‘to burn with the desire to see’ is a wonderful feeling. And like Nicéphore Niépce, I have great faith in the secret link between words and things.”
<transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-l-sulqdd-mcujltt-i/> Daniel Girardin in conversation with Michael Kolster
Let’s conclude with two special card dedicated to the two Nicephores from 787 and 1787, created for the Misteri della Fotografia series ! MYT-4 – Nikeforos. Second Council of Nicaea, Asia Minor, 6295 since the creation of the world (787 AD) Nikeforos, a young logothetes of the genikon, defends sacred images against iconoclasm. Thanks to his eloquence and steadfastness, the systematic destruction of icons is halted. For a short time, the image is saved. In the East, he is even considered a saint for his wisdom. But the destruction resumes at the end of his life, and will not truly stop until the year 843. There was nothing left to destroy. Almost nothing was saved.
<transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-l-sulqdd-mcujltt-d/> MYT-4 – Nikeforos. Secondo Concilio di Nicea, Asia Minore, 6295 dalla creazione del Mondo (787 d.C.) Nikeforos, giovane logoteta del genikon, difende le immagini sacre contro l’iconoclastia. Grazie alla sua eloquenza e alla sua fermezza, la distruzione sistematica delle icone viene interrotta. Per un tempo breve, l’immagine è salva. In Oriente, viene persino considerato un santo per la sua saggezza. Ma le distruzioni riprendono alla fine della sua vita, e non si fermeranno davvero fino all’anno 843. Non restava più nulla da distruggere. Quasi nulla si è salvato. Heliochromy published as a postcard, mixed media on a digital base: collage, engraving, gouache retouching, and manual interventions. It is part of the first series, The Mysteries of Photography, dedicated to myths and precursors. The next one belongs to the second series, dedicated to the life of Joseph Nicéphore Niépce :
JNN-1. Collegio degli Oratoriani di Angers, 1787 Joseph Nicéphore Niépce, giovanissimo professore nella classe di “sixième”, mostra la lanterna magica ai suoi allievi. Viene retrocesso, dà le dimissioni e adotta il nome di Nicephore, campione degli iconoduli contro gli iconoclasti, mille anni prima.
“Despite his tragic fate, Niépce is a curious figure. Solitary—perhaps too far removed from the centers of power—he stands at the heart of what Walter Benjamin called ‘the fog surrounding the invention of photography,’ part of ‘the mystery of photography’ that is at the core of this Biennale. A ‘mystery’ with many layers, full of hidden drawers. Niépce’s fate is well captured by an image from a Melville film: a dead end, a forbidden zone, a false date, a hideous concrete wall—his story feels like a battle. Isolated, ruined, and poorly defended after his death by his son Isidore, Niépce was ultimately betrayed by Daguerre and Arago, who did everything they could to erase his name from one of the most brilliant inventions at the dawn of the industrial age: photography. Niépce turns out to be closer to the Balzacian characters of Lost Illusions than to the heroic scientists of Jules Verne’s novels. Fortunately, his honor—and the very existence of his invention—were saved from oblivion by numerous testimonies, sometimes in the most improbable ways. Such is the case with Iosef Khristianovitch Hamel, whose story was wonderfully told by Serge Plantureux in his excellent booklet The Spy and the Fern: Joseph Hamel’s Mission to Talbot, Niépce, and Daguerre, published in 2003. A fixed date, a marker, is certainly important from a historical point of view (1822, 1824, 1826, 1827); but the invention of photography is a long process, not a single date.
<transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-l-sulqdd-mcujltt-y/> « Photography is part of the Western tradition of image-making, a tradition that has been evolving since the Renaissance. Photography certainly sparked a revolution and expanded the possibilities of the image, even to the point of ‘liberating painting’—to use Cocteau’s phrase. But it did not appear out of nowhere. We must appreciate the detours, the Brechtian grains of sand in the well-oiled machinery of official narratives. Niépce is a perfect example. The historiography of publications about the invention is fascinating. It also reveals the complexity of the process and all the stakes surrounding this invention: economics, prestige, philosophy, nationalism, and more. I would like to share a few reflections on Niépce, focusing mainly on the cultural perspective, setting aside the scientific, economic, or political aspects. According to his baptismal papers, Niépce was born Joseph on March 7, 1765, and died Nicéphore on July 5, 1833. It’s important to note—not just as a symbol—the significance of Niépce’s adoption of the unusual first name Nicéphore, which carried a heavy meaning in the eighteenth century. After completing his studies (then called “Humanities”) at the Collège de Chalon, he became a fifth-grade teacher at the Collège d’Anjou, working for the Brothers of the Oratory in 1786. » (See illustration below of what was then the best college for sciences in the kingdom of France).
<transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-l-sulqdd-mcujltt-j/> « But in 1787, Niépce “was suddenly stripped of his fifth-grade class and relegated to the position of boarding school prefect.” He then signed a letter of protest to Father Latour, signing it « Nicéphore » Niépce. A certain Father Bonnardet, whose sources are unknown, wrote: “he was treated this way because of his frivolity and lack of authority over the students, whom he entertained with shadow plays instead of making them work.” Yet the inventory of the school’s physics cabinet proves that the school did indeed possess a magic lantern for projecting images from glass plates. Nicéphore is the new first name Niépce chose for himself in 1787, and he kept it, proof that it was not just a passing whim. Nicéphore is also the name of the future Patriarch of Constantinople, who at the Council of Nicaea in 787 championed the cause of the iconodules (friends of images) against the iconoclasts (enemies of images), during the great controversy over images that lasted in Christendom from the eighth to the ninth centuries. Nicéphore is a name loaded with meaning, synonymous with defender of images, linked to the Council of Nicaea, which met almost exactly a thousand years before Niépce’s letter, in 787. That council theoretically ended a hundred years of sometimes bloody bans on religious images. People were killed and tortured over images. In 820, just before becoming Patriarch of Constantinople, Nicéphore developed an argument with immense consequences: drawing is not circumscribing, and painting, he said in essence, relates only to resemblance. In other words, it is independent of its model (then called its archetype). It should be considered an act of sensory apprehension in the mode of resemblance alone. The image is only an imitation. At the end of the eighteenth century, there was a huge fascination with Greco-Roman culture, and a religious culture of which Niépce was perfectly aware. Throughout his life, he continued to cite Latin authors (in Latin), especially Virgil, and to draw on Greek for the neologisms he used to name his inventions. Nicéphore is therefore—though I cannot prove it—possibly a reference to a man of images, a thousand years to the day after the Council of Nicaea, in protest against an injustice brought about by his passion for images, through a magic lantern. Booed in Chalon… This was nothing compared to the uproar I caused by drawing a symbolic parallel between Nicéphore and Veronica—an angle that participants at the time were unable to grasp. »
<transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-l-sulqdd-mcujltt-t/> « A parallel between the names Veronica and Nicéphore, but also between the nature of photography, then in gestation, and the myth of Veronica’s veil in Catholic tradition. Here’s an explanation: In Christian tradition, Veronica is said to have wiped the bloodied face of Christ on his way to Golgotha. The imprint of his face remained on the cloth, making it a miraculous and sacred relic—what is called an acheiropoietic image, or “not made by human hands.” Veronica also derives from the Greek name Berenice, which, like Nicéphore, means ‘bringer of victory.’ Veronica is now also the patron saint of photographers; her Latin name corresponds to vera iconica, the true image… I won’t go into detail here. I simply want to place this image within the broader reflection on images in the West, with photography at the center. Let’s also note Niépce’s use of Bitumen of Judea as early as 1817—stercus diaboli to the alchemists (“devil’s dung”), a darkness conquered by light (lux in Latin). A paradox. Lux is also the name of the village where Isidore Niépce, Nicéphore’s son, settled in 1829 (pronounced “Lu” in the region). Niépce’s countless experiments place photography-in-the-making as the true heir to the Renaissance. It revived the camera obscura, incorporated linear perspective into its approach, and adopted—if not fulfilled—the ideology of “mimesis,” the perfect imitation of nature, the artistic ideal of the Renaissance. The camera obscura is already mentioned in Aristotle’s writings, described and revived by Leonardo da Vinci; by 1550, it was more than a simple pinhole device, equipped with lenses; by 1573, fitted with a concave mirror to right the image. The question of the machine is an interesting one. Camera obscura, camera lucida, drawing machines… Mechanical art, therefore trivial? Steichen had an excellent answer to this: would anyone reproach a musician for playing the piano instead of singing? Through the correspondence between Niépce and his brother Claude, we know that the idea seems to have come to them during a trip to Sardinia in 1797. There were many scientific, chemical, and optical precedents and unfinished experiments before Niépce. Photography could have been invented in the eighteenth century, after the German scientist Schulze discovered the properties of silver salts; we have seen that the camera obscura was already widely used since the sixteenth century. The time of invention was likely favored by the changing perceptions and perspectives at the end of the eighteenth century, and by the new industrial possibilities such an invention offered. This is also where Niépce stands, from the invention of the engine—the Pyreolophore (1806)—to his heliographic experiments, which were as much about reproducing engravings as about direct writing of viewpoints. One text draws our attention: that of Tiphaigne de la Roche, a Norman veterinarian, who in 1760 wrote a novella called Giphantie (an anagram of Tiphaigne), which tells of a world where mirrors remember. One also thinks of Leonardo da Vinci’s writings, who always advised artists to use a mirror to understand what a landscape or portrait would look like in two dimensions. A love of language and Greek words. At the heart of Niépce’s concepts, one could say their soul, their philosophy, the very meaning of their realization. Nature itself (archéïopète); imprint, drawing, writing; truth. An ambiguous concept, in fact, regarding the nature of photography as it would develop. This quick overview, I hope, has opened up new and original horizons for you. As Niépce wrote to his brother Claude, ‘to burn with the desire to see’ is a wonderful feeling. And like Nicéphore Niépce, I have great faith in the secret link between words and things.”
<transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-l-sulqdd-mcujltt-i/> Daniel Girardin in conversation with Michael Kolster
Let’s conclude with two special card dedicated to the two Nicephores from 787 and 1787, created for the Misteri della Fotografia series ! MYT-4 – Nikeforos. Second Council of Nicaea, Asia Minor, 6295 since the creation of the world (787 AD) Nikeforos, a young logothetes of the genikon, defends sacred images against iconoclasm. Thanks to his eloquence and steadfastness, the systematic destruction of icons is halted. For a short time, the image is saved. In the East, he is even considered a saint for his wisdom. But the destruction resumes at the end of his life, and will not truly stop until the year 843. There was nothing left to destroy. Almost nothing was saved.
<transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-l-sulqdd-mcujltt-d/> MYT-4 – Nikeforos. Secondo Concilio di Nicea, Asia Minore, 6295 dalla creazione del Mondo (787 d.C.) Nikeforos, giovane logoteta del genikon, difende le immagini sacre contro l’iconoclastia. Grazie alla sua eloquenza e alla sua fermezza, la distruzione sistematica delle icone viene interrotta. Per un tempo breve, l’immagine è salva. In Oriente, viene persino considerato un santo per la sua saggezza. Ma le distruzioni riprendono alla fine della sua vita, e non si fermeranno davvero fino all’anno 843. Non restava più nulla da distruggere. Quasi nulla si è salvato. Heliochromy published as a postcard, mixed media on a digital base: collage, engraving, gouache retouching, and manual interventions. It is part of the first series, The Mysteries of Photography, dedicated to myths and precursors. The next one belongs to the second series, dedicated to the life of Joseph Nicéphore Niépce :
JNN-1. Collegio degli Oratoriani di Angers, 1787 Joseph Nicéphore Niépce, giovanissimo professore nella classe di “sixième”, mostra la lanterna magica ai suoi allievi. Viene retrocesso, dà le dimissioni e adotta il nome di Nicephore, campione degli iconoduli contro gli iconoclasti, mille anni prima.
JNN-1. Collegio degli Oratoriani di Angers, 1787 Joseph Nicéphore Niépce, giovanissimo professore nella classe di “sixième”, mostra la lanterna magica ai suoi allievi. Viene retrocesso, dà le dimissioni e adotta il nome di Nicephore, campione degli iconoduli contro gli iconoclasti, mille anni prima. Eliocromie pubblicate come cartolina, procedimento misto su base digitale: collage, incisione, ritocco a gouache e interventi manuali, e fanno parte, una, della prima serie I Misteri della Fotografia, dedicata ai miti ed ai precursori, e la seconda della serie dedicata alla vita di Joseph Nicéphore Niépce Edizioni Atelier 41, via Fratelli Bandiera, Senigallia
La Fotografia è la più bella delle collezioni … Senigallia, città della fotografia, ospitera nuovi spazi dedicato alla ricerca e promozione della fotografia. Atelier 41 si trova 41 via fratelli Bandiera. Senigallia diventerà la Città delle collezioni. Any question : fotografia@atelier41.org <mailto:fotografia@atelier41.org>
<transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-l-sulqdd-mcujltt-h/> Share <transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-fb-sulqdd-mcujltt-u/> Tweet <transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-tw-sulqdd-mcujltt-c/> Share <transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-li-sulqdd-mcujltt-q/> Forward <consigneditdisergeplantureux.forwardtomyfriend.com/d-mcujltt-7D15CFF3-sulqdd-l-a> ATELIER 41 Via Fratelli Bandiera 41 60019 Senigallia Italy Preferences <consigneditdisergeplantureux.updatemyprofile.com/d-sulqdd-7D15CFF3-mcujltt-f> | Unsubscribe <transmission.plantureux.it/t/d-u-sulqdd-mcujltt-z/>