William Henry Fox Talbot: Beyond Photography
Thursday, 24 June 2010 to Saturday, 26 June 2010Location: CRASSH, 17 Mill Lane, Cambridge
(a) Summary Abstract
William Henry Fox Talbot (1800-1877) is remembered primarily as a photographic pioneer and influential early voice on photographic aesthetics, but his activities as a Victorian intellectual and 'gentleman of science' ranged widely across the natural sciences, classical scholarship and Assyriology. This interdisciplinary conference approached Talbot’s work with this wider perspective in mind, bringing together art historians, curators, historians of science and practitioners of the many scholarly fields to which Talbot contributed. The papers and commentaries situated Talbot against the networks and institutions of Victorian intellectual enterprise, while raising basic questions about the relation between photography and these other fields.
b) Conference Review
The aim of this event was to
reinvigorate scholarly work on Talbot – a central figure in the history of
photography – by experimenting with a new multi-disciplinary approach to his
work. The conference brought
together two communities of scholars: on the one hand, historians of
nineteenth-century science and culture, many of whom conducted new research
into the British Library’s large archive of Talbot’s notebooks and diaries but
who often had only passing familiarity with Talbot's photographic oeuvre; and
on the other hand, art historians and historians of photography for whom
Talbot's images form a foundational element of their disciplinary canon, but
who had little knowledge of his other intellectual activities. A set of
important themes emerged and recurred throughout the two days of the conference
and in the commentaries and discussions at the end of each day:
The “social geography” of Victorian
intellectual life. Talbot’s social
position and his wide range of interests seem to make him a particularly useful
subject for illuminating the socially heterogeneous landscape of
nineteenth-century knowledge in terms of issues of class, skill, expertise,
training, and discipline - terms central to the social history of the period.
The meaning of Lacock Abbey (Talbot’s country estate) as a social, political,
intellectual, technological, and archival site has not yet been fully
explored. Was Talbot a
“centrifugal” figure with subjects and information moving outwards, or flowing
inwards towards him? The telling absence of the “oriental” (especially India)
as one of Talbot’s interests was also raised, as was the question of his religious
orthodoxy, especially with respect to his various projects dealing with the
past and with ancient religions.
What do we mean by “beyond”
photography? Values having to do
with the proper or enjoyable exercise of vision/visual judgment (such as visual
acuity, discrimination, pleasure, and connoisseurship) arose in a few of the
papers, and suggested ways of examining connections or productive tensions
between Talbot's photographic work and his other activities. A question which frequently
arose between the lines but which was never answered was the relationship
between classic iconographic readings of Talbot’s photographs, and the
scientific and intellectual context of photography’s invention.
Talbot and nineteenth-century
knowledge. Talbot’s abiding interest in origins,
as well as a persistent fascination with languages, script and inscription,
decipherment, and legibility, are themes that seem to have cut across several
of his intellectual activities (antiquarianism, archaeology, etymology,
Assyriology, as well as photography). It would also be useful to explore the
political and theological valence of Talbot's various projects dealing with the
past. Many papers also called
attention to the materiality of record-keeping and research practices for
nineteenth-century intellectuals like Talbot, and to the materiality of the
Talbot archive itself. Moreover, like the scientist and celebrated polymath
William Whewell, Talbot seems to be a useful lens through which to examine the
tendency of Victorian intellectuals (particularly reforming Whigs) to value the
cultivation of omniscience, and to seek to understand and control many
different aspects of knowledge and society at once. Finally, certain key terms with highly unstable meaning in
the period under study (and which currently have a highly ossified meaning in
early twenty-first-century scholarly discourse) repeatedly arose in our discussions: "discovery",
"invention", "discipline", "professional",
"aesthetics". Because
Talbot's wide range of activities and interests took place during a crucial
period in the intellectual development and social formation of Victorian knowledge
systems, when even such seemingly basic terms as "art" and
"science" were in flux, it is precisely these terms that we need to
be careful not to deploy uncritically in our analysis.
Historiography/meta-narrative. Towards the end of the conference the
question was raised of what exactly was the nature of the historiographical
intervention we were attempting to make with this conference (and with any
proposed publication arising out of it). Is the aim to bring biographical coherence to Talbot studies, or to
disperse him as a subject across different fields? The question of whether to think of Talbot as a “typical” or
an “exceptional” Victorian intellectual recurred throughout the discussions.
