Henry Cole, the first Victoria and Albert Museum director, seemed to have been the link between Julie Margaret Cameron and the Queen. Cole knew the photographer and had sat for her in the past, so he arranged for her to have a studio in the museum where she could take portraits in an ideal setting. Already in 1858, the museum had the world's first international photographic exhibition and I am assuming this was where the Queen first saw Cameron's amazing work. The V & A must have remained supportive of Cameron's art. In 1865, the Museum acquired 63 of her works.
Queen Victoria maintained her interest in photography, even after she became a widow. And one of her most important collections came from Julia Margaret Cameron. The 2011 exhibition appropriately included six of Cameron’s powerful portraits of male sitters, part of the Great and the Good of C19th Britain.
Princesses Alice and Victoria, Queen Victoria’s daughters,
at Balmoral, 1856,
by Fenton
Queen Victoria maintained her interest in photography, even after she became a widow. And one of her most important collections came from Julia Margaret Cameron. The 2011 exhibition appropriately included six of Cameron’s powerful portraits of male sitters, part of the Great and the Good of C19th Britain.
May Day by Cameron, 1866
Victoria & Albert Museum, London
The Victorian Web
Cameron was attracted to subjects who'd been successful & famous via their careers, but her portraits were unlike that produced by contemporary, studio-based photographers. Artist G.F Watts helped Cameron to create portraits that expressed the individual character of the sitter, rather than a mere record of the sitter’s facial features. The slight blurring of each image was adopted by Cameron as an artistic technique, to achieve a more painterly effect and to suggest a sense of energy.
Roger Fenton (1819–1869) was trained as a barrister, not as an artist. Yet in 1852 his photographic work was exhibited at the Society of Arts, in the first British exhibition devoted exclusively to photography. Fenton was appointed the first official photographer of the British Museum in 1854 and achieved widespread recognition for the photographs that he took of the Crimean War in 1855.
He was introduced to Victoria and Albert at the first exhibition of the Photographic Society. And soon Fenton was invited to Windsor Castle to photograph the entire royal family. This brought great happiness to both sides - Fenton's unprecedented access to the family life of the royal family must have influenced his artistic future and Fenton in turn increased the royals' great interest in photography.
The Royal Collection exhibition includes Fenton’s final work for the royal family, completed after the photographer’s return from the Crimea in 1856. Fenton had travelled to Balmoral to photograph the newly completed royal residence in Scotland and members of the Queen’s household.
The royals also purchased a number of Fenton’s commercial photos, including his views of Windsor Castle and the surrounding parkland taken in 1860. Since the opening of two railway stations in Windsor, a visit to the Castle had become a popular trip from the capital. So Fenton may have intended his work to be sold as a quality souvenir or to serve as illustrations to guidebooks.
I wondered why the nation-wide tour started in Blackwell, The Arts & Crafts House in Cumbria. Possibly because the Lakeland Arts Trust's own collection already contained photographs and photographic objects relating to the development of photography in the Lake District.
The accompanying book, Roger Fenton • Julia Margaret Cameron: Early British Photographs from the Royal Collection by Sophie Gordon, was published by Royal Collection Publications in 2010. Rather than being a distant patron, the book illustrated how Queen Victoria's owned a much loved set of Cameron portraits. And it showed Fenton images of Windsor Castle and the royal children.
The first photographs dated back to the first half of the C19th and after that, techniques developed rapidly. But photography as a fine art was met with some resistance by cultural critics. Perhaps it was Queen Victoria's support that pushed photography from mechanical art to fine art.
He was introduced to Victoria and Albert at the first exhibition of the Photographic Society. And soon Fenton was invited to Windsor Castle to photograph the entire royal family. This brought great happiness to both sides - Fenton's unprecedented access to the family life of the royal family must have influenced his artistic future and Fenton in turn increased the royals' great interest in photography.
The Royal Collection exhibition includes Fenton’s final work for the royal family, completed after the photographer’s return from the Crimea in 1856. Fenton had travelled to Balmoral to photograph the newly completed royal residence in Scotland and members of the Queen’s household.
The royals also purchased a number of Fenton’s commercial photos, including his views of Windsor Castle and the surrounding parkland taken in 1860. Since the opening of two railway stations in Windsor, a visit to the Castle had become a popular trip from the capital. So Fenton may have intended his work to be sold as a quality souvenir or to serve as illustrations to guidebooks.
I wondered why the nation-wide tour started in Blackwell, The Arts & Crafts House in Cumbria. Possibly because the Lakeland Arts Trust's own collection already contained photographs and photographic objects relating to the development of photography in the Lake District.
The book, 2010, by Sophie Gordon.
Photo of Thomas Carlyle by Cameron.
The first photographs dated back to the first half of the C19th and after that, techniques developed rapidly. But photography as a fine art was met with some resistance by cultural critics. Perhaps it was Queen Victoria's support that pushed photography from mechanical art to fine art.
.jpg)
_01.jpg)
.jpg)
28 comments:
Such a fascinating post. And I love the old photo.
It’s fascinating how this exhibition not only honoured two pioneers of 19th-century photography but also highlighted the crucial role the royal family and institutions like the V&A played in legitimising photography as a fine art.
What a fascinating glimpse into the early days of photography and the pivotal roles played by Fenton, Cameron, and the Royal Family! It's wonderful to learn about Queen Victoria and Prince Albert's enthusiastic support for this new art form.
(My latest post: Day 2 in Sambhaji Nagar - Ellora Caves)
I didn't realise photography began quite that early. The quality of the photo you included is quite amazing for the time.
In the MayDay photo, the girl on the bottom right looks like she might have been the facial model for the many thousands of dolls produced in the 1950s and 60s, before Barbie came on the scene.
Without Cole's support for photography I'm sure many of these photos would have been lost.
Interesting to read about the people who took photography to another level I guess. Must have been very hard for some people to accept photography in place of a painted image. Makes me wonder where all the artists went.
Linda
Old photos are wonderful because they are a major source of our history of the time, assuming the photos haven't been "adjusted" since. But as Cameron, Fenton and their patrons showed, those 19th century photos also revealed a great deal about the time's aesthetic values.
roentare
totally agreed! The Royal Collection Trust wrote:
Queen Victoria and Prince Albert were passionate patrons of the arts and sciences, and had a serious influence on the cultural landscape of the late 19th century. They were collectors, owners and promoters, supporting a wide range of artistic genres: paintings, sculpture, photography, industrial design, and music.
Andrew
the royal couple amassed a collection of works by most of the leading photographers of the day. After Prince Albert’s death, Queen Victoria continued collecting. At the time of the Queen’s death in January 1901, the collection was an estimated 20,000 photographs.with each image and were very skilled technically, and the models took even longer to appear appropriately in their settings. Nothing was accidental.
No photos were wasted. The Royals collected the works by most of the leading photographers of the day and by the Queen’s death in 1901, the collection held tens of thousands of beautiful works.
River
if the photographs were going to represent British morals and aesthetics for ever, I bet the royals would have patronised those photographers who selected religious celebrations, public holidays, modest but attractive clothing for females, flowers and attractive gardens etc.
The girl in the May Day photo would have been thrown out of the group had she looked/dressed horridly.
Fun60
I agree. No artist of any genre could make his/her mark on the world without support from important and influential people. Victoria and Albert were most powerful royals in the world of course, but then Sir Henry Cole was the first director of the critically important V&A!!
Here's something I didn't know. Cole's influence also contributed to the establishment of the Royal Albert Hall.
Margaret
when I first started Art History at Melbourne Uni, I would have included architecture and excluded photography. Architecture was always a fine art even though its structural-engineering components were not very aesthetic or cultural. But the cultural and political symbols on architecture, and especially its works of art, were much easier to analyse.
But I have changed my mind about photography. Photography can serve many purposes - it can sell peanut butter, it can document historical events, and most importantly in this case, it can readily be art.
Pradeep Nair
I am not particularly a royalist, for Australia at least, and I didn't like Prince Albert in particular. But these two royals threw themselves into supporting and promoting medicine, science and the arts in the last half of the 19th century. It will not surprise us that Royal Albert Hall displayed both the arts and sciences.
In its infancy, photography was an expensive hobby, so only the well-heeled could pursue it. Now, we can all participate.
Those dresses in the first photo look like these girls couldn't do much in them, but then they were princesses and probably didn't have to do any chores. I think it's interesting how there were photo exhibits so early on in the new medium. Now we take it for granted, don't we? have a great weekend Hels.
What a rich and fascinating glimpse into the early days of photography and its royal patrons. The way Julia Margaret Cameron and Roger Fenton captured not just faces but the very spirit of their subjects shows how art and history can beautifully intertwine. Their legacy reminds us how tradition and innovation can go hand in hand. I just shared a new travel post. I am excited for you to read it. Thank you. Happy weekend.
Boa tarde de sábado. E um ótimo final de semana. Um excelente domingo. Obrigado por nos trazer uma excelente matéria.
I have never heard of these people but as you know I do like to learn about people and stuff from the past.
jabblog,
true that!
Fortunately both Cameron and Fenton, who both started off as amateurs, soon became professionals exhibiting their works, but also putting a lot of effort into copyrighting, publishing and marketing them. (Not bad for Cameron who raised 11 children, of her own and adopted!)
Erika
The 1852-3 ‘Exhibition of Recent Specimens of Photography’ at the Royal Society of Arts in London said to be the first exhibition devoted exclusively to photography. The catalogue is at: https://archive.org/details/ldpd_12955061_000/page/n27/mode/2up
Melody
and the historical themes were not always beautiful to look at. See Fenton's war themes etc in
https://smarthistory.org/roger-fenton-photographs-of-the-crimean-war/
Luiz
it is a great topic, yes! But once most of us didn't know about until many decades after Queen Victoria died.
Jo-Anne
I relied on doing Art History at uni to learn everything I needed to know from the past. But that was clearly impossible. So now we can thank goodness for blogging :)
I like looking at old photographs. Thanks to photography, we know what people who lived before us looked like. Photography is a very important form of art.
Irina
I agree. The older the documents I read, the more I realise how important photos are in increasing our confidence. I understand that photos can be altered these days, but probably not in Victorian days.
Great blog
Rajani Rehana
If you are interested in following the topic further, I would recommend reading Sophie Gordon's excellent book: Early British Photographs from the Royal Collection.
Post a Comment