ANNA ATKINS: CATALYST OF MODERN PHOTOGRAPHY THROUGH THE FIRST PHOTOBOOK

Melanie R. Isenogle

A Thesis

Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

August 2019

Committee:

Andrew Hershberger, Advisor

Sean V. Leatherbury © 2019

Melanie Isenogle

All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT

Andrew Hershberger, Advisor

Anna Atkins (1799-1871) was a botanist first and a photographer second.

Dedicating the majority of her life to the study of British botanicals, Atkins initially recorded

these plants through the act of drawing. Living during a time filled with photographic advancements from the likes of William Henry Fox Talbot (1800-1877), Louis-Jacques-Mandé

Daguerre (1787-1851), and Sir John Herschel (1792-1871), Atkins also played a critical role for photography through her publications. Herschel, a family friend, created the cyanotype method, which often forgoes the use of a camera and lens to create a picture. The cyanotype produces handmade photogram impressions of objects from light rays and emulsion. Atkins chose to use this process for her renderings of the plants she studied due to its ability to capture more

“accurate depictions.”

Atkins's book, Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impressions, created during the years 1843-1853, offers full pages of cyanotypes and wrappings which are made entirely of photographs. These images come in the form of a Prussian blue and white negative, combing both text and image to provide not only an education and categorization of the plants themselves, but also a more accurate depiction of the botanical specimens Atkins had spent her life studying.

This straight photographic style, via the photogram, also precedes traditional theories of when modern photography begins. Photography has habitually been categorized as beginning in the year 1839 with Talbot’s and Daguerre’s announcements of their processes for fixing light rays.

What scholars and critics sometimes fail to recognize, though, is that the beginnings for the modern era for photography start within this time, rather than around the twentieth century. iv Therefore, it could be argued that these innovations from Talbot, Daguerre, Herschel, and Atkins too, act as an advancement for the medium, thus propelling photography into a modern era.

Through careful analyses of the New York Public Library’s copy of one of Atkins’s publications, it is evident that her work exemplified this modern quality and captured an intellect that continues to inspire contemporary artists today. v

Dedicated to those who see a photograph and

feel the impact correspond with their soul. vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Through my journey of writing this thesis, I was granted experiences and relationships

that would prove to be exceptionally meaningful throughout this process. First and foremost, I

am fully appreciative and thankful for the guidance and support of my thesis committee

members, Dr. Andrew Hershberger and Dr. Sean V. Leatherbury. Without their guidance, this

thesis would fail to be what it is today. For the years leading up to this thesis, Dr. Hershberger continuously encouraged my ideas, claims, and passion for photography throughout the numerous art history classes and conversations I have had with him, both during my undergraduate and graduate degrees. It has been the utmost pleasure to learn from him and model myself after his positive academic atmosphere for the way I approach learning. Dr.

Hershberger’s constant support led me to contact the Royal Gardens of Kew in England for copies of letters in support of my thesis, as well as to make an appointment at the New York

Public Library to analyze firsthand Atkins’s publication; an experience that will easily be regarded as the highlight of my graduate career. Additionally, Dr. Leatherbury has pushed me to

thoroughly seek knowledge and think critically about my writing, which, without a doubt,

assisted me greatly throughout my thesis adventure. A critical addition to my collegiate career,

photography professor Lynn Whitney offered countless gracious words of inspiration that afforded much relief for me during times of stress, and for that I will forever be grateful. I also would like to thank Abigail Cloud in the English Department for assisting in translating the beautiful script in the letters from the Royal Gardens of Kew.

I must also recognize those within my program who, while writing their own theses,

provided the best support system. Mariah Morales and Tami Landis kept me grounded during

our entire program through many late nights and early mornings. These two women are such vii strong individuals, both academically and personally, and without them, this journey would have been full of more tears than laughs.

I have the utmost appreciation for my boyfriend, Sam Scholl, for sticking with me through my thesis and inspiring me every day. I also must thank Sam for housing and taking care of me during my many escapes to New York from Bowling Green, so I could recharge during this whole process. Your loving words of encouragement through the really long days of writing truly allowed me to persevere. For that, I am the most grateful.

Lastly, I would like to thank my parents, Alan and Nancy Isenogle, with whom I can hardly find the words to express my gratitude. Thank you for consistently showing support throughout my education and allowing me to pursue my dreams, no matter how big. vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

CHAPTER I. MODERN PHOTOGRAPHY AND ANNA ATKINS ...... 3

John George Children and The Royal Society ...... 6

Sir John Herschel ...... 9

Sir William Hooker ...... 11

A Science for Women: Botany ...... 12

CHAPTER II. CYANOTYPE IMPRESSIONS ...... 16

Birth of the Photobook ...... 16

Analysis of Paper ...... 20

Inspection of Algae Impressions ...... 24

CHAPTER III. LIFE AFTER PHOTOGRAPHS OF BRITISH ALGAE: CYANOTYPE

IMPRESSIONS PRODUCTION ...... 27

Death of Atkins's Father ...... 27

Other Publications ...... 28

Impact on Contemporary Art and Thought ...... 30

CHAPTER IV. CONCLUSION ...... 37

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 39

APPENDIX A. FIGURES...... 41 1

INTRODUCTION What is a photograph? This question is arguably the most debated topic in the history of

the medium by photographers and critics alike. Heated declarations turn into manifestos for a

few, and others then respond with equally passionate opinions. Pictorialist photographers like

Robert Demachy (1859-1936) stated that a photograph should be manipulated and entirely, or

partially, soft-focused. Other modernist photographers, such as Berenice Abbott (1898-1971),

during the mid-twentieth century, argued that a photograph must be entirely sharp-focused and

unaltered.1 But, what happens when a photographer defies these now common philosophies

before people even formulate them?

Anna Atkins (1799-1871), the first female photographer, in 1843 challenged these later

declarations in advance by creating the first photographic book with a method that forgoes the

use of a camera and a lens altogether to create a picture. The cyanotype, or blueprint as it is also

known, offers the world handmade impressions of objects via light rays and emulsion. The

definition of impression in this case refers to the imagery created when sunrays are blocked from

exposing light-sensitive paper by an object that is impressed upon, or rests atop of, the paper.

The result renders a negative image – a white shadow image surrounded by Prussian blue.

The purity of these creations offers one-to-one impressions directly from the object and its shadow, creating what Atkins herself referred to as a more accurate means of documentation than drawing (Fig. 1). The lack of a camera and lens also arguably produces a strong authorship within each print due to Atkins’s hand-painted emulsion, decisions for composition and display

1 Robert Demachy, "On the Straight Print" (1907) and Berenice Abbott, "Photography at the Crossroads" (1951), in Photographic Theory: an Historical Anthology, ed Andrew Hershberger. Oxford: Wiley- Blackwell, 2014. 114-117 and 150-153. Print. 2

of plants on each page, and also her cyanotype texts included inside the books and with each

image. Additionally, because of the thousands of photograms Atkins constructed in her lifetime,

the repetitious motions of this process became a subconscious, or even a therapeutic, mode of

creation for her.

The book, Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impressions, created by Atkins

during the years 1843-1853, offers intimate views of each straight photogram of intricate

botanicals.2 Preceding well-established theories about when modernism in photography begins,

this inherently straight photographic style via the photogram demonstrates a modernism far earlier than what many critics of the medium traditionally discuss. Robert Hirsch, for example,

categorizes photography’s modernism as following Pictorialism through the heading

“Modernisms Innovations,” for Chapter 10 of his book. Thus, modernism in photography for

Hirsch occurs around the early twentieth century, especially with straight photography.3 The

volumes of Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impressions relay visual information on an

earlier and perhaps equally straight photographic process, while at the same time discussing the

botanical specimens Atkins spent her lifetime researching. Drawing from a network of influential

minds, such as Sir John Herschel (1792-1871), the cyanotype’s inventor, and her mentor, Sir

William Hooker (1785-1865), and her father, John George Children (1777-1852), Atkins’s

publications show the modern, innovative capabilities she possessed in the mid-nineteenth

century.

2 Larry J. Schaaf, and Hans P. Kraus, Sun Gardens: Victorian Photograms by Anna Atkins. New York: Aperture, 1985. 34. 3 Robert Hirsch. Seizing the Light: A Social & Aesthetic History of Photography. Third ed. New York: Routledge, 2017. 489. 3

CHAPTER I. MODERN PHOTOGRAPHY AND ANNA ATKINS

Anna Atkins, child of Royal Society member, John George Children (1777-1852), and wife of John Pelly Atkins, proved to be a catalyst within the photographic world in the mid- nineteenth century. During a time of exceptional photographic invention, including the earliest photograms from the 1830s by William Henry Fox Talbot (1800-1877), Atkins’s use of the cyanotype proved that a camera was not inherently necessary to create prints. After the creation of her photobooks, Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impressions, it was highly apparent that “...this production [British Algae] represented a powerful early expression of photography’s potential for influencing book illustration.”4 Integral to bringing the medium into a mode of

thought that generated new ways of thinking about the world, society, and the practicality of

innovation via straight photographic means, Atkins was at the beginning of what could be

considered modern and straight photography.5

The word "modern" derives from the combination of the Latin words modo, meaning

“now,” which also stems from modus, referring to “measure,” and the affix –ernus, meaning

“present” or “existing now.”6 By a combination of connotations, we are left with an understanding that the Latin roots for "modern" refers to a measure of time signifying the present.

This "now" “existing now” generates a level of thought that signifies a newness in relation to the

right-now. Therefore, a boom of new ideas, creations, theories, etc., would signify a type of

modernism due to the simple fact that it is something innovative happening in the right-now.

Thus, within the artistic and scientific communities, the new photographic processes in the

4 Schaaf and Kraus, 7. 5 Schaaf, 212. 6 Peter Carravetta. “Postmodern Chronicles.” Annali d’Italianistica. 9. (1991): 46-47. 4

nineteenth century, via inventions, thoughts, and theories, truly propelled the medium as a whole

into a modernism almost immediately. Subsequently, the photogram, from the beginning with

people like Talbot and Atkins, should be seen as a part of modernism for the histories of art and

histories of photography. Consequently then, the later straight photography period traditionally

categorized as "modern photography" by most historians of the medium becomes instead a subset

under an overall and larger umbrella of modern photography. This potentially expands upon how

some authors, such as Peter Bunnell (b. 1937), include both manipulated Pictorialism and straight

photographic styles all as part of modern photography.7

As discussed by Hirsch throughout Chapter 10 of his book, Seizing the Light: A Social &

Aesthetic History of Photography, this traditional viewpoint on modernism is due to the move away from the soft-focus, ephemeral, Pictorialist style of photography of the late nineteenth

century, a style that seemed to, in a sense, mimic painting. The abandonment of this painterly style and the transition to a more "straight," sharp-focused mode of picture-making in the twentieth century sparked a shift in not only the actual images themselves, but also in the corresponding theories about photography. If straight working methods indicate “Modern”

photography, then perhaps modernism begins with Atkins's works from the 1840s because they

are also "straight," unmanipulated images. Following the flow of this logic, the traditional

categorization of the beginnings of modern photography fails to recognize that the medium itself

was, perhaps, not invented in 1839 by William Henry Fox Talbot and Louis-Jacques-Mandé

Daguerre, but rather, through the new image fixing processes, and straight photographic renderings by photographers, such as Atkins, the medium as a whole was advancing into a period of modernism . This is also potentially linked to the fact that the use of light as a tool for image

7 Peter C. Bunnell. A Photographic Vision: Pictorial Photography, 1889-1923. Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith, 1980. 7. 5

making had been around far earlier than 1839 as well, as also discussed by Hirsch in his first

chapter and especially by David Hockney (b. 1937) in his book Secret Knowledge, through the

use of light manipulation to help render paintings within the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.8

In addition to accounts of a camera obscura, artists are thought to have used light rays

reflected onto canvas to assist in their paintings. Examples include Giorgone (1478-1510) and

even van Dyck (1599-1641). Van Dyck is discussed by Hockney in Secret Knowledge as manipulating light rays to assist in his paintings, specifically for Painting of a Man in Armour of

1625-27.9 Hockney suggests that the level of detail achieved on a difficult texture, such as that of

the armor looks similar to that of a photograph.10 The clarity of this painting is then compared to

a photograph from 2000 of Milanese half-armour from c. 1590, and the resemblance of shadow,

light, and overall rendering between the painting, as reproduced as a photograph and shown side-

by-side printed in the book, is very similar .11 The use of light rays to aid in the production of

paintings occurred in the 1500’s and 1600’s, which would still put the use of light to assist in

image creation, at the very least, as existing some 300 years earlier than traditionally understood.

Innovative in nature, the use of light has spread new thoughts for centuries, but the early

nineteenth century saw a boom in these inventions, propelling the medium arguably into a period

of straight modernism well before what most scholars call "modern photography.” Atkins’s use

of the cyanotype photogram in the first photographically illustrated book, British Algae, thus

positions her as a pioneer of modern photography. “Originality,” writes Hirsch, is “a building

8 Hirsch, 1-26, and David Hockney. “Secret Knowledge: rediscovering the lost techniques of the old masters.” New York: Penguin Group, 2001. 42-43. 9 Ibid 10 Ibid. 11 Hockney, 44-45. 6

block for Modernism.”12 Atkins's publication, the first photobook, showed an originality that acted as a driving force for the medium into its own modernism.

John George Children and The Royal Society

The British Museum scientist and Royal Society member John George Children (1777-

1852) provided a lifetime of support for his daughter, Anna, within her scientific and artistic endeavors. Anna Atkins did not do her work alone, but rather she had the scientific, artistic, emotional, and parental support of her father for the majority of her life.13 With his own mother

passing after his birth, Children perhaps felt a need to create a strong bond between his daughter

and himself when Atkins's mother, Hester Anne Children, died after a horrible recovery resulting from giving birth.14 Through this bond, Atkins benefited from not only a positive father-daughter relationship, but also from the scientific and artistic community her father was connected to through his involvements with many likeminded individuals in the burgeoning scientific community in nineteenth-century England.15

Not only was Children a successful facilitator in advancing Britain’s scientific research and discovery efforts, but he also frequently provided a close network of modern theory and invention through the individuals he knew to Atkins throughout her upbringing, and then later,

daily, due to Children living with his daughter and her husband John Pelly Atkins (1790-1872), a

London West India Merchant, after he retired from the British Museum in 1840.16 Inventors,

photographers, and scientists alike surrounded Children in a circle of intellects via the Royal

12 Hirsch, 489. 13 Schaaf and Kraus, 7. 14 Ibid, 23. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid, 24. 7

Society, and this allowed Children’s only child, with whom he shared a home, to draw influence

from these people as well. Atkins herself was a scientist, and she focused her efforts on studying

aquatic botanicals, which also included developing and perfecting her documenting skills as an

artist to draw accurate depictions of the plants (Fig. 1). With new photographic processes

invented by fellow scientists like Talbot and Herschel, Atkins was able to learn about these

creations firsthand from the intellects themselves due to her father’s connections to them.

Fellowship in The Royal Society, an organization based in London which served the

purposes of advancing scientific invention via publications, meetings, announcements, and

networking, was arguably the pinnacle of John George Children’s distinguished career.17

Children served as not only a highly regarded scientist, but also as a Fellow and Secretary for the

organization.18 The Royal Society’s history proved to be exceptionally beneficial to the

advancement of Britain’s scientific and political understandings as a whole. Talbot, for example,

proclaimed his invention of the calotype process of photography to the Royal Society in 1839,

which traditionally is the year marking the beginnings of photography.19 Similar to Atkins's use

of the cyanotype, Talbot hoped to create a process that more accurately depicted subject matter

than would a typical drawing.20 The term for photography, photo-, meaning light, and the affix – graphy, referring to drawing or writing, combine to create the meaning of light sensitive drawing, which specifically alludes to Talbot’s original intention for the invention which he

17 Ibid, 23. 18 Ibid. 19 William Henry Fox Talbot writing to Jean Baptiste Biot. A letter kept in a private collection between Talbot and scientists working on photographic innovations in 1839 and their announcements. Talbot mentions in the letter that “Most occupied, at the moment, with a work on this subject, which will be read at the Royal Society the day afer tomorrow,” which refers to his announcement of photogenic drawing. 20 Schaaf and Kraus, 24. 8

called "the Art of Photogenic Drawing.”21 Children happened to be on the Committee of Papers

on February 7th, 1839, when Talbot’s article, "Some Account of the Art of Photogenic Drawing," was being deliberated for publication.22 Additionally, Children was the chair of the meeting

wherein Talbot provided the accounts of his photographic discovery, all of which indicates that

Children was one of the first people to learn about this fixated photographic invention.23

Daguerre also had created and announced a new type of photography around the exact

same time as Talbot in 1839. Talbot wrote to fellow members of the Royal Society about

creating an announcement of Daguerre’s fixation process, and also about his own process for

fixing images and its announcement to the Royal Society.24 Therefore, not only did these two

innovators fall into the modernism through invention that the Royal Society helped foster, but

these two individuals were connected as scientific colleagues discussing one another’s research

other over the course of years.25 This rich time for the histories of photography fostered

communication between a network of scientists with which Children was connected, and in turn,

Atkins became associated too, both in person and through conversations with her father.

Children actually can be regarded as the first person to introduce photographic practices

to Atkins as well.26 Prior to her later, and now famous, involvement with an alternative

photographic process (alternative due to the lack of a camera used, but still fixing light rays

nonetheless), Children gifted photography to his daughter by providing a camera for Atkins two

21 Schaaf and Kraus, 25. 22 Ibid. 23 Ibid. 24 William Henry Fox Talbot writing to Jean Baptist Biot. Letter mentions that Daguerre announced his process of fixation, the Daguerreotype, prior to Talbot announcing his fixation technique, the photogenic drawing process. 25 Ibid. 26 John George Children, Letter to William Henry Fox Talbot, September 14th, 1841. Private Collection. 9

years after Talbot’s announcement to the world of his calotype process.27 This was noted within a letter between Children and Talbot where Atkins’ father relayed: “My Daughter and I shall set to work in good earnest ‘till we completely succeed in practising [sic] your invaluable process…I

have also ordered a camera for Mrs. Atkins.”28 Her father’s support for her and her interests truly was remarkable. He not only provided positive moral support for her curiosities during a time

when daughters were not often encouraged in scientific pursuits, but he went so far as to

purchase a camera for her to use with Talbot’s calotype process.29

Sir John Herschel

Sir John Herschel (1792-1871), another fellow member of the Royal Society, arguably

can be considered the most influential figure in Atkins’s life, aside from her father, due to his

creation of the cyanotype process.30 Hershel’s connection to Atkins and Children went beyond

his membership of the Royal Society and as a colleague to Children. Atkins was close to the

Herschel family, both in proximity and fondness. Living just 25 miles from each other, recurrent

visits between the two families led them to become quite close.31 In fact, Atkins was often regarded as the Herschel childrens’ “almost aunt.”32 In contrast to Children purchasing a camera

for Atkins to learn Talbot’s calotype process, it is speculated that Herschel taught his cyanotype

process to Atkins directly due to the close ties between the Herschel and Atkins families.33

Searching for a way to fix a photograph, just like his colleagues Talbot and Daguerre,

Herschel invented the cyanotype process of photography. Ferric ammonium citrate and potassium

27 Ibid. 28 Ibid. 29 Ibid. 30 Schaaf, 126-127. 31 Schaaf and Kraus, 27. 32 Ibid. 33 Ibid. 10

ferric cyanide proved to allow the author of a photograph to capture the unique shadow of an object when exposed to sunlight, which can be used for prints from the created negative, as well as for photograms.34 This early photogram technique provided the world with a straight

photographic process in the year 1842, which precedes later theories of "modern" straight

photography in the early twentieth century by more than fifty years.35 The discovery came about

when Herschel’s passion and curiosity about photography via chemistry was sparked following

Daguerre’s announcement of his invention in 1839.36 For years, Herschel experimented and came

to the chemical breakthrough of ferric ammonium citrate and potassium ferricyanide, the

combination of which created a light sensitive emulsion that could be exposed to UV rays and

fixed with water.37 Additionally, Herschel continued to experiment with photographic chemistry

in hopes of discovering a way to have a fully colorized print.38

However, the cyanotype did not become as popular as Herschel’s contemporaries’

processes of the calotype and daguerreotype. These other photographic methods were better

suited for portraiture due to the color achieved in the prints and plates.39 The cyanotype offers a gorgeous Prussian blue color, but it proved to be unsuitable for portraits.40 However, its

influence went on to impact the field of architecture as a reproductive method for the "blueprint"

plans of buildings, which proved to be “revolutionary.”41 Similarly, Atkins could quickly

reproduce accurate images of the plants she photographed, architects could then create multiples

34 Ibid. 35 Hirsch, 489. 36 Schaaf and Kraus, 28. 37 Ibid, 27. 38 Ibid, 29. 39 Ibid, 30. 40 Ibid, 30. 41 Price, Louis Olcott. “The History and Identification of Photo-Reproductive Processes Used for Architectural Drawings Prior to 1930.” Topics in Photographic Preservation 6 (1995): 41-49. 11

of their exceptionally detailed building drawings and plans, thus saving time and money. These photographs and usage of plants derived from her botany background, which heavily was influenced and inspired by Sir William Hooker (1785-1865).

Sir William Hooker

Sir William Hooker held a significant position within the lives of Atkins and her father, as well as within the scientific communities of Britain. At the young age of twenty, Hooker was elected as a Fellow of the Linnean Society, a prestigious society in London focused on botanicals.42 Later in life, he worked as Regius Professor of Botany at the University of Glasgow,

Scotland.43 In addition to teaching in Glasgow and providing insight to the Royal Society,

Hooker also was Director of the Royal Kew Gardens where his son, Sir Joseph Hooker, who also was a prominent botanist, followed as Director.44 Most significantly though, Sir William Hooker, and also his son, were knighted due to their contributions to the scientific world of botany.45

Hooker’s botanical discoveries and contributions positioned him as a noteworthy individual within the sciences in Britain, where he was well connected to people such as Atkins's father, with whom Hooker frequently corresponded, along with other Royal Society members.

Not only did Children and Hooker discuss studies and research performed by the Royal Society and each other personally, but Children also wrote to Hooker on behalf of Atkins, a fellow botanist.46 Hooker assisted Atkins via this correspondence so frequently and thoroughly that

Children wrote to Hooker in 1845: “I am only the channel of communication, for she considers you as her tutor in botany as what little knowledge she [possesses] in the science has been chiefly

42 Mea Allan. The Hookers of Kew: 1785-1911. London: Michael Joseph, 1967. 17. 43 Ibid. 44 Ibid. 45 Mea Allan. The Hookers of Kew: 1785-1911. London: Michael Joseph, 1967. 15. 46 John George Children, Letter to Sir William Hooker, August 27th, 1845. 12

derived from your words.”47 Thus, among all of Atkins’s network of scientific influences stemming from her father, Hooker was the most monumental for her as a fellow botanist.

A Science for Women: Botany

In the 1800’s, men had the luxury of focusing their academic studies on subjects that were included in more public societies, whereas women were left with much more restricted options.48 Domestic hobbies, as well as tasks around the home, were seen as suitable for women during this time. This was mainly due to the parallels then assumed between femininity and more docile acts, such as drawing, music, and providing for the home as a caretaker.49 Another appropriate subject for women happened to fall within the sciences though, and this was botany.50 Despite men being the leaders of the scientific world at the time, women were actually encouraged to study plants. This subject matter was seen as proper for their gender due to the feminine, ephemeral nature offered by flowers and the like.51 The segregation of men and women within the sciences unfortunately did not permit women to publish articles or drawings of their work independently. Therefore, women would document a specimen’s likeness via a drawing or lithograph and then this would accompany a male colleague’s research and writing within a publication.52

Fascinated by the world of botany from an early age, Atkins would draw her organic materials and study their structures with an artistic hand for a scientific purpose. Dedicated to her

47 Ibid. 48 Hope Saska. “Anna Atkins: Photographs of British Algae.” Bulletin of the Detroit Institute of Arts 84, no. 1/4 (2010): 11. 49 Ibid. 50 Ibid. 51 Ibid. 52 Saska, 11. 13

studies, Atkins's main role was to document the subtleties of British algae, referring to the aquatic seaweeds that were native to the England, through graphite drawings on paper and lithographs.53 It was by practicing these drawings that Atkins quickly realized the exceptionally minute details of plants and how they could not be represented effectively by a medium such as drawing. A more accurate depiction was needed. In an effort to become more precise with her depictions of her collected botanicals, Atkins adopted the cyanotype process from Sir John

Herschel in 1842, and she began implementing this process for her depictions of algae, and all the plants that interested her, making straight prints via sunlight and shadow upon light- sensitized emulsions on paper.

The decision specifically to use the cyanotype process, in addition to its ease and artistic capabilities, circles around the year 1839. The thoughts botanists must have had about the benefits of photography for plant-based documentation are exemplified by Atkins’s use of the cyanotype for greater ease and accuracy of rendering the plants that she would earlier draw (Fig.

1). A cost-effective and efficient way to document botanicals was highly needed at the time by these individuals, and initially in 1839, the thought of using photography was the sort of end-all- be-all answer they had been seeking.54 However, the initial photographic machine inventions did not meet the expected potential, and those who were once eager for the capabilities of the medium within the scientific realm of plant documentation, quickly lost hope for its use.55 In a few years after using the cyanotype, Atkins brought forth an innovation to not only the world of photography, but also to botany. The quick, affordable, and, arguably most important, accurate straight photogram proved that photography could, in fact, be used in the manner photographers

53 Ibid. 54 Schaaf and Kraus, 36. 55 Ibid. 14

and botanists had originally hoped.

British botanicals were collected in great numbers by Atkins because they were readily available to her. Whether it be through gatherings during Atkins's travels with her father, or sent to her from friends or colleagues from their trips, Atkins collected hundreds of plant specimens over her lifetime.56 Furthermore, foreign plants outside of Britain were sent to her by others from places such as America, or even from Jamaica, through the connections of Atkins’s husband,

John Pelly Atkins, and the coffee plantation that he owned in the Caribbean.57

The process by which the author of the first photobook would make impressions of these organic plants from Britain and from around the world required some work. First, Atkins would need to clean the plants of debris, such as sand, while the plant was still in water, which would ease the process of delicately cleaning the small details of the organic matter.58 The tools used for this cleaning process would be dissecting forceps, to carefully position appendages of the plant, and a camel-hair brush for the actual removal of unwanted material from the subject matter.59

Post cleaning, the plants would be arranged within the water prior to their removal onto a firm sheet of paper, then would be placed in between two blotting papers within a press to assist in their drying almost completely flat.60 One troublesome issue with this though, was that some types of these aquatic plants would dry quite well and be easily removed from the papers, but others that held more fluid within their bodies would not, which required some finessing during the drying process.61 The additional labor in creating the flat plants for impressions allowed for

56 Schaaf and Kraus, 31. 57 Ibid. 58 Ibid. 59 Ibid. 60 Schaaf and Kraus, 31. 61 Ibid. 15

all of the details to be captured in the cyanotype process, thus creating the highest quality of impression, or straight photogram, Atkins produce. In this situation, a muslin layer would be placed over top, but removed during the drying process to prevent the texture of the muslin to impact the plant it was covering.62 Of those that needed the muslin, when dried, they tended to adhere to the base paper more so than others, which proved to be quite challenging to remove, and particularly troublesome if the paper was too thin because this would cause buckling.63

These dried specimens would then be used for cyanotypes in her publications and kept afterwards. In terms of the creation of the otherwise straight photograms, Atkins would prepare her paper daily, which would allow fresh coats of chemistry to be used for the prints made that day, therefore producing the highest quality of prints.64 She then would cut the paper to the desired size and coat it with the cyanotype chemical emulsion. Once it dried, she would then use this for her exposures. For the act of photographing, Atkins would take her dried, flattened botanicals and their labels (written on transparent paper) and lay them on the light sensitive paper, flattened by a sheet of glass, to then be exposed to sunlight for five to fifteen minutes.65

After the exposure, the prints would be washed in a bath and dried for completion. In 1865, six years prior to her passing and the same year as her botanical mentor Hooker’s death, Atkins donated her herbarium of collected plants that she had used for her publications to the British

Museum.66

62 Ibid. 63 Ibid. 64 Schaaf and Kraus, 32. 65 Ibid. 66 Schaaf and Kraus, 36.

16

CHAPTER II. CYANOTYPE IMPRESSIONS

Birth of the Photobook

Atkins’s interest in botany was centered specifically around British plants, as noted by her father John George Children.67 Therefore, the title of British Algae for her publication made

sense. Atkins was already familiar with the varying species, which then in turn allowed her to

record the plants with a heightened sense of awareness for their arrangements on her pages.

The precise quantity of copies of Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impressions

originally created by Atkins is hard to concretely determine because the original owners of her

books of photograms were her friends and scientific colleagues. However, of the copies that exist

today, we can determine that there were at least thirteen made originally.68 These copies now

belong to the following institutions: The Royal Society, London; the New York Public Library;

the Lacock Collection; the Detroit Institute of Art; the British Library/British Museum; Linnean

Society of London; British Museum (Natural History); Royal Botanical Gardens, Kew; Royal

Botanical Garden, Edinburgh; Kelvingrove Art Gallery & Museum, Glasgow; Museum of the

History of Science, Oxford; the J. Paul Getty Museum, Malibu, CA; and unfortunately, one sold

to an unknown buyer in 1910 as a part of William Lang Jr.’s library auction.69

The completeness of each book varies institution to institution. For example, the Getty

Museum’s copy is only a complete Part VII of the entire book; however, it is still in the

cyanotype binding that Atkins originally created. It is thought that this could possibly be part of

Talbot’s copy in the Lacock Collection, or even from the Linnean Society’s copy, but it could

67 John George Children, Letter to Sir William Hooker, August 27th, 1845. 68 Schaaf and Kraus, 41. 69 Ibid. 17

perhaps be a separate copy in and of itself.70 Additionally, Atkins would create some reprints of certain pages; however, the person receiving the new page(s) would be responsible for rebinding and replacing the old photograph with the new, which can cause many variances across copies if not done as Atkins intended.71 Such discrepancies and the lack of complete editions in each

location perpetuates the mystery that is the precise make-up and quantity of copies of British

Algae that were created from 1843-1853. It is possible that by allowing each recipient of the

book to bind and assemble the pages themselves, Atkins would be aware of, and perhaps even

wanted or at least expected, inconsistencies from copy to copy. This would provide each copy

with a higher level of uniqueness for its intended owner due to the nature of that copy differing

from all others.

British Algae was also privately printed by Atkins, as well as, possibly, with assistance

from her friend Anne Dixon (1799-1877) versus Talbot’s Pencil of Nature, which was commercially printed by a group of people.72 The significant distinction, though, is that Atkins

started the production of her books and disseminated them to her friends before Talbot did by a

few months.73 Another significant distinction between Talbot’s Pencil of Nature and Atkins’s

British Algae is that her publication is entirely made of photographs. The binding, the pages, and

the text and images all are cyanotypes, whereas Talbot glued in his photographs onto separate

pages within his book.74 The circulation of Atkins's publications was intimate and small in

comparison to Talbot’s book, which in turn is why his is often regarded as the first published

70 Ibid. 71 Schaaf, and Kraus, 8-9. 72 Schaaf, 209-210. 73 Ibid. 74 The Metropolitan Museum of Art. “Notes on The Pencil of Nature.” The wrapper for No. 5 of the 6 parts of The Pencil of Nature is listed as a lithograph. 18 photobook.75

The format of creation and dissemination for her books were also significant. Originally created as a book with parts, Atkins released the first part in October of 1843.76 These parts would be continued on a regularly released schedule until 1850 when she switched to making volumes, which proved to be more generous in their quantity of photograms.77 With this new way of organizing her publications, by 1853 when British Algae production ceased, there were a total of three volumes per book that held fourteen text and title pages, as well as three-hundred eighty-nine botanical photograms.78

The scientific purpose for Atkins’s photograms also fostered a form of truth in photography that was prolific during the nineteenth century. Truth, for Atkins, was a product of detail, which she outlined in the introduction to her book by describing the choice to use the cyanotype process for her images of her botanical collection (Fig. 1). Straight photography, something which became heavily debated around the turn of the twentieth century, ostensibly offers a form of reflection of the world as it appears to a viewer's eyes. A certain level of purity within this construct alludes to the notion that straight photography, then, would inherently be a form of truth. Atkins’s prints of plants exhibit a potentially similar truth within her own straight photographic process, which again challenges the idea that the beginnings of straight photography lie in the twentieth century.79 Clement Greenberg (1909-1994), in his essay “The

Camera’s Glass Eye” of 1946 (100 years after Atkins’ creations), examines the medium of photography as a whole by stating: “Photography is the only art that can still afford to be

75 Schaaf, 219. 76 Schaaf and Kraus, 8. 77 Ibid. 78 Ibid. 79 Hirsch, 489. 19

naturalistic and that, in fact, achieves its maximum effect through naturalism…it can put all

emphasis on an explicit subject, anecdote, or message.”80 Man Ray (1890-1976) created what he

called "Rayographs," or photograms, and was positively influenced by Atkins due to the

similarities of what she produced with the cyanotype process.81 Rosalind Krauss (b. 1941) in

1977 examines these Rayographs, or photograms, stating that “…the photogram only forces, or makes explicit, what is the case for all photography…The photograph is thus a type of icon, or

visual likeness, which bears an indexical relationship to its object.”82 This indexical relationship

to a photograph's object via a photogram is inherently strong due to the one-to-one quality a

photogram logically provides; the imprint of the literal shadow of the object via light and

chemistry.83 This could lead into photography achieving “naturalism” to its highest degree, as

suggested by Greenberg.84

One potential truth in photography stems from the relationship between the image and the subject via its rendering in methods such as the cyanotype. In Atkins's photograms, small lace- like forms blocked the light that penetrated, or did not penetrate, the original plants (algae and confervae, a freshwater algae), thus generating a one-to-one copy of the relative densities of the original plants/leaves/stems, etc. Even the most skilled artist creating a drawing could not guarantee a similarly exact one-to-one relationship that the cyanotype can in the same amount of time. Atkins’s introduction to the copy of Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impressions

at the New York Public Library shows her writing in the same form of a cyanotype too (Fig. 1).

80 Clement Greenberg. “The Camera’s Glass Eye.” In Photographic Theory: an Historical Anthology, (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2014). 137. 81 Rosalind Krauss. “Notes on the Index: Seventies Art in America.” In Photographic Theory: an Historical Anthology, (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2014). 248. 82 Ibid. 83 Ibid. 84 Greenberg,137. 20

Atkins recognized the accuracy that photography provided from the cyanotype process by writing at the beginning of Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impressions:

The difficulty of making accurate depictions of objects so minute and among the Algae and Confervae has induced me to avail myself of Sir John Herschel’s beautiful process of cyanotype, to obtain impressions of the plants themselves, which I have much pleasure in offering to my botanical friends.85

The “minute" details such as the transparency of thin membranes of plants, or the ephemeral hair-like appendages that would prove troublesome to document with graphite, verify that the photogram method with the cyanotype process more accurately described the plants themselves, thus generating a truthful accuracy.86 This truthful quality reaches its high point when analyzing

Atkins's actual prints in person.

The New York Public Library’s copy of British Algae provides insight into the thoughts and processes that Atkins had and used to create her publications. Seeing as the NYPL copy is dated to 1848-53, as written by Atkins on the Contents folio for Vol. II, we can conclude that

Atkins had a routine for the way she crafted each photographic print by that time (Fig. 2). "1848-

1853” is also exhibited on the binding of the NYPL copy of British Algae, and both of these displayed dates confirm that this copy was made in the latter portion of British Algae production as a whole (Fig. 3). When viewing the volumes of prints closely, one can quickly grasp that she truly was an expert at the cyanotype process and cared deeply for the subjects she documented.

Analysis of Paper

In terms of the physicality of the paper itself, this specific NYPL copy, and more specifically, Volumes II and III (Volume I is not available to the public due to its fragility), relay

85 Anna Atkins, Introduction to Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impressions, Spencer Collection, The New York Public Library. From: New York Public Library Digital Collections. 86 Ibid. 21

the story of Atkins’s mindset and how she went about the creation of each print. First, one can see the shift in emulsion coverage on the edges of each page. Within Vol. II and III, many pages reveal some of the white paperbase briefly on the top and bottom right corners. This could possibly show how Atkins either kept her paper flat and grounded during her exposures by laying something along the sides, or perhaps she had something attached that did this for her, such as a print frame (Fig. 4). Additionally, these generally rounded white spots, perhaps, could even be where she used the tips of her fingers to hold down the page ever so slightly to keep it from blowing in the wind or, in general, from shifting during the exposure. A sample of this can be seen in the photograph of Ulva latissima (Fig. 4). Displaying additional impressions along the top and bottom right corners, Ulva latissima is an example of what appears to be part of Atkins’s process when generating her photographs (Fig. 4). These small rounded imprints are fully white and sometimes appear more pointed than rounded. Acting consistently, these markings reveal the repetitious process Atkins perfected over her ten years of producing her prints and publications.

This consistency in the corner markings certainly is not the only revelation of her process as well.

Upon close analysis, one can also see the brush strokes Atkins used to coat her paper with emulsion. This fact alone provides data for the viewer. For instance, one can see that a brush, or something with a similar fibrous construction, was the object that was used to spread the liquid cyanotype emulsion onto her pages' surface. This can be seen in particular with Entromorpha intestinalis (Fig. 5). Towards the right side of the page and down towards the bottom, the slight variance in shades of Prussian blue communicates the fibers of the brush and the direction of the brush's movement, as well as where her emulsion coating tool stopped on the page and was lifted off when coverage was complete. 22

If inspected with a precise eye in strong lighting, the process of emulsion coating can be revealed in certain prints, such as in Entromorpha intestinalis (Fig. 5). The middle section of the page has horizontal lines that are covered by a full outline of a single brushstroke moving from the bottom right corner around the perimeter of the page and connecting back to the starting point. What can be gathered from this observation is that the emulsion would be added first to the middle of the page, and then spread around the outer edges, creating an even coverage of light sensitive material across the page. Furthermore, the way the shades are aligned suggests that these brushstrokes were painted on with swift motions. The relatively high speed of application employed by Atkins, in conjunction with a consistency provided from the hundreds of impressions, most likely informs us that this technique became a subconscious repetition within her process.

In terms of emulsion marks on the folios, another revelation provided by Atkins’s second and third volumes of British Algae at the NYPL appears in the debris and drip marks. In

Bonnemaisonia asparagoides, visible additional impressions on the lower right side were created in the midst of the exposing process (Fig. 6). In contrast to many plant specimens that Atkins documented, the debris caught during the act of photographing was fully solid leaving small white marks amongst the blue pages. Some of this is found in localized areas, whereas others are scattered across the whole page. Given that these prints had to be exposed in an environment that was not completely controlled by Atkins herself, as we can conclude via the finger impressions on the corners of the pages, we can assume then that this debris, such as dirt or other organic material, could have been blown in the wind and found its place on the page, underneath or over top of the glass used to hold down the prints as they were created. Another reason for this postulation is simply that there is no consistency with the marks; only some folios contain these 23

extra impressions, and of those that do, the markings are different from photograph to photograph. Despite the fact that Atkins had her process of print creation down to a repetitious, even subconscious, exercise, cyanotype chemistry still affords inconsistencies, as seen with the debris markings. Another irregularity found on the paper was water stains. When examining the prints up close, particularly with Bangia la Minaria, one can detect what appears to be drip marks that have since dried in the emulsion (Fig. 7). Bangia la Minaria reveals more of Atkins’ process with these markings.

The creation of a cyanotype requires a water bath post-exposure to fix the image. The water washes away the excess emulsion revealing the image of the impression before the author's eyes, somewhat like a later Polaroid image slowly appears after its exposure. When the washing is complete, the paper needs to dry, which can be done in a variety of ways depending on the material supporting the emulsion. When completed, Atkins's pages were meant to be viewed vertically with the text towards the bottom facing the viewer for readability. The most significant revelation of the drip markings is that Atkins clearly held her prints horizontally and allowed the excess water to remove itself from the print after the bath via the gravitational pull on the liquid moving it across the page and dripping down away from the paper. As seen in Bangia la minaria, if observed from its intended viewpoint, the drip marks appear to show movement from the left side of the paper across its width to the right side (Fig. 7). The drips themselves are noticeable due to the variance in shades of blue, much like Entromorpha intestinalis displays variance in color revealing the brush strokes (Fig. 5). This brushwork used to coat the light sensitive emulsion provides a surface of material for the plants to impress upon via the UV rays.

Thus, generating straight, modern, photographs of the algae she studied.

24

Inspection of Algae Impressions

Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impression highlights varying specimens of algae and plants. How do these different organic materials render via this method of photography? Upon examination, we can conclude critical details from Volumes II and III of the NYPL’s copy alone. Atkins herself wrote in her introduction page that the cyanotype process lent itself to help with the “accurate depictions of objects so minute” (Fig. 1). The variety of algae and plants selected by Atkins for documentation perhaps had to do with the inability of their “accurate depiction” via drawings alone (Fig. 1). This, in turn, assumes that it can be predicted that the algae within the pages of British Algae inherently would possess incredibly small features. For example, Vaucheria marina demonstrates this level of clarity within the smallest details that the cyanotype process can capture (Fig. 8). Long, winding, and similar to hair, the edges of the plant's impression perfectly demonstrate the abilities of the medium. The plants themselves almost resemble cotton balls when they are ripped or pulled apart. The plentiful minute strands of white pose a stark contrast against the deep Prussian blue background.

Each fibrous piece of the organism was captured via the blocking of sunlight which provides the viewer with four ephemeral shapes made up of the smallest features floating, in a sense, in a sea of blue on the page (Fig. 8).

Another example of distinct features can be found with the variety of plants with membranes so thin that light could slightly pass through them during the exposure. In Ulva latissima, one can perfectly decipher which portions of the plant were too solid for light to pass through for an exposure and which parts were more transparent (Fig. 4). Not only are what appear to be folds visible via the impression, but within the transparent areas details that suggest veins of the plant structure can also be seen. Such portions of plants would most definitely be 25

troublesome to fully capture with graphite or charcoal, but a photogram can accurately depict this detail in a matter of minutes. In some areas of the plants, such as the top hair-like fibers of

Vaucheria marina, the subtle detailing of white on blue almost appears to be dissipating into the background they are so thin (Fig. 8). The dichotomy of aesthetics between the plants' natural details and their arrangements on the page, as decided by Atkins herself, also fosters an intriguing image. The image created from Atkins’s botanicals reinforces straight photography through the photogram impression, which then categorizes the images made as “modern.” This fact, thus proves that modern photography, as defined by scholars, such as Hirsch, occurs much earlier than the turn of the twentieth century.87

The heightened detail within each photogram suggests notions of a soft dance between winding organisms. What truly is fascinating from these straight photograms is that the frozen, precisely placed organic matter does not seem still; the plants almost imply motion through their arrangement. An example of this can be found with Vaucheria marina (Fig. 8). It encourages a viewer's eye to move across the page in a pleasing manner that consistently presents new, detailed information with perfectly balanced breathes of negative space via the cyanotype blue.

The algae were laid on the paper for exposure, and they were arranged specifically to entice the audience artistically. These prints offer a level of aesthetic excitement in small ways too, such as the small curvature of fibrous appendages of the top plant (Fig. 8). This alone was a carefully crafted decision by Atkins designed not only to gain the best exposure for this particularly detailed part of the plant, but to loop one’s eye back down to the rest of the algal body to foster a continuation of movement. This ghost-like motion appears to be so subtle that it is fleeting, which then in turn displays a fragility to the viewer. These dances of plants, though, are then

87 Hirsch, 489. 26

captured in an eternal ocean of blue via the photogram, which references the plants themselves and their natural existence in the aquatic world.

Atkins's displayed choices for the plants suggest a conversation of sorts between the plants too. They aesthetically and carefully seem to converse in their organic impressions and within the decisions made for their layouts and sequencing, particularly with those prints that hold more than one specimen on a page. Those pages, such as Vaucheria marina, allude to precise decisions based on personal interpretations of the "look" of the subject matter (Fig. 8). Of course, the size of each specimen has some value in the decision-making factor for their arrangement, but with the immense variety of algae Atkins printed, each kind would be approached individually in terms of its display. The presumptive main purpose of the cyanotype prints was to easily and accurately render the plants that Atkins spent so long studying and drawing to accompany her scientific research, but Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype

Impressions clearly also proved to be an artistic innovation. Additionally, upon British Algae’s completion, Atkins co-created one last photographic publication, Cyanotypes of British and

Foreign Ferns, before her passing, which, similarly to British Algae, was made entirely of photograms.

27

CHAPTER III. LIFE AFTER PHOTOGRAPHS OF BRITISH ALGAE: CYANOTYPE IMPRESSIONS PRODUCTION

Death of Atkins’s Father

Atkins produced Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impressions from the years

1843-1853, but in 1852, this was shaken up with the news of her father passing on New Year's

Day, which signaled a shift in priorities for her.88 The death of her father took a toll on Atkins

mentally. He was not only the sole living biological parent she had for the majority of her life,

but he was strikingly similar to her in a variety of ways. Atkins and Children collectively shared

interests, such as philosophies, scientific curiosities and advancements, and a network of

connections of friends and colleagues. Due to this close relationship, both in their parental bond

and proximity to one another due to living in the same house, his loss proved to be that of a

father and a best friend all in one, which did not sit well with Atkins. Atkins’s husband saw

firsthand the grief his wife went through, while he himself mourned his close friend and father-

in-law. Writing to a friend over the matter, John Pelley Atkins wrote:

Few can understand the cause of my wife’s deep grief…. She has stood by her parents in all their trails in life, and very bitter they were. She assisted him in all his pursuits and was ever on the watch to care for and please him and so attracted was he to both of us, that we were forced to guard against the expression of a wish, so kind was he in gratifying us.89

Atkins’s husband recognized how close of a bond his wife shared with her father throughout her

life and witnessed their interactions within their scientific projects. After two months, she began

organizing her father’s papers, research, projects, letters, notes, etc.90 Recognizing her father’s

vast influence on the scientific community in Britain, such as his role within the Royal Society

88 Schaaf and Kraus, 34. 89 John Pelly Atkins, Letter to Rev. Philip Bliss, March 23, 1853. British Museum. 90 Schaaf and Kraus, 34. 28 alone, Atkins took a hiatus from British Algae production, and she began the journey of writing a biography of her father, John George Children.91

For roughly a year, Atkins spent her time assembling her father’s accomplishments. This included some of the scientific papers and poetry written by him, and stories and reminiscences from his friends all into one collective book.92 J. G. Nicholas, a friend of John Pelley Atkins, published Atkins’s book, Memoir of John George Children, Esq., in 1853.93 Atkins poured herself into this project, created a book consisting of over three hundred pages detailing her father's life, all the while focusing solely on her father and not mentioning herself in first-person.

Atkins did not even provide her own signature on the title page, in order to keep the focus on

Children.94 The respect and gratitude Atkins had for her father perfectly was summed up by this action alone. Eliminating herself from the equation would perhaps prevent her role as a daughter from distracting readers. Therefore, Children’s accomplishments could be received as favorably as was possible by the readers and not seem to be inflated by a daughter speaking highly of her father. With Atkins completing her father’s memoir, and with British Algae production picking back up in the summer of 1853 to then finish entirely in October of the same year, Atkins moved on to create another publication with help from a dear friend.95

Other Publications

During the time of compiling papers on the research, projects, poetry, letters, etc., from her father, Atkins's husband enlisted the help of his wife’s lifelong friend, Anne Dixon (1799-

1877).96 Dixon grew up with Atkins and is often regarded as her “almost sister” due to their close

91 Ibid. 92 Ibid. 93 Ibid. 94 Ibid. 95 Schaaf, and Kraus, 35. 96 Ibid. 29

relationship.97 Atkins and Dixon were so close that they each would make long and frequent

visits to the other's home.98 Unlike her famous cousin, novelist Jane Austen (1775-1815), Dixon possessed a much quieter footprint in history. However, her association with Atkins provided some notoriety. Both women were intrigued by botany and collected specimens together, which allowed for the fostering of a close scientific bond and added to their already strong friendship.

This shared understanding of botanicals provided Atkins with an assistant for her cyanotypes, a process that Dixon was familiar with not only via her dear friend Atkins, but also from by her nephew Henry Dixon (1798-1851), who used the process regularly too.99

Because Dixon came to stay with Atkins during the period of grief from Children’s

passing, she was around for the last few months of British Algae production. Due to this, it is

speculated that the last few cyanotypes for British Algae could possibly have been crafted by

Atkins alone, or by both Atkins and Dixon, or Dixon alone. However, there is not enough

evidence to concretely grant Dixon authorship over these pages.100

During the summer when Atkins began the wrapping up of her last volume of British

Algae, Dixon created her own publication. Creating a book of straight cyanotype photograms,

Dixon generated Cyanotypes of British and Foreign Ferns as a gift for her nephew, Henry

Dixon.101 We know that this cyanotype book was also made at the same time and place— summer of 1853 at Atkins’s home of Halstead Place, Kent—as the last volume for British Algae because of a very apparent watermark that reads “Whatman Turkey Mill 1851” that appears on the backs of some pages in Vol. III.102 This watermark is a reference to the papermaker, James

97 John Pelly Atkins, Letter to Rev. Philip Bliss, February 28, 1852. The British Museum. 98 Schaaf and Kraus, 35. 99 Ibid. 100 Ibid. 101 Schaaf and Kraus, 36. 102 Ibid. 30

Whatman (1702-1752), and his paper production company from Atkins’s area.103 Not only were her botanical specimens often British and local, but so were her paper supplies.

Possibly as a “thank you” to Dixon for helping her friend in her period of mourning,

Atkins produced her second photographic book, Cyanotypes of British and Foreign Flowering

Plants and Ferns, in 1854.104 Unfortunately, this copy is no longer intact; loose pages now live amongst other artworks in varying institutions across the globe.105 A lesser known third book was produced around 1856, as seen by watermarks on a few pages, which included some plates from British Algae, as well as other objects, such as feathers. Little is known about this copy, but it is contemplated that Atkins did not solely work on this. Dixon may have assisted, or perhaps,

Isabella Herschel (1831-1893), daughter of cyanotype inventor, Sir John Herschel, could have helped as well due to her residency at Halstead Place in the spring of 1856.106 A few years later,

Atkins passed away on June 9th, 1871.

Atkins's momentous legacy of photobook creation and mastery of straight photograms carried on long after her death. Her work has influenced scientists, scholars, artists, and even the field of architecture as a whole through the blueprint. Atkins’s photography has been highly regarded in the contemporary world and continually inspires artists and historians.

Impact on Contemporary Art and Thought

In August of 2017, Rubber Factory, a New York-based gallery dedicated to photography, opened its exhibition entitled Women in Colour, a show highlighting contemporary female photographers and their use of color to characterize their gender identity.107 Stemming from

103 Hazen, A. T. “Bakerville and James Whatman.” Studies in Bibliography. 5. (1952/1953): 187-189. 104 Schaaf and Kraus, 36. 105 Ibid. 106 Ibid. 107 Women in Colour, Rubber Factory. Women in Colour is listed in detail on the Rubber Factory’s 31

research on Anna Atkins and her Prussian blue photograms, Atkins is seen as a starting point for the conversation on gender and color. Questions raised during this photographic show cover the concept of color and femininity and what this means when color specifically is used in reference to one’s gender identity. Concluding that Atkins was not only the first female photographer, but also the first female photographer to use color, the curator hypothesized that Atkins knowingly kept this in mind with her compositions to highlight her gender. Women in Colour’s curatorial statement reads that Atkins:

…partnered [her cyanotypes] with Talbot’s photogram (1834) — his paper negative image, a ghostly outline of the object in non-color, produced a palette of earthy browns. Gender codes of Atkins’ blue/feminine versus Talbot’s brown/masculine underscore these divisions of content, context, and concept, adding to the discourse around male and female sight.108

Talbot, who also created a photobook entitled The Pencil of Nature (1844-1846), created images that were far less striking in terms of their pure colors. Earthy tones, in the context of this exhibition, were signifying the masculine identity, whereas Atkins's use of the eye-caching blue nodded towards femininity. This notion of color attached to a gender identity is something the

Rubber Factory exhibition argued continues today with female photographers such as Cindy

Sherman (b. 1954), Carrie Mae Weems (b. 1953), and Susan Derges (b. 1955), all of whom were represented within this exhibition with striking (two color, like blue and white?) color works.109

Atkins clearly assisted in paving the way for modernism within the photographic and botanical worlds. If this 2017 exhibition is correct, she also proved to be a forerunner for feministic

website. A curatorial statement by guest curator, Ellen Carey (b. 1952), is listed detailing the research and inspiration on Anna Atkins for the exhibition that ran August-September of 2017. 108 Ibid. 109 Ibid. 32

thought within an artistic contextual creation. By pairing concepts fostered by a nineteenth century photographer with contemporary women photographing and using color in similar ways,

Women in Colour discusses an “origin” point for this color theory, thus declaring that Atkins was the starting point for specifically using color photography to represent femininity.110

The creation of British Algae in it of itself provided a newness to the world of photography through the first photobook, but a female creating this, rather than a male, such as

Daguerre or Herschel (Talbot’s Pencil of Nature followed Atkins’s book by a few months), also proves to be significant. This is due to the fact that English and Western European women were typically involved in domestic roles, and not typically in science and art.111 Skills in needlework or drawing made a woman “accomplished;” therefore, British Algae’s scientific purpose and artistic values make Atkins particularly “accomplished” for nineteenth century Britain.112

In addition to providing a starting point for the timeline of color-gender theory, the

Women in Colour exhibition also recognized Atkins's innovative and creative mind that far preceded movements in the twentieth century by stating:

Her compositions are precursors to abstraction and minimalism in photography, noted for their sophisticated, elegant arrangements that highlight her keen visual intelligence. Her work points the way to these less-is-more art movements through off-frame space, symmetry and asymmetry, reductive palette, rectangular frame-as-active picture plane, line-as-open form, size, and scale, thinking conceptually toward the end results.113

Creating publications that precede other photographic books and theories from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, such as the arguments for straight photography, Atkins also provides

110 Ibid. 111 Saska, 11. 112 Ibid. 113 “Women in Colour.” RUBBER FACTORY. 33

examples of artworks that seemingly would fit into specific and later art movements far before they were recognized. Perhaps Atkins was a predecessor for Minimalism in art.

Richard Wollheim (1923-2003) coined the term “Minimal Art” in 1965.114 Minimalism refers to art that strips away all unnecessary qualities to allow only essential form to display the subject. A potential example of this can be found in the artist Yves Klein’s (1928-1962)

Anthropométrie sans titre series (c. 1960s). Klein’s series involved nude models painting themselves International Klein Blue and then pressing themselves upon large sheets of paper, leaving a blue imprint of their bodies on the white paper (Fig. 9).115 The markings display only the necessary forms, the imprint of blue onto plain paper suggesting the former presence and markings of a body. Atkins’s photographs act strikingly similarly. The impressions of plants pressed to the paper provide only the crucial elements of form to portray the subject matter.

Perhaps the main difference is Atkins's cyanotypes are negatives, white shadows on a blue background, whereas Klein’s Anthropométries are positives, blue imprints on a white background. In any case, potentially this idea of “minimal” formal qualities was started in the mid-nineteenth century through photograms, rather than the mid-twentieth century. If so, it could be argued that Atkins's works influenced Wollheim’s theories of Minimalism in art.

Contemporary artists have adapted the cyanotype to be more than just a two-dimensional artistic creation. Elevating photography and pushing the boundaries of what a characteristically flat medium can do, artist Tasha Lewis (b. 1990) creates immersive cyanotype installations that push photography to be more than an image on a piece of paper. Lewis creates a variety of

114 Gregory Battcock. Minimal Art: a Critical Anthology. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2009. 387. 115 Richard Calvocoressi. “Yves Klein at the Centre Georges Pompidou.” The Burlington Magazine Vol. 125, no. 967 (1983): 642. 34

cyanotype work, some of which are sculptural animal installations. Drawn to the cyanotype due to it being a “dynamic and adaptable photographic medium, Lewis creates cyanotypes on fabric for malleability.116 She learned the process early in her artistic career by fellow cyanotype artist,

Brenton Hamilton, during an alternative photographic processing course at the Maine Media

Workshops and College in Rockport, Maine during the summer of 2007.117

For her cyanotype sculptures, Lewis produces her photograms and then sews each one together to assemble the full sculptures.118 Her work blends science and art, just as Atkins did through the study and recording of British botanicals within the photographic pages of British

Algae, and nods to the cyanotype pioneer through instances such as Lewis’ Botanical Beasts series.119 Within this body of work, Lewis mentions:

The images on the textile are created using the cyanotype process – a historic photographic technique from the 1840’s … All of the prints in this collection are photograms made with pressed botanical specimens. Each piece of the patchwork is stitched together by hand into a cohesive skin.120 Not only is the process of the “stitched together” photographic “skin” a relation to

Atkins’s hand-made procedure of binding and then wrapping her books in cyanotype “skin,” but the imagery on the fabric alludes to her famous publications, as well. Each sculptural piece is a combination of multiple photograms containing various impressions of plants. As the name of the series suggests, Botanical Beasts directly connects the contemporary with the past via the cyanotype method, the organic plant-based imagery on the “skin” of the animals, as well as the

116 Interview between Tasha Lewis and Melanie Isenogle. 117 Ibid. 118 Tasha Lewis. Botanical Beasts. Tasha Lewis’ website provides detailed pages of her series of artworks. For Botanical Beasts, she provides a statement about her work, the material, and her process. 119 Ibid. 120 Ibid. 35

combination of science and art.121

This melding of two fields, something Atkins perfected with Photographs of British

Algae: Cyanotype Impressions, appears in multiple facets of this series by Lewis. For instance, the use of botanicals for impressionistic imagery within Lewis’s photograms correlates with

Atkins's documentation of plants for scientific organizational purposes.122 Although Lewis did not label her plants and categorize them with tables of contents impressions like her influence did, the reference to Atkins's origin of purpose for the photogram is strikingly apparent.

Speaking on Botanical Beasts connection to Atkins, Lewis says:

I feel most connected to her in these series because I actually picked and dried leaes from places I visited that were meaningful to me. Those were then arranged, and the prints sewn around the forms of gazelle heads. I love the presence of the photogram: the almost absence of mid-tones, the totality of the blue background and ghost of the specimen’s silhouette.123 The choice to render animals for her sculptures poses a similar conversation as the plant imagery

Atkins chose to use. The mounted heads of animals on a wall could be seen as a scientific categorization of given their positions on the wall and the audience interacting with an object that carries the connotation of a trophy, or part of a hunting game (Fig. 10). Atkins’s process for

British Algae began by collecting her plants and categorizing them, to then be categorized within the book as a photograph where the rendering of the plant itself would be the only subject on the page, just as the heads of the animals in Botanical Beasts were the only subjects on the wall.124

Lewis took some innovative measures within this series as well that pushed photography to a new level. Creating photograms on fabric and sewing them together to create a

121 Ibid. 122 Ibid. 123 Interview between Tasha Lewis and Melanie Isenogle. 124 Saska, 13. 36

photographical sculpture moves this two-dimensional medium into a three-dimensional experience. The flexibility of the medium as a whole perfectly is represented from the use of the cyanotype in this manner by Lewis. The chemical emulsion has the capability to adhere to fabric, which then opens the door to a world of different usages. In Lewis’s case, she produces sculptural artworks dressed in Prussian blue.

Additionally, for the horns and thread of her “faux-taxidermy” creatures, Lewis used glow-in-the-dark elements to heighten the viewer's experience (Fig. 11).125 This material also requires five hours of “charging” in any form of light to then illuminate in the dark.126 This

“charging” acts as a faux photographic experience to the cyanotype process, where an image impression has to be exposed to light for a set amount of time for an image to appear.127 As a result of the glow-in-the-dark elements in Botanical Beasts, the imagery of the photograms, and the series as a whole, each viewer will have varying experiences under different lighting conditions, which references the light sensitive medium as a whole and how varying exposures to UV light equate to different results in the cyanotype process.

The Rubber Factory’s exhibition Women in Colour, as well as Tasha Lewis’ artwork, demonstrates the contemporary influence Anna Atkins continues to possess long after her passing. Her innovative thought, publications, and theories prove that she is and should be recognized as a truly propelling feminist color theorist and botanical scientist, as well as proving her to be a catalyst for modern and perhaps even contemporary photography.

125 Ibid. 126 Ibid. 127 Ibid. 37

CHAPTER IV. CONCLUSION

Anna Atkins was a botanist first and a photographer second. However, when photography

entered her world from the network of individuals that her father was involved with via the

Royal Society, such as Sir John Herschel (1792-1871) and William Henry Fox Talbot (1800-

1877), she blended the two fields together to create more accurate depictions of the plants that

she studied. While her straight photograms were originally produced to satisfy a need to accurately depict the appearance of these organic objects, Atkins also had a keen aesthetic eye

when curating her imagery for Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impressions.

Atkins's photograms demonstrate modern innovations that precede traditional theories

about what makes a photograph a "modern" photograph, as in the "straight photography"

movement of the turn of the twentieth century. Atkins's innovations prove that she was a catalyst

for the advancement of modernism within the photographic world in the mid-nineteenth century:

a modernist straight photographer in advance. Her use of the cyanotype process as a tool for not

only an accuracy within documentation, but as a vehicle for communicative education about the

plants she studied also proved that a camera was not inherently necessary to create photographs.

Most all of what she did ties into ideas of straight photography, the pursuit of some form of truth within an image, and a blend of science and art. These qualities are shown through her written ideas, and through her visual and compositional tendencies, her method of creation, and her choice of materials and subject matter.

The traditional view that photography began in 1839 with Talbot’s and Daguerre’s and

Herschel's photographic inventions that fixated an image could instead be recognized as the beginning of modern advancement for the medium as a whole. The evidence of something similar and related to photography existing in many fashions prior to this new age of image 38

fixation in 1839 does not take away from the importance of the 1830s. Before that period the

shadowy images could not be frozen in time like Talbot, Daguerre, and Herschel discovered.

Camera obscuras cast moving shadows in cave-like rooms.128 Camera lucidas assisted artists to

create strikingly realistic proportions within their paintings.129 Evidence suggests that perhaps

photography is not as young as we have traditionally thought. Atkins presents a prime example

that perhaps "modern photography" too is not as young as we have traditionally thought.

As an innovator, Atkins advanced the medium of photography with her publications of

photograms. Her works continue to influence scientists, scholars, photographers, and other artists all over the world to this day, like Tasha Lewis and her cyanotype sculptures.130 With twelve of

Atkins's still-intact publications held by varying collections, and hundreds of her cyanotype

pages displayed on the walls of art institutions all over the world, Anna Atkins’s legacy will not

be forgotten. Her exceptionally well-crafted straight photograms will continue to demonstrate

her ability to provide an original and perhaps even perfect blending of the two fields of science

and art.131

128 Plato, et. al., “Excerpts from the Allegory of the Cave. In The Republic.” In Photographic Theory: an Historical Anthology, (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2014). 12-13. 129 Hockney, 42-45. 130 Tasha Lewis. Botanical Beasts. 131 Schaaf, and Kraus, 41. 39

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allan, Mea. The Hookers of Kew: 1785-1911. London: Michael Joseph, 1967.

Atkins, John Pelley. Letter to Rev. Philip Bliss, February 28, 1852. The British Museum.

Atkins, John Pelley. Letter to Rev. Philip Bliss, March 23, 1853. The British Museum.

Battcock, Gregory. Minimal Art: a Critical Anthology. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2009.

Bunnell, Peter C. A Photographic Vision: Pictorial Photography, 1889-1923. Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith, 1980.

Carravetta, Peter. “Postmodern Chronicles.” Annali d’Italianistica. 9. (1991): 32-55.

Children, John George writing to Sir William Hooker. July 24, 1832. Letter.

Children, John George to William Henry Fox Talbot, September 14, 1841. Letter.

Calvocoressi, Richard. “Yves Klein at the Centre Georges Pompidou.” The Burlington Magazine Vol. 125, no. 967 (1983): 642.

Fox Talbot, William Henry writing to Jean Baptist Biot. January 29, 1839. Letter.

Greenberg, Clement. “The Camera’s Glass Eye.” In Photographic Theory: an Historical Anthology. Ed. Andrew Hershberger. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2014. 137- 138. Print.

Hazen, A. T. “Bakerville and James Whatman.” Studies in Bibliography. 5. (1952/1953): 187- 189.

Hirsch, Robert. Seizing the Light: A Social & Aesthetic History of Photography. Third ed. New York: Routledge, 2017. 489.

Hockney, David. Secret Knowledge: rediscovering the lost techniques of the old masters. New York: Penguin Group, 2001.

Krauss, Rosalind. “Notes on the Index: Seventies Art in America.” In Photographic Theory: an Historical Anthology, Ed. Andrew Hershberger. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2014. 246- 250. Print.

Lewis, Tasha. “Botanical Beasts.” http://www.tashalewis.info/BotanicalWork.html 40

Lewis, Tasha. Interviewed by Melanie Isenogle. Email.

Newton, Sir William J. “Upon Photography in an Artistic View, and in Its Relations to the Arts” (1853), in Photographic Theory: an Historical Anthology, ed. Andrew Hershberger. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2014. 56-58. Print.

Plato, “Excerpts from the Allegory of the Cave. in The Republic.” In Photographic Theory: an Historical Anthology. Ed. Andrew Hershberger. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2014. 12-16. Print.

Price, Lois Olcott. “The History and Identification of Photo-Reproductive Processes Used for Architectural Drawing Prior to 1930.” Topics in Photographic Preservation 6 (1995): 41- 49.

Saska, Hope. "Anna Atkins: Photographs of British Algae." Bulletin of the Detroit Institute of Arts 84, no. 1/4 (2010): 8-15.

Schaaf, Larry J., and Kraus Hans P. Sun Gardens: Victorian Photograms by Anna Atkins. New York: Aperture, 1985.

Schaff, Larry. “The First Photographically Printed and Illustrated Book.” The Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America. 73, no. 2 (1979): 209-24.

Sontag, Susan. “On Photography.” New York: Picador, 1977.

Spencer Collection, The New York Public Library. "Introduction" New York Public Library Digital Collections.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art. “Notes on The Pencil of Nature.” https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/267022

West, Lesley A. "An Agricultural Machinery Museum." Agricultural History 41, no. 3 (1967): 267-274.

“Women in Colour.” RUBBER FACTORY. https://www.rubber-factory.info/women-in-colour 41

APPENDIX A: FIGURES

Fig. 1. Anna Atkins, Introduction to Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impressions, 1848-1853. Cyanotype. ~9 9/16 x 7 ¾ in. Spencer Collection, The New York Public Library. From: New York Public Library Digital Collections. 42

Fig. 2. Anna Atkins, APPENDIX. Content (Additional title: Notice.), 1848-1853. Cyanotype. ~9 9/16 x 7 ¾ in. Spencer Collection, The New York Public Library. From: New York Public Library Digital Collections. 43

Fig. 3. Anna Atkins, Photographs of British Algae book binding spine. Spencer Collection, The New York Public Library. From: New York Public Library Digital Collections. 44

Fig. 4. Anna Atkins, Ulva latissima, 1848-1853. Cyanotype. ~9 9/16 x 7 ¾ in. Spencer Collection, The New York Public Library. From: New York Public Library Digital Collections. 45

Fig. 5. Anna Atkins, Enthromorpha intestinalis, 1848-1853. Cyanotype. ~9 9/16 x 7 ¾ in. Spencer Collection, The New York Public Library. From: New York Public Library Digital Collections. 46

Fig. 6. Anna Atkins, Bonnemaisonia asparagoides, 1848-1853. Cyanotype. ~9 9/16 x 7 ¾ in. Spencer Collection, The New York Public Library. From: New York Public Library Digital Collections. 47

Fig. 7. Anna Atkins, Bangia laminaria, 1848-1853. Cyanotype. ~9 9/16 x 7 ¾ in. Spencer Collection, The New York Public Library. From: New York Public Library Digital Collections. 48

Fig. 8. Anna Atkins, Vaucheria marina, 1848-1853. Cyanotype. ~9 9/16 x 7 ¾ in. Spencer Collection, The New York Public Library. From: New York Public Library Digital Collections. 49

Fig. 9. Yves Klein, Anthropométrie de l’Epoque Bleu (ANT 082), 1960. Dry pigment and synthetic resin on paper mounted on canvas, 61.61 x 111.22 in. Musée de National d’Art Moderne Center Georges Pompidou 50

Fig. 10. Tasha Lewis, Botanical Beasts, Cyanotype, plaster gauze, wood, wire, and felt. 2017. 51

Fig. 11. Tasha Lewis, Botanical Beasts, Cyanotype, plaster gauze, wood, wire, and felt. 2017.