Editorial

From its origins, photography has been the object of philosophical and critical approaches. It was invented in the West, almost in the middle of the 19th century: a time of rising theoretical production and scientistic thought marked by the dominant positivism. By then, it was a task to elaborate a repertoire of concepts to define the particularities of the photographic device and its products, assuming the character of photography as a new image-producing tool based on physical-chemical procedures. Although they were obliged to be constituted as propositions of a historical-cultural reading, these concepts usually aspired to be universal and timeless: non-contextual and ahistorical. They integrated what can be considered the foundational discursive archive of the medium, whose expansion and growth reach the present.

Even in its very genesis, this archive was never a place for the harmony of criteria. It couldn’t have been, given the speed with which, in the two initial decades of its configuration—the fifties and sixties of the 19th century—the thinking on photography diversified. Two early examples illustrate the above statement well. In 1844, the English inventor William Henri Fox Talbot (1800-1877), in his book The Pencil of Nature, identified the images produced with the photographic camera as photogenic drawings made by the hand of nature. Only seven years later, in 1851, in the French magazine La Lumière, the journalist and art critic Francis Wey (1812-1882) defended the idea that photography was a medium with which one could exercise the interpretation of the photographed object or subject and, consequently, manifest the individuality.

At present, theoretical research on photography has spread worldwide, becoming part of international academic work. New notions try to displace others that, in their turn, tried and sometimes succeeded in doing the same with those that preceded them. In any case, in the face of this proliferation of theoretical reflections, it is still worth asking ourselves how much history and context have influenced the ways of thinking about photography.

1- William Henri Fox Talbot. The Pencil of Nature. London: Longman, Brown, Green and Longmans, 1844.

2- Francis Wey. “De l’influence de l’héliographie sur les beaux-arts.” La Lumière. Beaux-Arts - Héliographie - Sciences. Paris: Société Héliographique, #1, 9 Février, 1851, pp. 2-5; #2, 16 Février, 1851, pp. 6-7.

By José Antonio Navarrete

[I]n general, my work is less about expanding the possibilities of photography than about re-investing it with a truer perception of things by returning to a simple method, one that photography has had from the beginning of its existence… For I do believe that in photographs like those of the nineteenth-century English photography Thomas Annan or Eugene Atget, you can read the motivation of the person who made the image in them; the psychological, emotional or intellectual scaffolding that the person saw in the environment.

Thomas Struth

Taken from: Johnson, B. Photography Speaks: 150 Photographers on their art. Norfolk, VA: Aperture Foundation / The Chrysler Museum, 2004, p. 310.

Back in Miami, just after my daughters were born, I opened a gallery in my parents’ former clothing factory in Wynwood. Miami’s arts and culture scene was slowly evolving during these years, but there were no galleries devoted exclusively to photography. When I opened the gallery in 2008, I was happy to dedicate my work to what I loved and provide our city with a place to engage and learn about the photographic arts. Though 2008 was a difficult time in the financial world, it was the right time in my personal life, and I was determined to start small and slowly build the project. The majority of the seven artists included in the inaugural exhibition are still artists I represent today. After a few years, I was delightfully receiving visits from important museum curators from across the country. Also, I felt true fulfillment with the community’s response, the students, and the young collectors of photography.

FS
What criteria govern your selection of artists and works for the gallery?

DM

I usually follow my intuition and my emotional response to the work. I also really value “clicking” with the artist. I lean towards conceptual and narrative works that tell a compelling story most of the time. I also really enjoy showing contemporary photographs made with historical processes and those altered with mixed media.

FS
What changes have you noticed since then in the panorama of local photography?

DM

The photographic world has changed dramatically in the last 20 years. On a local level, I am grateful that there are other photographic galleries like Art Media as well as a much larger awareness about fine art photography.

The emergence of digital image-making, the iPhone, and NFTs, has drastically changed how the world looks at photographs. We see more photographic images today on our handheld devices than ever before. Though I find this fascinating, I’m very old-school in my thinking. I really do believe that nothing can replace the experience of walking into a gallery or a museum and spending some time with a physical work of art, in all its dimensions, and allowing it to have the time to touch your soul. My gallery has always been a resource for students and young collectors and is a very open and engaging place to be curious and learn about the photographic arts. There is still so much I’d like to do in our growing city, and I’m excited to continue on this journey, along with my sister Rhonda, who is a filmmaker and video artist. We will be opening a center for photography, film, and video art for exhibitions, lectures, and workshops. It will also include a library for research, study, and lounging (graciously donated by the legendary Peggy Levison Nolan)! We will be moving to the Little River area of Miami, on 73rd Street and North Miami Avenue. I’m very excited to welcome soon old friends and patrons as well as new students, collectors, and friends!