Citizens of the Twentieth Century: Portrait Photographs, 1892-1952 [Reprint ed.] 0262192489, 9780262192484

Citation preview

mm

Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from Kahle/Austin Foundation

https://archive.org/details/augustsandercitiOOOOsand

AUGUST SANDER CITIZENS OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY

AUGUST SANDER CITIZENS OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY

PORTRAIT PHOTOGRAPHS 1892-1952

EDITED BY GUNTHER SANDER TEXT BY ULRICH KELLER TRANSLATED BY LINDA KELLER

THE MIT PRESS CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS LONDON, ENGLAND

Thomas J. Bata Library

Fourth printing, 1997 Originally published under the title August Sander: Menschen des 20. Jahrhunderts by Schirmer/Mosel GmbH, Munich; © 1980 by Schirmer/Mosel GmbH. English edition © 1986 by The Massachusetts Institute of Technology. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data August Sander: Citizens of the twentieth century. Translation of: August Sander: Menschen des 20. Jahrhunderts. Bibliography: p. 1. Photography—Portraits. Germany—Biography. Gunther, 1907-, IV

2. Photographers—

3. Sander, August.

II. Keller, Ulrich, 1944-,

I. Sander, III. Title.

Title: August Sander: Citizens of the 20th Century.

TR680.S22613

1986

ISBN 0-262-19248-9

770'.92'4

85-25625

CONTENTS

Preface by Ulrich Keller

vii

1

1

Sander and Portrait Photography

2

August Sander: A German Biography

12

3

Conceptual and Stylistic Aspects of the Portraits

23

4

The Portfolio Arrangement

36

5

On the Pictures

43

6

Face of the Time

54

Notes

55

Bibliography

59

Sources of Figures

62

Contents of the Portfolios

63

The Portraits

PREFACE

In

1929 the German photographer August Sander an¬

The issue of cropping, which was taken very seriously by

nounced his plan to edit a large photographic portrait

August Sander, requires a separate comment. Theoretically

manual that would present a cross-section of the existing

it would have been desirable, of course, to reproduce each

social order in Germany in the form of forty-five portfolios,

portrait exactly in the form in which it was enlarged and

each consisting of twelve images. For many reasons, this

cropped by the artist himself. In practice this was not feasi¬

imposing project went uncompleted, and only fragmentary

ble, however. Sander’s vintage prints are now scattered in

selections from among the portraits have appeared in print.

many collections (some of which are inaccessible), and dif¬

After a delay of half a century, a posthumous publication of

ferently cropped prints from the same negative are not un¬

Citizens of the Twentieth Century is now attempted with the

usual. Consequently, it was decided to rely exclusively on

full awareness that the difficulties August Sander was unable

the original negatives and to reproduce the largest rea¬

to overcome in his day have remained if not increased.

sonable part of each glass plate so as to provide a maximum

To be sure, except for minor losses Sander’s negatives

of visual information. The occasional intrusion of irrelevant

have luckily survived the vicissitudes of the century. How¬

detail was tolerated, but distracting objects, too-extensive

ever, the classification and the ordered presentation of this

backgrounds, and archival inscriptions were excluded.

extensive, uneven, and insufficiently identified picture ma¬

The task of selecting the pictures was primarily shared by

terial posed formidable problems. For example, the original

Lothar Schirmer and Gunther Sander. I assume full respon¬

plan to include twelve photographs in each portfolio could

sibility for the text, which was written in 1976 and revised

not always be followed; often there were too many or too

before its publication in Germany. In the English transla¬

few pictures to choose from, and this necessitated a certain

tion, chapter 6 (which deals with the reception of Sander’s

fluctuation in portfolio sizes or even the omission or addi¬

work in

contemporary

German newspapers)

has

been

tion of whole series. Further difficulties attended the se¬

greatly condensed, and there are minor cuts elsewhere in the

quencing of the photographs within each subdivision. With

text.

very few exceptions, Sander left no notes that could have guided the editors in this task. Moreover, it was often

I thank Gunther Sander for interviews and Norbert Huse and Lothar Schirmer for critical advice.

doubtful how Sander would have proceeded in cases where a given portrait seemed to fit equally well in more than one

Ulrich Keller

slot. (For instance, several of the photos of women might

Rochester, N.Y., May 1981

legitimately be placed in any of the “women” portfolios or in the “servants” portfolio.) Delicate decisions also had to be made when more than one version of a portrait had survived among Sander’s negatives. In all such cases the editor and the author had no choice but to follow their own best judg¬ ment. Apart from that, they established rather strict quality standards for the selection of the pictures, which meant in practice that second-rate material was excluded and no at¬ tempt was made to conceal the uneven and sometimes frag¬ mentary condition of Sander’s portrait archive. To put it differently, the project was deliberately scaled down, even though it would have been technically possible to match the originally envisioned number of 540 portraits. All in all, it must be conceded that an edition of Citizens of the Twentieth Century supervised by August Sander would have differed in many details from the present publication. Clearly this publication is not a simple reprint but a recon¬ struction; however, despite the many uncertainties, in prin¬ ciple it claims to be faithful to Sander’s original intentions.

1

SANDER AND PORTRAIT PHOTOGRAPHY

Family Album and Social Inventory

of containing inexhaustible factual evidence that can help to clarify, complement, and even correct abstract historical

Photo anthologies have become fashionable. Some illustrate

knowledge. Sander’s portraits are not just entertaining illus¬

historical periods,

trations of German history; they also represent an authentic

such

as

the “roaring twenties,” the

“glorious Empire,” or the “Victorian era”; others are dedi¬

historical source.

cated to mankind in general, like Pawek’s World Exhibition of

This source material, however, must be read critically.

Photography or Steichen’s Family of Man. The structure of

Even though it is presented to us as a logically arranged

such books is simple yet attractive. Like a kaleidoscope, they

documentary, it is not entirely free of Active qualities—a

repeat in ever-changing variations the old themes of birth,

duplicity

of meaning

that,

evidently

without

Sander’s

marriage, death, work and play, love and hate, triumph,

awareness, arises from the nature of the project. The exist¬

suffering, and the golden mean.

ing social order that Sander attempted to portray is no sim¬

Unavoidably, the present volume will be perceived as

ple object like a cube that can be accurately measured

another picture book of yesteryear or a new German family

without difficulty. In its complex structure it is more like a

album. Upon closer examination, however, one begins to

city or a landscape which offers the passerby a constantly

see that this is a different kind of project—not a sentimental

changing view. The pattern of streets and the lay of the land

kaleidoscope of humanity but rather a systematic inventory

can be seen coherently only when seen from a distance. Such

of society. Snapshots of human pleasures and pain are not

a “bird’s-eye view” is no problem in this century of the

August Sander’s specialty. He prefers the form of the por¬

airplane. But there is no projectile to catapult us out of

trait; the people in his portraits are aware of the camera, and

society. Only God may view it from “above”; those who

they assume representative poses. Arranged in orderly suc¬

are part of it can never obtain more than a distorted partial

cession, these portraits do not attempt to feel the pulse of

view. In other words, a social panorama cannot simply be

life; rather, they try to reflect the stratification of society.

recorded or exposed but will always remain a matter of

Sander offers information about subjective as well as objec¬

conjecture and hypothesis.2 Sander’s portrait work is no ex¬

tive aspects of his sitters and so practices social psychology,

ception. Without doubt each of the farmers, craftsmen, and

or rather sociology in pictures.1

lawyers actually existed, but the hierarchy in which the pho¬

In recent times it has become increasingly apparent that

tographer arranged them is a very debatable proposition.

social psychology and sociology are subdivisions of or at

Besides being inherent in the overall arrangement of the

least prerequisites for the writing of history. Without draw¬

portraits, the conjectural aspect played a part in the creation

ing upon these disciplines it is almost impossible to form an

of each individual picture. Insofar as Sander chose his sub¬

adequate understanding of modern historical processes. The

jects, experimented with poses, imposed viewing angles,

mentalities and behavioral patterns of social groups and

and so on, his social inventory is permeated by personal

whole nations have proved to be powerful moving forces in

inferences.

history. Present-day leaders are aware of such factors; they

Sander’s work always retains an artistic, interpretive dimen¬

make use of them and in turn are shaped by them. Histo¬

sion as well.

With

all

its

apparent

straightforwardness,

rians are beginning to draw their conclusions accordingly.

While Sander’s portraits may to some extent be seen as

For example, it is no coincidence that the psycho-social

his own constructions, they also should be read as self¬

backgrounds of Hitler and his followers have been traced

interpretations of the people represented. As sociologists

down to the most minute detail.

and psychologists will confirm, people are not simply what

Written sociology, depending as it does on statistical ma¬

they are but rather are engaged in a continuing process of

terial, is forced to reduce the complex reality of society to a

creating and projecting themselves.

Language, gestures,

relatively small and simple gradation of classes, groups, and

clothing, and the like are the usual means by which people

corresponding mentalities. The systematic use of photogra¬

announce their social aspirations, express their fantasies, and

phy, on the other hand, can introduce us to a much wider

mark out the boundaries of their identities. Such ideal pro¬

range of social phenomena. Sander’s richly differentiated

jections seldom appear completely natural and do not al¬

portrait inventory of the Weimar Republic offers the best

ways fit harmoniously into the external reality. Cracks,

example. As questionable as the theoretical foundation of

incongruities, and contradictions with the environment can

this picture compendium may be, it does have the advantage

be expected; the element of fiction is usually unmistakable

The camera is very sensitive to this phenomenon, but not every camera operator knows it. In the average photograph intended to flatter the customer, the raw texture of social pretension reveals itself only inadvertently, beneath the poor disguise of special lighting and retouching. In Sander’s por¬ traits, on the contrary, every self-projection is methodically analyzed and recorded as such. Sander was one of the few portrait photographers whose work focused on the essaylstic and the Active, and that often meant the overstated and unmasking aspects of the portrait pose. What the photog¬ rapher added to the portrait only tends to make the sitter’s self-presentation more pronounced. At this point it would be premature to enter into a detailed analysis of Sander’s technique and style, but a look at some exemplary pictures may be appropriate here for the sake of orientation. Consider, for example, the two “farm girls”

1

A. Sander, farm girls, 1927.

2

A. Sander, pianist, 1928.

that Sander presents in their Sunday best (figure 1). The details—pure white dresses and stockings and an artful hair ribbon—could be straight out of a family picture showing a

that this soloist is a sought-after and treasured rarity, a sort

happy childhood idyll in an urban middle-class setting. But

of luxury item. He appears wrapped in his tuxedo and coat

the total effect tells another story. Though the older girl

as though he were himself a kind of delicate musical instru¬

smilingly does what the portrait situation requires, her

ment requiring great care in handling. The baroque architec¬

younger sister refuses to behave properly. Clearly, she feels

ture strengthens this impression by placing the musician in a

uncomfortable in the Sunday finery, and she reacts to the

prestigious aristocratic milieu. In addition, Sander has delib¬

camera

picture

erately introduced a high arched doorway, which gives us a

shows a flaw. In addition, the photographer has intention¬

clue to the fact that the pianist is of small stature;3 his

ally placed the sisters in a bleak field far out in the country,

studied, erect gravity can be read as, among other things, an

so that another incongruity becomes apparent: In this dull

attempt to compensate for this. On another level, we might

provincial environment, the triumphant hair bow of the

take his obvious pedantry as the typical behavior of a musi¬

older child produces an exaggerated, overly optimistic ac¬

cian who excels more in precise performance than in creative

cent. We encounter here a disparity between social aspira¬

interpretation. In all, the pianist, with his keen sense of his

uneasily.

Thus

the

“happy childhood”

tion and reality that seems to possess surreal overtones.

own importance, seems to project a less than modest image.

These farm children no more conform to middle-class fash¬

And yet one must admit that he behaves in a perfectly real¬

ion codes than they affirm their parents’ ideal of happiness.

istic and legitimate manner—after all, a good soloist does

The Sunday appearance which they are only partly success¬

occupy a high rank in the professional hierarchy. Social aspi¬

ful in presenting to the camera may be read in several ways;

ration and reality are much more balanced here than in

like every kind of fiction, it is a rather complex phenome¬

the case of the two “farm girls,” as Sander recognized and

non. Even if the parents did not hesitate to paste the picture

demonstrated very well. Sander certainly never intended

in the family album, the modern viewer will hesitate to

to expose the pianist or make him appear ridiculous. Never¬

accept the portrait at face value, as a simple souvenir. Instead

theless, he maintained his distance, refraining here as else¬

he is drawn toward careful analysis and deciphering of a

where from the uncritical hero worship that so unpleasantly

picture that seems to find a logical place only in Sander’s

marks Hugo Erfurth’s portraits. By means of a few telling,

critical inventory of German society.

slightly unusual features (the smallness of the man, his

Another interesting example is the pianist in figure 2, who wears his spotless

clothing with a good deal

quaint importance, his seclusion from the outside world),

of self-

Sander ensures that we neither thoughtlessly accept the ap¬

satisfaction and whose serious gaze and calculated manner

pearance of the pianist nor devotedly relish it; rather, we are

give further proof that he is saturated from head to foot with

led to examine it as a social fiction and projection. Sander

a sense of his own importance. Clearly he is used to seeing

presents us with visual evidence and tries to stimulate dis¬

himself as the focal point of concert halls and sophisticated

cussion and reflection—this is a principal feature of his

newspaper reviews. Sander’s portrait style can be studied

portraits.

here in its purest form. For a musician the black suit and the

From this short analysis August Sander already emerges

whole formal appearance would not seem to be extraor¬

as a portraitist of sufficient caliber to deserve thorough art-

dinary, yet the pianist refuses to be smoothly integrated

historical treatment, and not only because the present boom

within the scope of our expectations. He places such empha¬

in photographic books must be nourished. To be sure, 20 or

sis upon his dignified clothing and manner that they lose all

30 years ago a Sander monograph would have been unthink¬

naturalness, causing us to wonder, to reflect, and to draw

able. In those days Edward Weston and Henri Cartier-

our own conclusions. Unmistakably the suggestion is made

Bresson ruled the scene, leaving Sander only an obscure and

marginal place. Even earlier, in the 1920s, public interest in

Two randomly chosen examples give an idea of the di¬

the United States and abroad was concentrated on Stieglitz,

mensions of Nadar’s staging genius. On the one hand we

Strand, Renger-Patzsch, and Moholy-Nagy. At the most

have Daumier (figure 3), a skeptic looking critically and

important photo exhibitions during Sander’s lifetime, he

questiomngly askance. The black drape that hides his body

was only seldom and inconspicuously represented. His name

and his hands and the carefully modulated lighting lend a

hardly appears at all in Stenger’s, Newhall’s, Gernsheim’s,

mysterious air to the portrait. We are not allowed to see

and Pollack’s books on the history of photography.4

more than a small part of the man’s elusive character. Dela¬

Only in the early 1970s, with the publication of the exten¬

croix (figure 4), on the other hand, appears as a man of tem¬

sive portrait anthology Menschen ohne Maske [Men Without

perament who does not withdraw from the viewer but

Masks], did Sander’s star begin to rise. Since then, hardly

rather presents himself in a sharply articulated pose. The

any culturally ambitious city has not seen at least one large

harshness of the pose creates a certain distance, but Dela¬

exhibition of his work, and the commercial interest in vin¬

croix’s hard-edged, quickly offended and quickly offending

tage prints from his Lindenthal studio has grown accord¬

pride is only a facade behind which one senses the presence

ingly. The surest sign of Sander’s ascent to “classic” status

of a passionate intellect.

may be seen in the recent acceptance of his work as the subject of doctoral theses.

Few parallels to such brilliantly and imaginatively for¬ mulated self-presentations can be found in Sander’s work.

Sander is still a new subject to the history of photography.

Particularly in the portraits of authors, artists, and intellec¬

Like every fashionable trend, Sander’s newfound fame is not

tuals, a conventional and unexciting approach seems to pre¬

a completely trustworthy phenomenon. That Sander actu¬

vail. Sander was at his best as an observer of social fringes

ally merits the prominence he has so suddenly achieved can¬

and subcultures, from farmers to circus performers. It is

not be simply assumed but remains to be proved. A first

above all in the breaking of such new photographic ground

step in this direction has been made in the picture analyses

that the greatness of Citizens of the Twentieth Century lies.

attempted above; the brief comparisons between Sander and

Apart from that, Sander developed different stylistic princi¬

some “established” greats of portrait photography given in

ples. Clearly his portraits are drier and less magnificent than

the following paragraphs promise further results without

Nadar’s. This fact should not be interpreted only negatively,

precluding a more thorough analysis of Sander’s portrait art

however. After all, Sander pursued didactic purposes; he

in a later chapter.

sought to analyze and specify, not to pay homage. A social inventory is no gallery of celebrities, and Sander kept this constantly in mind.

Masters of Portrait Photography Wherever portrait photography is discussed, the name of Nadar will arise sooner or later. Better than anyone else, Nadar knew how to

make the new,

slowly accepted

medium appealing to a broad public.5 Cleverly taking ad¬ vantage of his prominence in bohemian circles, he made his studio in the Rue St.-Lazare the meeting place of the artistic and literary elite of Paris. Nadar combined the sharp psychological perception of the caricaturist with a sense for photographic technique. No false artistic ideals impaired his flair for business; he was remarkably imaginative in generating publicity for his

3

studio. He impressed his contemporaries with his generosity

1855.

and amiability. Armed with these talents, Nadar built up friendly relationships with all the cultural celebrities in France. Even though these men had the most divergent in¬ terests and temperaments, Nadar admired every one of them and his camera did justice to them all/' Nadar’s por¬ traits may be considered as elegant and charming compli¬ ments paid by one prominent figure to others of his kind. In this lies both the strength and the limitation of Nadar’s por¬ trait art. To a great extent it is the product of the Parisian salon world; whoever is not at home in this world is ig¬ nored, and an atmosphere of reverence is always main¬ tained. Within these boundaries, however, Nadar’s portraits reveal a depth and a variety of human character seemingly unparalleled in the history of photography.

Nadar, Honore Daumier,

As Nadar may stand as the classic representative of nineteenth-century studio portrait photographers, so Paul

and characterizing the people and buildings as parts of the same natural setting.

Strand is among the founders and principal propagators of

Strand’s reputation suffers from the ease with which,

modern avant-garde photography, with its preference for

upon hasty perusal, his photo books may be mistaken for

“straight” outdoor images.7 Born in New York, Strand

glossy publications about “faraway lands and foreign peo¬

started out with abstract work and social criticism. His in¬

ple” of the sort produced by the tourist industry. The por¬

terests changed in the early 1920s when he began to travel,

traits in particular, with their humanitarian orientation,

first in more remote regions of North America and later in

should prevent such a misunderstanding. This orientation

Europe and Africa. What fascinated him in these places were

also brings Strand into close proximity with his contem-

social microcosms and old cultural traditions that were not

pory, Sander. Both were in search of a sane and stable world

yet corrupted by Western commerce and industry and

made up of strong individuals with both feet solidly on the

which therefore seemed to offer a chance for the American

ground, and both emphasized the functional aspects of hu¬

pioneer ideal ot working the land with one’s own hands and

man existence (work clothes, tools, and facial expressions).

reaping the physical, moral, and political advantages that

But the two artists had quite opposite concepts of the larger

were supposed to accompany such a life. In Strand’s various

structure within which human activity takes place. While

series of photographs focusing on this theme, the portrait

Sander saw the individual, with all his aspirations, hopes,

always provides the central and, in a sense, crowning picture

and disappointments, in the context of a widely differ¬

motif.8 By limiting the amount of space around his sub¬

entiated social system, Strand described him as a socially and

jects and presenting them frontally, Strand created a formula

psychologically one-dimensional being who stood ready, in

that left little leeway for socially typical poses. In addition

a nonhierarchical, natural context, for whatever work might

he seems to have encouraged his models to assume a

fall to him.

motionless, stoic stance, as in figures 5 and 6. Consequently,

In conclusion, a word about Diane Arbus, who is gener¬

we look in vain for any trace of the self-projection and social

ally recognized as a major figure in contemporary photogra¬

aspiration so characteristic of the urban middle classes. As

phy.9 Arbus had studied Sander’s work in the Museum of

they stand before us, Strand’s people seem to be related not

Modern Art. Sander’s critical approach to portraiture, his

to a complex, competitive social order, but rather to a sim¬

refusal to act as an accomplice or an adulator of the sitter,

ple natural order that demands physical work above all. The

could indeed have provided valuable lessons to her. One

frontal orientation of the people in these pictures communi¬

immediately notices, though, that Arbus was dealing with a

cates their readiness, free of psychological complications, to

totally different mentality—that of people who “lay it on

take up the practical matters of life and to earn their daily

thick.” Everywhere in these portraits one is struck by the

bread. Correspondingly, Strand places particular emphasis

massive application of lipstick and makeup, exotic masks

on clothing and tools that exhibit a special local character.

and pearl pendants, glittering silks, cascades of tulle, false

One is aware that these utilitarian objects are made to fit

teeth, false hair, false breasts, and so on. From the most

specific climatic and working conditions. A similar regional

unlikely sources these people have amassed an enormous

and functional element is seen in the walls of cottages and

stock of cultural trophies, ranging from the tattoo of the

the entrances of houses that Strand liked to include in his

South Sea islander to the hairdo of the Hollywood star, and

portraits in order to “place” the subjects in a specific ecosys¬

used them to create the most fantastic pseudo-identities. In

tem. In the furrowed faces and wooden walls there are often

one and the same person must be reconciled the business suit

similar patterns caused by the same weathering processes

with Indian feathers, or paradisiac nudity with high-heeled shoes, or a male physique with feminine lingerie, or the overt sexuality of the harem girl with the respectability of the middle-class wife. It is always clear from the outset that these people can never be what they wish to be. Either their imaginary identities are so exaggerated that they do not have a place in the role system of social reality (as in the case of the woman with the Liz Taylor look in figure 8) or else the realization of their wishful projections is impossible by definition (the men who want to be women, figure 7). Not satisfied with simply recording them, Arbus used drastic

measures

to

reveal

all

these

attempts

at

self¬

projection as grotesque failures. She preferred to “attack” her models frontally and “explode” flash lighting directly in their faces even on bright days. Arbus not only refused to grant any extenuating circumstances, she did not admit any circumstances at all. In her portraits the people appear as 5

F. Strand

1933.

4

Mexican peasant,

6

P. Strand, Italian farmer,

1953.

isolated and pinned down as butterflies in a glass case; they are presented to us as freaks a priori, without any reference to

continuous improvement of camera optics and chemistn. photography was still saddled with considerable practical difficulties. Studio operators could not do without elabo¬ rate lighting systems, head supports, and backdrops. The cameras were still expensive and bulky, and the complicated wet-plate process required immediate developing by work¬ ers versed in chemistry. All these demands were difficult for nonprofessionals or hobbyists to meet, and thus amateur photography remained a marginal phenomenon. For de¬ cades portrait photography was the specialty of entrepre¬ 7

D. Arbus, two men dancing

at a drag ball, 1970.

8

D. Arbus, woman with a fur

collar, 1968.

neurs who had the capital and the organizing skills necessary to outfit and staff a studio.10 Figure 9 is a typical example from this phase of portrait photography, a two-page spread from the sample book of

conditions which could foster a better understanding of their

the highly regarded London studio of Camille Silvy.11

eccentric roles. Obviously, such conditions exist, and it re¬

Clearly these visiting-card pictures represent a compromise

quires no great effort to reconstruct the social context in

between the interests of the commercial photographer and

which behavioral roles that the photographer records as so

the customer. The customer wanted a picture documenting

absurd appear meaningful and functional. (It is well known,

his social status, but it could not cost too much. The pho¬

for example, that the self-representation of transvestites can

tographer met this wish by providing a pompous setting,

be fully believable, at least for members of their own subcul¬

but since costs had to be minimized to ensure optimal

ture.) Arbus ignored this on principle. She identified herself

profits, this setting was a cheap, shoddy affair. Close inspec¬

with nothing—above all, with no social order. She stood

tion of the average studio portrait reveals that the marble

outside any social context in which she found her models.

columns were of wood, the thin screen walls could be pulled

Her photography came out of total alienation and seems to

back and forth like stage scenery, and a few pieces of gim-

find its only satisfaction in imposing the stigma of alienation

crack furniture were used in all situations. Such economical

on others. Arbus thus took up a position directly opposed to

arrangements permitted the expeditious processing of the

that of Sander, whose point of view was that of the respect¬

most diverse clients, who, in the rush, could only assume a

able middle class and who presupposed the existence of an

few commonplace poses to show off their Sunday-best

intact social framework. No matter how often Sander may

clothes. Thus, a pompous, quasi-aristocratic facade is set up

have pointed out dissonances between personal projection

before our eyes, but it possesses little credibility. At least to

and social reality, he never lost his belief in a functional

the modern viewer,

individual existence and an integral collective order.

artificial character is immediately apparent.12

its mass-manufactured,

cheap,

and

Nadar, Strand, and Arbus are major representatives of

In these compromise-ridden products of status-seeking

portrait photography who have been set in relation to

and profit-seeking, hardly any room was left for aesthetic

Sander in order to provide a way to gauge the rank and the

quality. Above all the portrait aspect suffered because the

specific quality of his work. Of course, Sander would hardly

sitters’ individuality was lost in the pretentious arrange¬

have compared himself to such great photographers. As the

ment. And, since the photos were made in uniformly small

proprietor of a portrait studio—that is, as a businessman and

formats in order to fit the precut openings in albums, the

a practitioner—he stood within the tradition of routine

faces were too tiny for serious portrait purposes anyway.13

commercial portrait photography, the standard procedures of which seem to have been more relevant for him than the illustrious works of Hill, Nadar, or Cameron. The follow¬ ing section will therefore review the historical development of ordinary portrait photography. The stages in this devel¬ opment largely coincide with the main periods of Sander’s biography, and they left clear traces in his work.

The Commercial Studio Portrait A standardized form of portrait photography began to evolve in the 1860s as the handicraft of the pioneer pho¬ tographer gave way to a trend toward stereotyped mass production and blatant commercialism, which had its paral¬ lels in other branches of laissez-faire capitalism. This devel¬ opment was reinforced by the fact that, in spite of the

9

C. Silvy, two pages from sample book, ca. 1860.

Even such a towering figure as Nadar was forced to ra¬

esoteric inner values. If the autonomous, spiritual personal¬

tionalize and stereotype his picture output when the public

ity found its fitting environment in Jugendstil architecture,

demand centered on cheap visiting cards.14 As August

it must thank Art Photography for its mirror image. This

Sander began his career, commercial studio photography

elective affinity between the upper middle class, the interior,

was still in full swing. Notwithstanding his later disdain for

arts and crafts, and pictorial photography is directly evident

this form of portraiture, it is clear that its socially ambitious

in the two portraits by Rudolf Diihrkoop given here as

and socially representative character did not fail to influence

figures 10 and 11.19 It is significant that the gentleman read¬

his portrait style to a degree.

ing in figure 11 does not find himself surrounded by card¬ board ballast or placed on the infinitely variable stage of a portrait studio. In accordance with one of the chief rules of

The Portrait in Art Photography

Art Photography, Diihrkoop situated him in a much more intimate atmosphere, probably the man’s own study. The

By the turn of the century a new type of portrait photogra¬

statuette may be read as an indication of the sitter’s interest

phy had begun to emerge. At least indirectly, the first im¬

in collecting.20 We have here a setting that at least aspires to

pulse for the awakening of artistic ambition in photography

be unique and personal even though it is quite similar to the

can be traced to the appearance of easily manageable hand

cultivated interiors in many other “artistic” camera por¬

cameras, highly sensitive dry plates, and roll film. Com¬

traits. Quite intentionally, Diihrkoop chose not to place the

bined in a whole new system of photography, these innova¬

man in an obviously arranged pose, nor is he shown wear¬

tions inaugurated the era of fast, simple snapshot exposures

ing his Sunday best. Rather, he is wearing a suit that, for the

that could be developed at a later time, rendering the pho¬

period, was simple, everyday attire. The photographer has

tographer independent of the darkroom. Photography be¬

created the impression that the model was not aware of

came the hobby of a wide segment of the public.15 Along

the camera, as though it were eavesdropping on a private

with the masses, the wealthy and the educated familiarized

moment. Only in this way could the expression of unaf¬

themselves with the camera, discovering in the process that

fected, absorbed contemplation that was nearest to the heart

photography offered exciting creative possibilities and could

of the art photographer be evoked. In reality Diihrkoop

be elevated to a veritable “art.” Spreading from England to

did, of course, make use of arrangement and pose, but he

Germany and France, this movement of dilettantes soon

did so in a very discreet way that gave his model the pres¬

found itself engaged in a two-front battle. On the one hand,

tige that comes

it turned against its own origins,

impressiveness.21

condemning popular

from inner worth instead of external

amateur photography as a mindless pursuit; on the other

In his early years August Sander adopted an approach to

hand, the “Art Photographers” wanted to have nothing in

portraiture that largely coincided with Diihrkoop’s stylistic

common with profit-oriented studio production. The situa¬

tenets, as will be shown later. At this point we should only

tion was not without irony; no sooner had photography

add

become available to the masses than it was taken away from

inspired style of Art Photography. Evidently the highest

them to be stylized as high art.16

ambition of these photographers was to give their pictures

some

comments

on

the

painterly,

Impressionist-

Viewed sociologically, the rise of Art Photography is one

the appearance of paintings, that is, of handmade artifacts.

of many symptoms that show a process of differentiation

In keeping with this they were especially fond of sending

within the European bourgeoisie around 1900. Educated cir¬ cles began to see the disadvantages of industrialization and reacted with uneasiness to the reckless profit-taking and the ostentatious lifestyle that had emerged during several de¬ cades of uncontrolled economic expansion. Middle-class soul searching led to a new concern for the spiritual essence of man, which appeared to be threatened by technological progress. A strong need for a sheltered private life made itself felt, and interior design and applied arts gained inter¬

10

est. There was a hearkening back to preindustrial residential

woman, ca. 1900.

R. Diihrkoop, portrait of a

styles; interiors were attuned to the inhabitant and were furnished with artistically refined and often handcrafted ob¬ jects rather than tasteless mass-produced wares.17 On his “inwardly blooming island,” the individual could conceive of himself as an autonomous, spiritually refined personality capable of shaping his environment according to his own will without outside pressures.18 Art Photography is a particular manifestation of these general social trends; it too lies on the path of retreat toward

6

11

R. Diihrkoop, gentleman

reading, ca. 1900.

large, sumptuously framed hand-reworked prints to exhibi¬

underscoring the importance of the illustrated magazines,

tions.22 It would appear that this peculiar enthusiasm for the

whose “backwardness” he interpreted as preliminary.26

manual modification of the photographic image was mo¬

After the long denial of the camera “machine” by Art

tivated by an antipathy toward everything mechanical and

Photography, the functionalist view brought a complete

technical. Since technology was considered threatening to

about-face; now only the technical methods were accept¬

the finer, spiritual values in life, it was considered contradic¬

able, and great hopes were pinned on their still latent “pos¬

tory to employ the camera—a machine—in the representa¬

sibilities” (a term specific to the time). Correctly understood

tion of artistically ennobled portraits and landscapes which

and correctly employed, these methods were to create new

were suggestive of these very values. The logical way to

values and a new world, with the camera assuming the task

alleviate or conceal the contradiction was to transform the

of recording and transmitting the process. Moholy-Nagy

“mechanical” camera image into a handmade art object.

spoke somewhat naively of the “wonders of technology,” and without dark premonition he declared advertising and political propaganda to be the proving ground of modern

The Functionalistic Photo Aesthetic

camera work. Throughout his book one senses the great enthusiasm with which he looked forward to testing the

In the 1920s, Art Photography was superseded by what

camera in a variety of new fields. That such optimism was

could be called a “functionalistic” mode of camera work,

once possible may be more significant than its failure to

Laszlo Moholy-Nagy being one of its theoretical and practi¬ cal pioneers.23 In Painting—Photography—Film, a book pub¬

endure.27 Moholy-Nagy and his Weimar colleagues skillfully em¬

lished by the Bauhaus in 1925, Moholy-Nagy asserts that

ployed photography as an advertising tool and a herald of

the principles and the technique of photography had not

technological wonders, especially those produced by the

undergone significant changes since 1839. To him the salient

Bauhaus. Portraits appear to have been only sporadic by¬

point was therefore to fully discover and use the existing

products; having been the domain of soulful Art Photog¬

possibilities. For all those years, Moholy-Nagy believed,

raphy, the portrait genre was evidently suspect for the

photography had been the captive of century-old patterns of

Weimar avant-garde. Where faces do appear in their photos,

representation and imagination, “imposed upon our visual

they are generally vehicles tor abstract form experiments or

faculties by certain eminent painters.” Photography thus

examples of new technical possibilities (see figure 12) rather

perpetuated the “prevailing concepts of artistic reproduc¬

than character portrayals.

tion” and remained subjected to the “rules of perspective.”

The portrait appears to have played a somewhat greater

Against this state of affairs Moholy-Nagy expounded the

role in Russian avant-garde photography. Alexander Rod-

use of the medium according to its “own laws” and “inher¬

shenko agreed with Moholy-Nagy that the modern me¬

ent possibilities” and further diagnosed that “even with

tropolis, with its skyscrapers, neon signs, and motorized

proper understanding for the medium, human thought can¬

transportation, had revolutionized traditional visual percep¬

not be quick or broad enough to predict even the most

tion. For people who traveled in elevators and airplanes, the

tangible possibilities.” Still, he listed quite a number of

usual “belly-button perspective” of photography no longer

them: “Fixing motion in its center; creating optical distor¬

seemed appropriate. “The interesting viewpoints,” Rod-

tions by approaching the object from below, from the side,

shenko postulated, “are those from above and below, and

from above; selecting unusual details; emphasizing fine half¬

we must work on them.”28 Rodshenko chose an extremely

tone gradations; light-dark contrasts; brilliant white; the

low viewpoint where it most provocatively contradicted the

magical quality of the finest textures: in the ribs of a steel

old ways of seeing: in the representation of the human face.

construction as well as in the foam of the sea; and all this

He tried to forestall the critics of such formal audacity with

recorded in 1/100 or 1/1,000 of a second; the gloss of the

the argument that “the revolution in no way consists of

photographic paper; arresting situations, reality; objective

replacing the portrait of a general with one of a working-

but also expressive portraits; advertising, political prop¬

class leader done in the same photographic style.” Nev¬

aganda,”24 and so on.

ertheless,

As could be. expected from a major Bauhaus exponent, Moholy-Nagy’s

theory

of photography

shows

definite

his

innovative portraits

exposed him

to

the

accusation that he had transformed normal people into •

*

monstrosities.

?Q

“functionalist” traits.25 Reference is made to the specific

Experimental camera work aimed at undermining estab¬

laws and possibilities of the medium; the “right” use of

lished tradition was likely to meet with a cool reception

equipment and materials is demanded. Further, it is implied

wherever it appeared. Thus, it is not surprising that com¬

that the use of the technological possibilities will lead to an

mercial portrait photographers in Western countries only

optimal aesthetic solution. In view of later, purely formal¬

hesitantly adopted the functionalist innovations. Unusual

istic trends in European avant-garde photography, it should

angles, sharp contrasts, and similar effects may be found in

be understood that Moholy-Nagy did not advocate the

portraits from the late 1920s, but mostly in moderated, inof¬

functionalist approach for its own sake, as a kind of self-

fensive form. In portraits of women, the stylistic innova¬

sufficient juggling with technical toys. Rather, he placed the

tions were mollified by an element of traditional sweetness,

camera in the service of transmitting reality, consequently

as figure 14 illustrates.30

12

L. Moholy-Nagy, large form

against the light (Mayakovsky), 1924.

Politically Oriented Portrait Photography in Germany Parallel to the development of “functionalist” photography, Sander’s portrait encyclopedia Menschen des 20. Jahrhunderts [Citizens of the Twentieth Century] began to take shape. The above discussion of Moholy-Nagy and the international avant-garde reveals little about the special cultural back¬ ground of Sander’s project. We must therefore broaden the scope of our investigation and, among other things, look into the historical circumstances prevailing in Germany after the First World War.31 It goes without saying that the loss of the war, with the ensuing economic and social turbulence, was bound to have a negative impact on all areas of photography. In the subse¬

13

A. Rodshenko, head of a

girl, 1930.

quent phase of economic recovery, industry became the major patron of commercial photography; the portrait busi¬ ness, hampered by the proliferation of private snapshot pho¬ tography, never regained the significant role it had played before the war. That German portrait photography, in spite of this handicap, opened up for itself a new and very lively field

of activity

outside

the

commercial

sector

may,

strangely enough, be traced to the same social upheaval that caused the decline of the conventional portrait studio. The trauma of the years 1918-1923 had brought about a general psychological insecurity in Germany—a national “identity crisis.” Questions about the nature of society, especially the German society and its future, became vitally important. 14

W. Riehl, portrait of a

woman, 1932.

The old social order, in which most people had had a secure place and therefore no reason to be confused or to pose questions, no longer existed. Representatives of every possi¬ ble social group and ideological movement joined in the attempt to restructure the world philosophically and politi¬ cally, but no consensus was ever reached. As a result there arose an astonishing variety of opposing factions, the adher¬ ents of which pointedly expressed their differing attitudes even in the details of their outward deportment, as Karl Arnold’s

caricatures

(figure

15)

demonstrate strikingly.

More than that, various scientific and pseudo-scientific dis¬ ciplines began to specialize in the concoction of physiog¬ nomical schemes that allowed each social group to identify their idols and villains on a typological scale ranging from “good” to “bad,” or “friend” to “enemy.” The absurdity of the physiognomic rage was again brilliantly satirized by Ar¬ nold in the drawings shown here as figure 16. Karl Jaspers, in his On the Intellectual State of the Time, described this dubious “anthropology” as one of the “most widespread mystifications of man.”32 Elaborate written studies dealing with physiognomy were soon supplemented by pictorial statements. For example, a whole range of ideological positions is represented in a series of photographic works dealing with the war and its impact on Germany. Germany 1914-1924: A Book of Greatness and Hope—so runs one title. Another picture pamphlet of this kind, Germany Awake!, was published in 1923 by Hitler’s personal photographer, Heinrich Hoffmann.

s

A second variety of ideologically committed photo books

and One Photos from Present-Day Germany appeared in 1930

is represented by the illustrated surveys of contemporary

As a response to this primarily male portrait gallery, Lud¬

history that became fashionable in the late 1920s, for ex¬

wig Brieger produced Female Faces of the Present in the same

ample This Is Peace, by Franz Schauwecker; 1910-1930:

year. The publisher Niels Kampmann followed with Our

Twenty Years of World History in 700 Pictures, edited by Alex¬

Time in 77 Female Pictures. The same publisher brought out a

ander Märai and Läszlö Dormandi; The Face of Democracy,

further variation on the portrait book in 1934 under this title

with an introduction by Ernst Jünger; and The Changed

Formed By Life, the principal idea being the juxtaposition of

World, with an introduction by Friedrich Georg Jünger. By

youthful and elderly portraits of each subject. Hugo Er-

clever selection, arrangement, and commentary, the photo

furth’s pantheon of German culture was published only

material—which usually came from picture agencies and

posthumously in book form,33 although some individual

thus was rather neutral in itself—was processed so as to

pictures received great exposure around 1930 in exhibitions

interpret recent history according to ideological presupposi¬

and magazines. Erfurth knew how to use pure profiles and

tions rather than to record chronological facts. Though they

delicate halftone gradations to lend his subjects an air of

are dubious from a latter-day point of view, such processed,

refined intellectuality. Evidently these portrait publications

slanted picture presentations seem to have exactly matched

were intended to give the public the comforting impression

the psychological needs of the German public at the time. Among the most impressive documents published in postwar Germany in efforts to cope with the national iden¬

that the German spirit had survived the war uninjured and that, at least in the cultural sector, the “land of poets and thinkers” still played a leading role in the world.

tity crisis were the portrait-photo books that rose to popu¬

Along with these collections, which specialized in promi¬

larity between 1929 and 1933. For example, in the “Blue

nent personalities and were made up of photographs from

Books” series, the collection People of the Time: One Hundred

various studios and agencies, there were others that limited

©ie ©plftenfnnbibaten bee J3actelen

Der betnnute Dolfelolrtfdiaftler flefrlifd)uft „QXUloei flbel“

16

K. Arnold, physiognomic studies, 1925.

17

H. Erfurth, Walter Gropius,

ca. 1920.

themselves to “ordinary” people and were edited by indi¬ vidual, artistically ambitious photographers. Sander’s Ant¬ litz der Zeit [Face of the Time] (1929) is the best known of this category, but it represents an exception insofar as it features a broad social spectrum. The other examples each focus on one particular group. Helmar Lerski’s Everyday Heads (1931) concentrates on beggars, the unemployed, cleaning women, and other lower-class people of the cities; Erna LendvaiDircksen’s German Folk Faces (1930) represents only inhabi¬ tants of remote country regions. Erich Retzlaff celebrated industrial workers in Men at Work (1930), country people in Those of the Soil (1931), and the elderly in The Face of Age (1930). As some of the above titles indicate, the choice of certain social groups for portrait books was politically and ideo¬ logically motivated. Stylistic means are very telling, too; Lerski, for example, identified himself as progressive by his ostentatious use of “functionalist” mannerisms such as ex¬ treme close-ups, precise details, and sharp contrast, while in content and theme he subscribed to a sentimentally tinted socialism.34 Lerski presented the troubled and burdened ones of this world, not as they were, but rather ennobled and indemnified by the display of deep feelings and spiritual heroism. Put differently, Lerski did everything to account for the outward deprivation of these people as an inner re¬ nunciation. Obviously, though, this movielike staging of noble emotional attitudes was of questionable value, since it in no way changed the real situation of these people; on the contrary, it may have contributed to the perpetuation of that

19

E. Lendvai-Dircksen, farmer

from the Schwalm region, 1930.

situation. Still, Lerski discarded the Art Photography myth of the autonomous personality secure in its cultivated inte¬ rior. The heroically suffering figures in Everyday Heads sug¬ gest that there is no longer any shelter for them—that they stand exposed to a hostile environment. Lendvai-Dircksen’s style also reflects an ideological position. The avoidance of surprising formal experiments clearly places her in the con¬ servative camp. With many of her like-minded contem¬ poraries Lendvai-Dircksen shared a prejudice against the alleged deracination and decadence of the “overly rational, fast living” city dweller.35 Her portrait volumes are filled with gnarled, upright “born leader” characters who are still firmly rooted in their native soil and sheltered within their village community. These blacksmiths, farmers, and car¬ penters are not autonomous individuals in private seclusion, either; instead they are evidently intended to exemplify the formative power of race and land. Lendvai-Dircksen in¬ troduced the viewer to a good and well-ordered environ¬ ment that offered a refuge from urban evils. The bourgeois personality of the prewar period and Lerski’s everyday hero were here confronted with a new idol: the healthy and pureblooded villager. These observations may suffice to make clear that Ger¬ man portrait photography around 1930 provided a channel for the expression of philosophical and political creeds.36 What Karl Jaspers said about the general “anthropological” obsession of the time applies quite specifically to the picture books of Lerski and Lendvai-Dircksen: “This anthropology

is far from the desire to justify the average and ordinarv. On the contrary, a love for the aristocratic and a hate for the ignoble is at the root of such theories. Humanity is divided into ideal types and antitypes which represent what one emulates or opposes. Ethnic types, professional types, phys¬ ical types are distinguished objectively but in such a way that the distinction is always guided by secret love and hate.”37 Like Lerski’s Everyday Heads and Lendvai-Dircksen’s Ger¬ man Folk Faces, Sander’s Citizens of the Twentieth Century is a characteristic product of the 1920s. Sander shared the incli¬ nation toward typology with his contemporaries, and like them he worked—willingly or unwillingly—in an ideolog¬ ically charged field. And, however much he was interested in the “average and ordinary” and restrained himself from openly biased pronouncements of the sort made by Lerski and Lendvai-Dircksen, his photography too was guided by secret sympathy and antipathy. Moreover, since his portrait atlas was such a large and ambitious project, it was found to be particularly burdened with the principal problem of every anthropological undertaking: the reconciliation of “objec¬ tive knowledge and intuitive understanding,” which can never be totally achieved. As Jaspers pointed out, “Things are measured; but what is actually seen eludes all measure¬ ment and numerical fixation. Facts are communicated but do not match the meanings with which they are purported to be obviously identical.”38 As heavily as Sander’s work may have been burdened with uncertainties, and as emphatically as it was a product of its time, it is nevertheless outstanding, rising far above com¬ parable works produced in the 1920s and the 1930s. Sander’s view was significantly wider and sharper than those of por¬ trait

photographers

such

as

Lerski,

Lendvai-Dircksen,

Retzlaff, and Fiedler and racial theorists such as Bruno R. Schultz, Ludwig F. Clauss, and Hans W. Fischer.39 His portrait work retains moments of social reality which other¬ wise were blocked out by ideological filters and blinders.

2

AUGUST SANDER: A GERMAN BIOGRAPHY

Herdorf

his photographs of the 1930s as scenic beauties, not as en¬ vironmental disturbances.43 Around the same time Sander

August Sander was born November 17, 1876, in Herdorf, a

decided to buy himself a motorcycle “in order to enjoy Na¬

small town in Siegerland, a mountainous region near Co¬

ture better,” and in a poem written during the Second

logne.41' A lot of farming, a lot of mining, the usual crafts,

World War the sound of a boat’s horn on the Rhine echoes

and here and there a small factory—this was the environ¬

through his description of the morning mists.44

ment that formed Sander’s youthful impressions. Herdorf

When Sander entered the military service in 1896 he was

had not yet been touched by the Industrial Revolution,

already a fairly productive amateur photographer, owing his

which had then just begun to transform the large cities.

practice of what in the eyes of Herdorfers must have been an

Even iron-ore mining and forging were carried out by farm¬

extravagant hobby to the patronage of a rich uncle.4_> Bar¬

ers who had their own homesteads. For this native popula¬

racks life in Trier in no way brought an end to Sander’s

tion, industrial employment was not alienated wage work; it

passion for photography, and he was even able to serve a

was a craft exercised with professional pride41—a fact that

sort of apprenticeship in a local studio. Provided with a

seems to have had a considerable influence on Sander’s con¬

testimonial by the studio owner Jung, which Sander later

cept of society.

liked to think of as a journeyman’s certification,44’ he began

Sander’s father was a not untypical Siegerlander. Besides

in 1899 a two-year circuit of Magdeburg, Halle, Leipzig,

his carpentry work in the mines, he operated a farm and

and Berlin in order to gather further experience in various

owned some capital earned by the sale of an iron mine. In his

photographic firms. As a concession to the rising artistic

leisure time the father devoted himself to drawing. Every¬

style in photography he spent some time at the Dresden

thing suggests that August Sander grew up in a solid family

Academy of Art.

environment in which encouragement for his intellectual development was not lacking. He began working in the mines at age 14. Only when he was inducted into the mili¬

Linz

tary in 1896 did Sander leave his father’s farm and the mines, having been shaped in many ways for the rest of his life. In later years Sander recalled his homeland, Herdorf m the

Sander’s “journeyman years” came to an end January 1, 1901, as he accepted a position as “first operator” in the

Sottersbach Valley, as an unsullied idyll:

Greif Studio in Linz. Upon raising the handsome sum of

Sottersbach Valley is narrow and beautiful, enclosed by richly forested mountains. The stream winds with many turns through this graceful and lovely valley. With each season the magnificent landscape changes its colors. Fish frolic in the stream and the trout play nimbly. . . . Every day brought new experiences. On the opposite mountainside, for instance, puffed and sighed a little locomotive of the 1870s with every possible and impossible tone, much to our great enjoyment. Several times a day the train pushed heavy-laden coal cars up the valley toward a mine and on the return carried down ore and ironstone which were extracted from the mines at the upper end of the valley. In spring the village herdsmen came daily at eight in the morning and with a wonderful ringing of bells drove the animals to the meadows. There were about 200 cows or even more and it always took quite a while for the herd to pass our house.42

20,000 kronen with the help of a realtor, Sander soon be¬

One sees that in his youth August Sander did not experi¬

his social aspirations the stamp of approval. Sander’s trans¬

came the owner of the business. His marriage to the daugh¬ ter of a court official in Trier was a further step toward a promising bourgeois career. Within just a few years Sander had made the sharp transi¬ tion from a rural mine worker to an urban businessman in command of seven employees. In order to succeed in his new career it became necessary for him to win acceptance by the “high society” of Linz and to create a distinguished clien¬ tele—by no means an easy task. Under the guidance of his wife, Anna, he strove to acquire something of a middle-class education. He read literature, subscribed to art magazines, and collected paintings and furniture. Ambitious musical exercises eventually qualified him for membership in the Linz Liedertafel, an exclusive musical society,47 which gave

ence nature and technology as opposing forces. The “little

formation into a cultivated urban gentleman is quite appar¬

locomotive’’ was a part of the idyllic landscape, not a foreign

ent in family photos, such as figure 20. The great number

object. Sander remained true to this attitude even as an older

of these photos and the pride with which they display the

man

signs of his hard-won prosperity indicate how new his sta-

Mechanically worked quarries, for example, appear in

tus appeared to him and how much he need to have it recognized.45 The photographic style that Sander adopted about this time was, naturally enough, the style required by the social sphere to which he had just won access. More precisely, he assimilated

the

painterly approach to

portraiture,

with

which the educated bourgeoisie around 1900 sought to set itself apart from the “stereotyped, tasteless” popular styles of earlier periods. In a 1905 advertisement set in beautiful Jugendstil lettering and decorated with the inevitable long¬ haired nymph, Sander “took the liberty” of “bringing to the kind attention of the honorable ladies and gentlemen of Linz [his] first-class photographic art studio.” In a similar pros¬ pectus of 1907, sent to potential customers along with a portfolio

of sample

photographs,

Sander

formally

ex¬

pounded his belief in Art Photography. As can be gathered from Sander’s invective against painted backgrounds, the old-fashioned, artificial studio picture still held a strong po¬ sition in the portrait market: As the contents of the accompanying portfolio clearly show, my photographic images compare favorably with the previ¬ ously accepted type, especially as far as the careful treatment of the background is concerned. As commonly known, most photographic portrait stu¬ dios abound with painted architectural or scenic back¬ grounds, which are mechanically employed without any regard for the sitters’ varying social position, so that a har¬ monious pictorial effect is out of the question from the start. Owing to special arrangements in my studio, I am now qualified to make unique and tasteful portraits there, allow¬ ing for the fact that not all clients can be photographed in their own home or garden—which, however, is quite desir¬ able and for which I recommend my services. In examining my work it should be understood that— much in contrast with the current practice—I endeavor to retain all the characteristic features which circumstance, life, and times have stamped upon the face. Thus I can offer to produce expressive, characteristic likenesses that completely represent the nature of the subject.49 The self-confidence demonstrated here was not without justification. As the few surviving gum bichromate prints from his Linz period (such as figure 22) show, Sander was indeed a first-rate Art Photographer. His pictures seldom returned from international exhibitions without recogni¬ tion. In 1904 alone he received two gold medals, in Weis and Paris, in addition to the “Donor’s Award under the highest patronage of His Majesty the King of Saxony.” Newspaper critics were not sparing of recognition either. The following comment appeared in the Linzer Tagespost upon the occasion of an arts and crafts exhibition in 1903: Sander has hit the mark this time. His picture of the Lus¬ tenau church conveys a mood that appears to be lifted di¬ rectly out of [the magazine Die Jugend]', his “Gusental,” with its piquant figures, might hang in any art exhibit. In por¬ traits, too, this master has shown mature accomplishment. Here even the expert would have difficulty recognizing the work of a machine. Throughout Sander’s efforts an artistic strain is perceived, not to mention his complete mastery ot the technical challenges of his medium. 50

22

A. Sander, portrait, bromoil print, ca. 1913.

In the same year, Das Atelier des Photographen, the leading

the advent of industrial production methods are visualized

Art Photography magazine in Germany, brought attention

here with archaeological precision, as if from the perspective

to Sander by publishing three selected portraits. Better than

of another century.

the previous quotations, these pictures (including hgure 21)

Sander had glorified the Linz middle class according to all

show how Sander, much like Dührkoop or Erfurth, had

the rules of Art Photography, but now for his new Wester¬

chosen the soulful personality sheltered in its own interior as

wald customers he switched to a clear, unadorned, almost

his central theme, with the “machine’s work” camouflaged

documentary style. In other words, Sander’s view of the

as much as possible by “painterly” means."1'

portrait was no longer purely artistic but followed more and

Sander’s success as an Art Photographer led him to con¬

more sociological lines. For example, when Sander made

sider and to present himself as an artist. He furnished his

the famous

studio like a painter’s, wore velvet clothes, and gave a place

young farmers on their way to a town dance (plate 13), his

photograph of the three cigarette-smoking

of honor in his home to a reproduction of Rembrandt’s

main concern was one of cultural history; he wanted to

famous Dresden self-portrait. There was as yet no indication

depict the worldly, fashionable inclinations of the younger

that Sander would practice “straight” photography in the

generation that contrasted so sharply with the strict moral

1920s.

conventions of their fathers. This picture cannot have been the result of a private family commission, nor would it have been suitable for a photographic exhibition. Here for the

Cologne-Lindenthal

first time Sander seems to have disregarded customers’ in¬ terests in order to pursue his own documentary purposes.

Late in 1909 Sander gave up his Linz studio, for reasons that

From such a single study it was but a small step to the

are not quite clear, and after some hesitation settled in Co¬

assembly of a whole picture series that could demonstrate

logne-Lindenthal. Following his tried and true method, he

the various aspects of farm life. Sander proceeded to assem¬

sent prospective customers an advertising leaflet in which he

ble such a series only after the First World War, even though

identified himself as a proprietor of “workshops for artistic

in some form this idea seems to date back to the years 1911 —

home photographs” and carried on his polemics against the

1914. His remarks on the subject are too vague to allow

“run-of-the-mill photographs as they are made in the more

more specific conclusions,53 but it can be said that the Wes¬

fashionable studio factories of large cities.”52 Sander’s “plain, natural” pictures appear, however, to have met with much less acceptance in Cologne than they

terwald farm portraits represent a beginning from which the plan for a much larger documentary project could gradually evolve.54

had in Linz. The local elite remained true to the portrait

However, the farm photographs, with their matter-of-

factories, forcing Sander to go out into the country to find

fact appearance, represent only one part of Sander’s prewar

commissions. So began a long period of commuting be¬

production. He also continued his Art Photography, and by

tween the studio in Lindenthal and the farms of Westerwald,

1914 he had managed once again to attract a distinguished

where Sander’s pictures came to be highly appreciated.

urban clientele to his studio.55 His documentary interests

The new rural customers had little in common with the

might have remained forever a secondary concern had it not

upper class of Linz, and Sander had to develop new artistic

been for political events of large magnitude. The outbreak

and economic approaches. Evidently he was not at a loss in

of the First World War interrupted his photographic career,

this situation; on the contrary, it had a liberating effect on

although he was intermittently able to make military por¬

him and brought new talents to light. Sander was at home in

traits. His commercial assignments, his personal souvenirs,

Siegerland and Westerwald. He knew the sort of people

and his documentary studies of the war years are particularly

who lived there, and he spoke the local dialect. After his

difficult to distinguish from one another.

success in Linz, his widened horizons opened up fresh per¬ spectives on things that before had seemed unremarkable. He was now able to recognize the socio-cultural structure of

The Postwar Years

the Westerwald farm life as something unique and worthy of record, and he was persistent enough to translate his ob¬

After the war, the political and economic crisis made a swift

servations into an adequate stylistic language. There were

return to normal business impossible for many Germans.

no more moody interiors, urbane manners, or soulful facial

Artists, writers, and intellectuals in particular suffered from

expressions; the idiom of Art Photography would have been

a lack of commissions and work opportunities. However,

out of place here. Instead of “catching” his sitters in cul¬

while

tivated privacy and introspection, Sander now fixed them as

financially, it did afford them a valuable chance to reflect

simply and directly as possible on his plates, abandoning the

upon and reshape the theoretical foundation of their work.

dusky,

this

period

of

enforced

inactivity

hurt

them

romantic gum-bichromate technique completely.

The informal circles that came into existence provided

The photos that were later brought together in the “ger¬

forums for passionate discussion and bold projects, and even

minal portfolio” (plates 1-12) are the exemplary results of

though most of these projects could not be carried out for

his new objective approach. The reserve, solemn stiffness,

lack of means, they helped to lay down guidelines for future

and

work.

14

htion-bound outlook of the Rhineland farmer before

Sander was very much part of this semi-bohemian scene.

through all classes, occupations, and lifestyles in postwar

Around 1920 he established a relationship with a group of

Germany. The nucleus and the pattern for this project wTere

artists who became prominent as the Rhineland Progres¬

inherent in the Westerwald farm portraits. That tentative

sives; ultimately this alliance gave his photographic career a

endeavor to understand the individual as part of a social

distinct turn.56 In long arguments with Franz Sei wert and

microcosm and to examine specific forms of family life,

Heinrich Hoerle, the central figures of the group. Sander

work, and recreation was now rounded out by Sander into

became convinced that photography and painting were

a clear concept that could be applied to workers and

completely separate media and should follow independent

craftsmen, to the lower, middle, and upper classes, and even

courses.57 As late as 1921 he had produced fuzzy gum prints,

to such marginal figures as circus performers and vagrants.

but by 1922 he had broken with Art Photography to practice

Sander began to make photographic portraits expressly

what he called “exact photography.” This complete about-

for the projected compendium in 1924. Several pictures

face was initiated by experiments such as the one in which

bearing this date, designated as “occupational portraits” and

Sander enlarged a portrait of a farmer on a smooth, shiny

not suitable for family albums, must have been destined

paper normally used for technical illustrations. As a result,

from the beginning to go into various sections of the great

remembers an eyewitness,

portrait handbook. (See plates 94, 97, 101, 125, and 315.)

“every detail was enhanced,

nothing beautified, nothing suppressed. Every painterly ef¬

The historical moment at which Sander left off reexamin¬

fect was left out. When Sander compared this picture with a

ing his old negatives and undertook the ever more system¬

gum print from the same negative he was delighted, and no

atic accumulation of new picture material was by no means

less so was Seiwert.”58 From now on Sander’s ideal was the

accidental.

clear,

sharp portrait photography that could be readily

Weimar Republic entered a period of economic consolida¬

identified as a technical product. Retouching was rejected on

tion. Sander felt the impact of the general economic upturn

With

the currency

reform of 1923-24,

the

principle, although Sander did continue to make use of it in

directly in the form of industrial contracts that gave him

quite a few individual cases.

long-term financial security, compensating for the decline in

Seiwert attributed a political function to the clarity and

portrait commissions (which never again reached prewar

logical order of his paintings and believed they represented

levels). Seldom called upon by private customers, and un¬

preliminary steps toward the “reorganization of not only

satisfied by industrial assignments (which he preferred to

society but even the world.”59 Sander’s position was much

leave in the hands of assistants), Sander now spent most of

less radical. He never reconciled himself to the idea of world

his time on the unprofitable but creative and stimulating

revolution. As a dedicated Social Democrat, he accepted the

stock-taking of Weimar society.

Weimar Republic even

though

its

continual instability

strengthened his nostalgia for the secure rural environment of his youth. Nevertheless, the political discussions of the Rhineland Progressives did not pass by him without a trace.

The Role of the Photographer

Sander now adopted a more reserved attitude toward the middle class. Undoubtedly the quality of “exactness” that

The man who set out to create Citizens of the Twentieth

began to characterize his pictures around the same time was

Century around 1924 had little in common with the former

a result of that distancing process; it signaled a transition

gold-medal winner from Linz. Instead of velvet robes and

from the glorification of the middle class to its objective

fashionable suits Sander now wore regular clothes, and by

inventorization.

the 1930s his Rembrandt copy would give way to the new¬

Sander began in the early 1920s to sift his Linz and Wes¬ terwald negatives, gradually developing a core archive of

est

constructivist

creations,

such

as

Seiwert’s

painting

“Photography” (figure 23).60

particularly interesting images which he printed on sharp

Sander also developed a new awareness of the problematic

glossy paper, showed to friends, compared, and discussed.

relationship between art and economic conditions. How¬

Pictures originally made as “works of art” now revealed

ever, he tended to see this problem from a somewhat anti¬

documentary content and were most appreciated for their

quated point of view; his basic demand that the artist must

objectivity. Sander’s portrait archive, at first intended for

decide whether to serve cultural or market exigencies was

commercial purposes, now achieved a new dimension as a

based upon the belief that the two were distinct entities and

reservoir of illustrations delineating the psychological and

that “culture” could and should remain independent of eco¬

social constitution of the individual and the society.

nomic factors.61 These reflections coincided with his belief

Sander had developed a feel for the uniqueness ol the rural

that he could, through his creative work, stand apart from

existence even before the war. Now, as he reexamined his

history and society. From that neutral ground he believed he

archive, he began also to scrutinize the lifestyle of the middle

would be able to impartially “hold a mirror” up to people

class. Beyond that, Sander’s scope of interest enlarged to

and produce an “objective” picture of the social panorama

encompass the most diverse social groups and their interre¬

before him.62 As we will see, Sander’s career was a perfect

lationships. The structure and organization of society as a

illustration that such independence is impossible to achieve.

whole began to occupy him, and gradually the plan emerged

Without realizing it, he operated from a specific social posi¬

for a large portrait atlas—a photographic cross-section

tion which prescribed for him a definitely partisan position

15

23

F. Seiwert, “Die Pho¬

tographie,” 1930.

and his practice of occasionally asking exaggerated prices for his photographs proved particularly unwise. It is no wonder that the Lindenthal studio at times found itself on the brink of bankruptcy. Providing a comfortable financial future for his family was never Sander’s strength. A family member’s complaints about this were once answered by a friend and assistant in terms that seem to reflect Sander’s own opinions:

24

K. Rössing, “Zitate in der

Praxis” [“Quotations in Use”], 1929.

If someone undertakes such an important project then he must always work at it—every minute, consciously and un¬ consciously. He can do nothing else but work according to his ideas because he is internally driven to do so; he would be unable to live without doing that which lives and grows within him. One cannot choose to do such a thing but sim¬ ply does it under any circumstances, even if one starves because of it. Did Beethoven, Goethe, Schubert, and many others ask whether they would be wealthy, did they first build a cozy home and a safe existence before they began to create that upon which millions have feasted and will con¬ tinue to feast?65 Even though Sander, as an artist and an equal of Goethe or Beethoven, did not consider himself strictly obliged to provide for his family, he did maintain a rather patriarchal household. Church festivals were regularly observed and pompously celebrated. Child rearing often proceeded by

Zitate In der Praxis

means of the rod. Sander’s patriarchal sovereignty also ex¬ tended to his dealings with feminine employees, who had not only technical duties to fulfill. Critics of this behavior That one could in this respect hold a more realistic opin¬

received the response: “Oil must be poured in the lamp if it

ion, even without being in the leftist camp, is shown by the

is to burn. In this way, artist and assistant are both well

example of Karl Rössing, the creator of the 1932 woodcut

served and put in a position to enjoy life.”66

series “My Prejudice against This Time.” Rössing, too, con¬

In spite of his disdain for material goods, Sander never

sidered an autonomous culture desirable, thus revealing his

completely lost the desire for a peaceful and secure family

conservatism, but unlike Sander he was aware that culture

residence—a desire he idealized as “the middle-class home

had long since become a business. He spoke sarcastically of

of Goethe’s era,” to which he planned to dedicate a series of

“Culture, Inc.,” and he loved to attack the mass media and

photographs. In designing and purchasing furniture for his

the art market, which had made the once autonomous arts a

Lindenthal apartment he reached even further back, to the

commercial business largely dependent on technological

Renaissance and Gothic periods.67 Much to his chagrin, the

means,

and turned

apartment was only rented; notwithstanding serious efforts,

the work of art into an object of technically rationalized

he never was able to realize the lifelong dream of owning his

exploitation.63

own house. With all this, Sander deeply despised the com¬

put artists in a dependent position,

Sander himself could not escape the bitter experience that

fortable lifestyle of the philistines. He admired George

culture and economy were not nearly as independent of each

Grosz “because he ‘cut down’ the bourgeoisie.”68 The con¬

other as he liked to assume. When he showed photographic

ventionally bourgeois aspects of Sander’s own life seem to

examples of “good and bad architecture” (figures 25, 26)

have escaped his attention.

alongside his portraits in his Cologne Art League exhibition in 1927, he lost lucrative commissions from the owners of the buildings he had labeled bad/’4 In spite of all his boasts about artistic autonomy, Sander never returned to the theme of architecture; nevertheless, he did not revise his thinking. His lack of real independence must have become painfully clear to him later when the realization of his great portrait atlas was forestalled by political, economic, and publishing difficulties. Sander’s unrealistic attitude toward economic factors also helps to explain why he was unable to translate his portrait work into an adequate reputation and financial success. He

25

never really understood how to promote and market his art,

“good” architecture, 1920s.

16

A. Sander, example of

26

A. Sander, example of “bad”

architecture, 1920s.

First Publications

photos in an excellently printed volume called The World Is Beautiful, and it had been a great commercial success. In

In the meantime, work on Citizens of the Twentieth Century

Sander’s portraits Wolff recognized suitable material for an¬

continued. It would be absolutely impossible to estimate

other publication of the same type. Accompanied by a

how much time, money, and energy Sander invested after

foreword written by Alfred Döblin and a subscription offer

1924 in establishing contacts, traveling, and searching for

for the complete set of 45 portfolios, 60 Sander photographs

“typical” representatives of all social ranks in their authentic

were published in 1929 as Antlitz der Zeit [Face of the Time], '

environments. Yet it is clear that Sander was less mobile

Notwithstanding the small number of photographs, this

than he might have been. In spite of the sweeping title of his

sample edition represents a remarkable published accom¬

portrait manual, he was certainly no cosmopolite. On the

plishment. It is an outstanding example of a new category of

contrary, he demonstrated an unswerving preference for his

books which is difficult to define but which represents a

homeland, the narrow rectangle marked out by Bergisches

significant innovation in the publishing business of the

Land, Koblenz, the lower Rhine, and Westerwald. The idea

1920s.74

that this small home district was representative of twentieth-

In the “photo book,” as the new category may be called

century man in general can be seen as a daring artistic hy¬

tentatively, the photographic image took on a more impor¬

pothesis in the style of James Joyce’s fixation on Dublin.

tant function than that of an illustration provided by any

Even an excursion into the nearby Ruhr region did not

commercial studio or picture agency. Instead, it was treated

tempt Sander, and except for Berlin he never traveled to

as a work of art, or at least a significant visual statement, for

large cities for the sole purpose of making portraits.69,70

which the author took responsibility. If text was connected

Sander’s own position in society was an important factor

with such pictures at all, it was reduced to a minimal, at

in determining which groups and social levels were accessi¬

most accompanying role, while the reproduction quality of

ble to him and, consequently, which divisions of his portrait

the photographs,

manual received the greatest emphasis. Naturally enough,

graphic design of the volume became essential. As a rule, the

there was no lack of connections with artists, musicians, and

harmonious combination of pictures and book design re¬

authors; Seiwert and other friends provided additional con¬

quired creative cooperation between the photographer and

tacts in this area.71 Sander had an ample number of doc¬

the publisher.

their sequential arrangement,

and the

tors, lawyers, and professors among his private clients. The

Face of the Time is a good example of this process. The

still rather craft-oriented personnel of various small and

selection and arrangement of the 60 pictures took no less

medium-size businesses were known to Sander through lo¬

than 6 months. In view of this it can be surmised that the vari¬

cal commissions. He had little contact with either the work¬

ous incongruities between the book and Sander’s original

ers or the business leaders of the large industries in the

portfolio arrangement are by no means accidental.7:1 For

nearby Ruhr region. Among the aristocracy, diplomats, and

example, contrary to Sander’s first intentions, the book

politicians,

presents the proletarian class as a rather compact and clearly

Sander had to

content himself with

minor

figures. Through his son Erich, who was a Communist

delineated group.

Party member, he came in contact with leftist groups; he

series was to end with pictures of the sick and the dead, the

Also, whereas the projected portfolio

consciously ignored the National Socialists until it was too

final images in Face of the Time show unemployed people.

late. As far as agriculture was concerned, he focused almost

Instead of a timeless memento mori, a current social prob¬

exclusively on the middle-class family operations of the

lem thus concludes the volume. No related correspondence

Rhineland, never venturing out into the huge estates that

has survived, but it seems reasonable to assume that this as

were owned by Prussians and worked by armies of poorly

well as other adjustments were suggested to Sander by the

paid farmhands. Perhaps some of these gaps might have

publisher. Apart from this, it should be noted that the un¬

been filled had Sander’s work on Citizens of the Twentieth

usual layout of the book provides for just one portrait per

Century not been halted after 1933. Those difficulties, how¬

two-page spread, identified only by the subject’s profession.

ever, still lay in the future.

That is, the pictures are not grouped in pairs and the subjects

By 1927, Sander had accumulated enough portrait mate¬

are not identified by name, presumably because that would

rial to open an exhibition in the gallery of the Cologne Art

have invited comparison and speculation foreign to the na¬

Union as a first preview of his grand project. The exhibition

ture of the pictures. In this matter, too, an intelligent coop¬

was well received in Cologne, and it helped to spread

eration between the photographer and the publisher seems

Sander’s reputation to other parts of Germany. 1 he Ost-

to have taken place.

haus Museum in Essen soon showed a similar selection ol

In contrast with The World Is Beautiful, Sander’s Face of the

his pictures, and Carl Georg Heise purchased a series ot

Time did not sell well. With its careful arrangement of rela¬

portraits for the Lübeck Museum—with his own money,

tively repetitive portraits, its principal appeal was to highly

since spending

educated people. Journalists and intellectuals acclaimed the

public funds

unthinkable.72 More important,

for photographs was

still

book enthusiastically and seem to have accounted for the en¬

bulk of the 2,000 subscriptions sent to the publisher by 1933.

couraged by Heise to enter into negotiations with Sander. In

Sander thus won at least a partial public success, enough to

1928 Wolff had published a collection of Renger-Patzsch

give him renewed drive for the continuation of his work.

the

publisher Kurt Wolff was

There is no sound basis for an estimate, but the amount of Sander's material may well have doubled between 1929 and

tween 1840 and 1930 and his definition of his own place in that development.

Sander initiated another large picture

Following a pattern set by contemporary authors, Sander

project, which was to complement his ongoing portrait

divided the history of photography into four principal

1933.

Moreover,

work. In a radio broadcast he outlined the new plan: Having traced the physiognomy of people . . . , we now turn to their creations, that is, the works of man, beginning with the landscape. Like language it is stamped by man and his works, growing out of his needs; thus man often changes even the biological reality. In landscape formations, too, we can recognize the human spirit of the times and we can capture it by means of the camera. The same is true of architecture and industry, as of all human endeavors, great and small. The landscape, confined by the boundaries of a common language, yields the physiognomical time expo¬ sure of a nation. If we widen our field of vision we reach in this way a total panorama similar to that of the universe seen in an observatory, an overall time exposure of the world population, which could be highly significant to the under¬ standing of the development of mankind.76

periods, the earliest one being the epoch of the daguerreo¬ type, which Sander praised as the peak of craftsmanship in the evolution of the medium. Next came the era of the collodion process, which Sander said had “dominated the practice of photography for 30 years” (ca. 1853-1883). He continued:

As can be gathered from this quote, Sander’s plans became

Photographic collections of this period prove to us that the craftsmanly achievements in photography were largely equal to those of the first epoch, but there were important changes as well. For example, the professional photog¬ raphers, whose numbers increased greatly, began to strive for profits, not to mention the simultaneous emergence of mass-production studios. As a result the market was swamped with a lot of kitsch. It must be recognized, though, that even at this time, alongside the kitsch, delight¬ ful miniature pictures were produced, some of which were excellent in all respects.

more audacious with the advancing years. Even if one

In the second epoch, therefore, Sander distinguished be¬

counts only the actually executed work, one arrives at an

tween a fine early phase and a period of decline. His own

amazing record. Sander was remarkably active and innova¬

“master,” Sander added (evidently referring to Mr. Jung in

tive between the ages of 45 and 55. At a time in life when

Trier), was still a man of “craftsmanlike ability,” even

many artists have their principal accomplishments behind

though he too had been forced to make concessions to the

them and are drawing on their past triumphs and making

tasteless conventions of mass-produced photography.

minor stylistic adjustments in order to defend their market position, Sander was undertaking ambitious new projects that normally would have required the enthusiasm of a 20year-old. In retrospect Sander saw this time as the happiest of his life. “Still today I must say,” he reminisced in a letter of 1951, “that the best time for the intellectual stimulation and progress in all these things lay between ’20 and ’30. That was our time and the time of the upward movement.”77

The third epoch, around the turn of the century, is de¬ scribed by Sander as “the time of Art Nouveau,” when “England led the way in pictorial photography, which was originally directed against the current kitsch products.” Though Sander makes no reference to it, this period in¬ cluded his own beginnings and first triumphs at Linz. By 1931, however, he had become so thoroughly ashamed of his own photographic past that he bluntly characterized pic¬ torial photography as a “misunderstanding” caused by D. O. Hill’s pictures. “As a result of the use of paper negatives

“Nature and Development of Photography”

and salted paper,” he wrote, “those old photographs had a blurry, unclear appearance much like the fuzzy gum prints

In the years immediately preceding the Nazi takeover, pho¬

of today; this led to an unfortunate, long-prevailing misun¬

tography had become a respected, relatively prominent art

derstanding of the nature of photography. Upon this foun¬

form in Germany—a fact that must have added to Sander’s

dation pictorial photography developed and continues, out

enthusiastic recollection of the “time of upward move¬

of ignorance, to be labeled as artistic.” In short, the painterly

ment.” As museums, art associations, the press, and pub¬

manner “was a mistake and so carried within itself the seed

lishers discovered the magic of photography, the historical

of its destruction since it was not based upon the chemical-

aspects of the medium began to arouse widespread interest

optical evolution of photography. . . . For photography this

among critics and intellectuals. Sander was an eager reader

development had the advantage of making the real nature

of the pertinent writings of Stenger, Benjamin, Bossert and

and possibilities of the medium apparent again. . . . Only

Guttmann, and Dost,78 and was therefore well prepared

along the lines of clear, realistic photography . . . was it once

when in 1931 he was invited by the Kölner Rundfunk

more possible to achieve progress. Meanwhile, modern ob¬

[Cologne Broadcasting Company] to give a series of radio

jectivity, which arose in opposition to the painterly style,

lectures, which were aired under the title “Nature and De¬

aided progress in photography and carried it beyond paint¬

velopment of Photography.” The manuscripts of these lec¬

ing.” The exact meaning of the last sentence remains open to

tures have survived, awaiting publication. Among the great

conjecture; in any case, Sander speaks of a new, fourth

number of themes treated in these pages with varying

epoch of photography having begun in the early 1920s.

degrees of lucidity,

relevant in

As he points out in the following paragraph, the new,

the present context: Sander’s view of photography be¬

objective camera style of the 1920s had its roots in various

1

one seems

particularly

forms of applied photography. Even before the First World

of Fine Arts to destroy the printing plates and seize the

War the practical application of photography had provided

remaining copies of Face of the Time was a clear indication of

evidence that “the nature of all photography is documen¬

what Sander could expect from the new regime. Presum¬

tary” and can only be “destroyed by manual handling.” San¬ der goes on to say:

ably nothing of the kind would have happened had he not

Documentary photography is less concerned with filling the aesthetic requirements of external form and composition than with the significance of what is represented. Never¬ theless, both elements—aesthetic and documentary truth— may be combined for use in various areas. Photography is capable of documentary authenticity only under the condi¬ tion that we follow exactly the chemical-optical methods; that is, produce pure light creations by chemical and optical mean's. By comparison we find that the pure light creation achieved by chemical means is much more aesthetically pleasing than the bastard products resulting from “artistic” interference. With few exceptions the pure method may be used in almost every area. To understand this we should keep in mind three basic concepts: See, observe, and think correctly!

recently assisted his son Erich in the reproduction of Com¬ munist leaflets. A few of the sheets wound up in the hands of Nazi authorities, with the result that Erich Sander was sent to prison (where he died in 1943 for lack of medical treat¬ ment). August Sander, whose aid had been motivated more by fatherly feelings than political conviction,

remained

under suspicion, which probably led to the government scrutiny of his publications. No official reason for the confiscation of Face of the Time was ever given to Sander, but it would appear to be due to the fact that his book described the German society as less than perfectly homogeneous or racially pure. Further indica¬ tion of Sander’s isolation can be seen in the fact that not one of his photographs was included in “Heads of the German Racial and National Community,” compiled by the Stoedtner Archive for newspapers, publishers, schools, and Nazi

To sum up: Sander’s great love of the early phases of

training courses. (This collection did, however, include a

photography undoubtedly influenced his own portrait work

series of Lendvai-Dircksen portraits; see figure 27.) In this

significantly. He looked down with great disgust on the

context it is noteworthy that a reviewer of the extreme

subsequent period of photography, but the main target of

right had already in 1929 criticized Sander’s Face of the Time

his criticism was the painterly style that he himself had once

as “a physiognomic document of anarchy and inferior in¬

so masterfully employed. As a convert to objective and ex¬

stincts . . . not a document of uplift, enthusiasm, let alone

act photography, he was completely blind to the merits of

essence.

the older style, and he omitted any reference to the role it

There could be no doubt that the publication of the pro¬

had played in his own work. The arguments Sander put

jected portrait atlas would not be possible under the Nazi

forward against the misguided approach of Art Photogra¬

regime. Nor could Sander depend any longer on the wide

phy are of the familiar functionalist type. The “true, original

support he had previously received in intellectual circles,

nature,” the specific “possibilities,” and the “inherent rules”

which had considerably furthered the progress of his work.

of the medium are stressed, as are the technically correct and

Many of his friends were now denounced as “degenerate

aesthetically optimal use of the camera, the integrity of the

artists” or subjected to other forms of repression. Sander

optical-chemical procedure, and the “pure light creation.”

himself could only quietly and modestly continue to enlarge

Moholy-Nagy could hardly have expressed himself in a

his archive. As a result of the adverse circumstances, most of

more orthodox manner. At one point, however, Sander’s

his work was now done secretly and in opposition to the

ideas departed from those of the avant-garde: Close-ups,

regime. Characteristically, he started a portfolio of political

extreme angles, sharp contrasts, and similar manifestations of the “inherent rules” of photography did not interest him at all. Instead of formal effects, Sander demanded “correct seeing, observation, and thinking.” This lifelong motto '' of Sander’s gives top priority to the intellectual analysis ot the subject, which throughout his portrait oeuvre indeed takes precedence over merely technical and formal virtuosity.

The Third Reich The publication of Face of the Time in 1929 and the broadcast lectures of 1931 may well have been Sander’s greatest suc¬ cesses

as

a

photographer.

With

the

National

Socialist

takeover his career clearly took a turn for the worse. The fact that he was not invited to the “pace-setting’’ 1933 Berlin photo exhibition “Die Kamera”8''1 did not in itself mean very much; Sander had usually been overlooked on similar occa¬

27

sions. But the decision in 1934 by the Government Bureau

community, ca. 1935.

Stoedtner Picture Agency, heads of the German racial and national

prisoners of National Socialism, which included a portrait of his son: in addition he gradually accumulated portraits of

28

A. Sander, view of Cologne,

1937.

persecuted Jews. Two portfolios to be called “Return to the Reich” and “The Woman as National Socialist” were planned but never executed. Male representatives of the Na¬ tional Socialist movement were assigned to the “Soldiers” portfolio. Sander made politically sensitive portraits only intermit¬ tently; he never used the camera systematically as a weapon against the regime. Instead he concentrated on less danger¬ ous subjects; for example, he began a comprehensive pho¬ tographic survey of historic Cologne. Even this project, however, exposed him to renewed suspicion. The police came into his house and confiscated various photographs, allegedly because they depicted strategically important loca¬ tions. The City of Cologne was interested in the publication of the project, but Sander refused; he later remarked that “the work had not progressed far enough” and “the political

entirely possible that a photographer of Sander’s stature

situation did not seem to be right.”82

could have given a new twist and a new meaning to a hack¬

The Cologne documentation appears to have absorbed

neyed concept. To what extent Sander managed to do so can

only a small part of Sander’s energy. His greatest and at

only be determined by a future examination and publication

times his only interest during the 1930s was the landscape

of the extant picture material.

theme he had envisioned in the broadcast lecture of 1931

In general it may be said that between 1933 and 1945

quoted above. Restricted and victimized in various ways by

Sander shared the views of many German middle-class intel¬

the new regime, he sought relief in the freedom of nature.

lectuals who noticed only the ridiculous aspects but not the

Week-long hikes in the Siebengebirge, Eifel, Westerwald,

political effectiveness of the Nazis’ exploitation of the re¬

Rhine, and Mosel regions brought him “peace and relax¬

sentments of the little man. Typical of this rather short¬

ation.” Most of the 40 photographs in the volume August

sighted attitude was Sander’s occasional recourse to public

Sander: Rheinlandschaßen83 are from this period of “inner em¬

or private expressions of irony, which undoubtedly relieved

igration.” Their predominantly romantic style indicates the

some of his frustration but otherwise led to no result. For

illusionary character of Sander’s attempted escape.

The

example, he once placed a large picture of a pig’s head in the

youthful experiences that predisposed him to his pastoral

show window of his Lindenthal studio. The local Nazi func¬

conception of nature have already been mentioned. How¬

tionaries immediately took offense and had the embarrass¬

ever, it should be kept in mind that Sander never intended to

ing portrait removed.88 In some cases Sander’s provocative

publish a book of Rhine landscapes. The title and picture

behavior caused him to be picked up by the “blue car” and

selection for this posthumous volume must be credited to

taken to the police station. Once he was even brought to

the publisher. Sander himself had envisioned both less and

trial,89 but most of the time he was clever enough to be

more. He wished to portray smaller regions, such as Eifel

content with a strategy of limited conflict and consequences,

and Siebengebirge, rather than the entire Rhineland. His

using sarcastic comments in letters as a safety valve. In 1943,

plan was for a series of small picture booklets; in fact, five

for example, he remarked: “Unfortunately my entire work

were published.84 However, these booklets were to include

is now interrupted since we are all needed in the building up

pictures of people and architecture alongside the landscapes.

of the transcontinental German Empire.”

Clearly, we find Sander embarked here on the ambitious

After the war there was no further need for ironic dis¬

“Man in the Landscape” project he had announced in the

guise; writing on January 2, 1946, Sander could speak out

1931 broadcast lecture.88 What Sander wanted to portray

without hesitation “for the honest and cooperative man, for

was the “cultural landscape” historically shaped by a partic¬

the future of the German man . . . that he may again have

ular type of people. Of course the concept of the Kulturlandschaft, to use the

that place in the sun that he truly deserves but that was taken from him by the subhumans of the Hitler band.”90

German term, was not Sander’s invention. Ever since the publishers Langewiesche introduced the “Blue Books” at the beginning of the century, countless photographically il¬

Kuchhausen

lustrated volumes have paid homage to this concept, includ¬ ing Rhineland books by W. Schaefer, W. Hermanns, W. P.

After his studio was damaged by bomb attacks in 1944 and a

John, and P. Wolff.86 The conventional motifs used here and

fire later destroyed the negative archive in the cellar of the

in contemporary Rhineland postcards appeared in Sander’s

house, Sander’s career as a commercial studio operator was

photographs as well, indicating that his flight into the land¬

finished.01 In the summer of 1943 Sander already saw the

scape often led him back over well-worn paths.87 Yet, it is

state of things without illusion: “Now my greatest con-

cern is to save my work through the coming days. ’92 He

7 volumes

managed to transport at least a few truckloads of his artisti¬

Menschen des 20. Jahrhunderts [Citizens of the Twentieth Century] offered for sub¬

cally most valuable picture material to Kuchhausen, a small

scription in 1929. Its forerunner Antlitz

village near Honnef. There, in the cramped upper story of a

der Zeit [Face of the Time] appeared 1929

farmhouse, Sander spent his last years, subsisting on a mea¬

and was confiscated 1936 [sic], i.e. the re¬

ger pension and sporadically continuing his photographic work.

maining

copies

and

the

lates

were

destroyed.

His destroyed darkroom equipment was soon replaced, although his reduced circumstances did not allow for a really

1 volume

of a Rhine Mountain] (Botanical text for

adequate work area. Kuchhausen obviously did not offer

elementary and high schools.)

optimal conditions for the completion of the great portrait project,

which still had

many large gaps.

Sander was

Die Flora eines rheinischen Berges [The Flora

20 portfolios

isolated there; he had hardly any means of transportation,

Die Stadt Köln, wie sie war, nach dem alten römischen Plan [The City of Cologne as It

and he was able to renew only a few of his old contacts and

Was according to the Old Roman Layout],

acquaintances.

sold. Will be published gradually in single

Though Sander did continue to make portraits under

volumes.

these difficult circumstances, he was often frustrated by ad¬ ditional problems. Now in his seventies, he could no longer

1 volume

Goethes bis zu unseren Tagen [Rhineland Ar¬

muster the old creative energies. Furthermore, his subject—

chitecture from the Time of Goethe to Our

German society—had changed. At the end of the National

Day]

Socialist dictatorship, not only did the cities lie in ruins; the nation’s social structure, too, had been leveled. The once

Rheinische Architekturen aus dem Zeitalter

2 volumes

Studien der Mensch [Studies of Man], the or¬

rather striking material and ideological differences had been

ganic and inorganic tools of man (for

reduced, which meant for Sander that the search for clearly

elementary and high schools). The second

articulated “types” was much more difficult. After 1945

volume is in preparation.

Sander added quite a few farmer portraits to Citizens of the Twentieth Century, but the other sections received only

1 volume

Painters of Cologne], types and reproduc¬

scarce enlargement. Publication of the compendium would

tions of their work from 1920-1933.

have been possible and meaningful, but it was not realized because Sander’s strength had diminished and because the

Kölner Maler der Gegenwart [Contemporary

Several volumes

Mensch und Landschaft [Man and Landscape]

publishers and the public of the restorative Adenauer era

including Das Siegtal, Die Leuscheid, and

wished to escape the gloomy shadows of the past.

others under the motto:

“In der Leu¬

As in the years following the First World War, Sander

scheid da wohnet ein rauhes und derbes

turned mainly to his collection of negatives. He lost himself

Volk” [In Leuscheid there lives a rough

in arranging and rearranging the old material, adding port¬

and hardy people],

folios that represented new points of view and making un¬ limited new plans. One of the things he wished to do was

1 volume

double or triple the size of Citizens of the Twentieth Century,

the Twentieth Century], With lectures by

but fortunately for that book his plans never took definite

August Sander on “Wesen und Werden

shape.93 With indomitable optimism Sander always imag¬

der Photographie von ihren Uranfängen

ined that a number of his favorite projects were on the verge

an” [Nature and Development of Photog¬

of publication, yet only one was actually published during

raphy from Its Earliest Beginnings], pre¬

his lifetime. The portrait album Deutschenspiegel appeared in

sented on the radio in 1931.

1962, the selection of the 80 pictures having been left to two editorial assistants who did not understand the significance of the material they were dealing with. Sander’s Cologne

The series of my already published landscape booklets: Die Mosel

documentation, which has not been published to the present

Das Siebengebirge

day, did bring him some financial remuneration when he

Die Eifel

sold the collection to the City of Cologne for 25,000 marks

Das bergische Land

in 1952. In the same year the photographer set down a “Pro¬

Die Saar

gram for the Progress of My Work” that provides informa¬ tion about the imposing series of projects he had in the works in the last years of his life94:

Die Werkstatt eines Photographen im 20. Jahrhundert [A Photographer’s Workshop in

The series of landscape booklets will be continued in spring, 1953.

Even though hardly any of these publications actually mate¬ rialized, Sander could console himself with the fact that he was not completely forgotten in photography.

Edward

Steichen honored him with a personal visit in 1955 and in¬ cluded some of his portraits in the Family of Man exhibition. In addition Sander was named an honorary citizen of Herdorf, the town of his birth, which also named a street after him. After his fellow photographers had ignored him or smiled at him as an outsider for decades, the German Society for Photography finally brought itself to award to him onefourth of its Kulturpreis for 1961. A few years earlier Sander had received the Bundesverdienstkreuz, a medal honoring civilian excellence. However, none of this could diminish the depression Sander struggled with after the death of his wife; he died after a heart attack on April 20, 1964.

22

3

CONCEPTUAL AND STYLISTIC ASPECTS OF THE PORTRAITS

Formulations

typewritten outline for the above-quoted subscription leaflet in which Sander states that the “forthcoming large publica¬

Although the publication of Citizens of the Twentieth Century

tion” will contain “a still finer gradation than the present

did not take place during Sander’s lifetime, we are well in¬

work” (that is, Face of the Time) and that

formed as to his intentions concerning the project. The earliest authentic formulation of the project’s general concept is found in the invitation to subscribe to Citizens of the Twentieth Century that accompanied Face of the Time in 1929 95

The arrangement in the large work is the following: I begin . . . with the farmer. As the first portfolio, the Germinal Portfolio [Stammappe] is structured according to the fol¬ lowing system:

jn this leaflet the 60 published pictures are referred to

as a “small selection from the life work . . . that Sander started in 1910 and continued to build up and differentiate for twenty years.” The invitation continues: The complete work consists of seven groups, which corre¬ spond to the existing social structure, and is to be published in about 45 portfolios, each containing twelve pictures. Sander begins with the farmer, the earthbound man, and leads the viewer through all levels and types of occupations up to representatives of the highest civilization and down again to the idiot. This enormous task, which the author set for himself and which had never even been attempted on this scale, was not approached from an expert’s point of view. Sander had no scientific aids and was not advised by race theorists or social researchers. In other words, he relied exclusively on the direct observation of human nature, ap¬ pearance, and environment; he followed his unerring in¬ stinct for the authentic and the essential, and embarked upon his mission primarily as a photographer. And he completed this mission with the fanaticism of a seeker of truth, without prejudice for or against any party, alignment, class, society.

1. The earthbound man 2. The philosopher 3. The assailant or revolutionary 4. The wise man 5-8. The woman (in the same order as 1-4) 9. The woman of advanced intellect (the intellectual woman) 10 and 11. Two couples, discipline and harmony 12. The family in generations. The entire work is divided into seven groups corresponding to the existing social order. . . ,96 Sander does not express himself unambiguously here, but evidently he meant that the arrangement of the twelve open¬ ing pictures was, as far as possible, to be repeated in the following portfolios. This would have meant that a certain variety of basic human characteristics would have recurred on different social or cultural levels.97 This assumption ap¬ pears

to

be

corroborated

by

a

surviving

handwritten

“Chronicle of the Germinal Portfolio” of 1954 in which Sander explains “where and how the portfolio came into

The portrait work that was offered for subscription with

existence, and why 1 assigned an archetypal function to the

these words was meant to depict the “existing social order”

farmer.” “The idea as such,” he notes, “reaches back into

—a goal that only appears to be clear and definite. Sander’s

my earliest youth. ... In the year 1911 in my elective

conception of Citizens of the Twentieth Century was more

homeland of Cologne I began to work on my project Citi¬

complicated and ambiguous than this formulation suggests.

zens of the Twentieth Century. The figures in the portfolio

For instance, he understood the “social order” not as a

originated within my actual Westerwald homeland. People

hierarchy of social classes or strata, as the modern reader

whose customs I had known since my youth appeared by

might expect, but as a framework of professional guilds

their close connection with Nature to be excellently suited

[Berufsstände], which is not quite the same thing. Further,

to the realization of my ideas in a germinal portfolio. Thus

he saw this professional society not as a pyramidal structure

the beginning was made, and I proceeded to subordinate all

rising from bottom to top but rather as a circular formation

later types to the archetype with all its generally human

reflecting a cultural cycle, from the “earthbound man” to

characteristics.”98

“representatives of the highest civilization” and then "back

Although Sander’s projected occupational typology is

again to the idiot”—a view closely connected to the philoso¬

largely identical with the overall portfolio arrangement, it

phy of decadence. Finally, there are indications that the pro¬

remains unclear by what means the “generally human char¬

fessional typology of Citizens of the

Century

acteristics” were to be made evident on the various social

simultaneously presents a typology of physiognomical con¬

levels. Perhaps it was intended that the same sequence of

stants of “generally human” nature. This is suggested in a

characters (“earthbound man,” “philosopher,” etc.) would

Twentieth

be repeated over and over again, with explanatory legends.

it would have been legitimate to sparingly supplement

Since no complete portfolios were published during Sand¬

Weimar portraits with earlier and later examples in order to

er’s lifetime, this point can no longer be clarified. In Face of

create a sense of historical evolution, but when certain social

the Time, however, the plan for the large portrait atlas may

groups (such as the farmers and provincial townspeople) are

be grasped in nucleo. Here it is impossible to detect any

presented primarily in such anachronistic pictures the por¬

particular emphasis on “generally human” constants; the

trait manual’s delicate system of interrelationships loses its

order and the titles of the pictures are subordinated to pro¬

balance. All in all, Sander failed to find an unequivocal con¬

fessional-social viewpoints. Also, the subscription leaflet in¬

cept for his great undertaking that would blend the various

corporated only those parts of Sander’s typewritten draft

structural systems into a whole.

that were in keeping with these viewpoints. Therefore it seems reasonable to assume that, under the influence of his publishers,

Sander eliminated the archetypal component

Art-Historical Perspectives

from his concept. This is also indicated by his radio lectures of 1931, in which references to “archetypes” and “generally

Sander’s plan to present the “existing social order” of his

human characteristics” are missing while the term “phys¬

Germany in approximately 540 portraits of social “types”

iognomy” is clearly used in a historical and social rather than

was certainly a novel project, and it appears to have re¬

characterological sense.

mained unique in art history up to the present time.101 But it

Among other things, Sander stated in his radio lectures

does not lack precedents and forerunners, and these are use¬

that “the basic thought of my photographic work Citizens of

ful to the classification and evaluation of Sander’s undertak¬

the Twentieth Century, which I began in 1910 and which

ing.

contains some 500 to 600 pictures, ... is nothing but ... an

portraits, has a particularly long tradition. In the Middle

attempt to make a physiognomical time exposure of Ger¬

Ages, emperors, popes, saints, and heroes were depicted in

man man.” This basic observation is explained as follows:

long rows of paintings on the walls of public buildings. The

Its

central concept,

the serial presentation of the

invention of the woodcut and engraving greatly facilitated Though the individual does not make contemporary his¬ tory, he does, however, shape the expression and the spirit of his time. It is possible, then, to capture and communicate in photographs the physiognomical time exposure of a whole generation. This time exposure will assume a particu¬ larly striking form if we arrange photographic types from various social groups in sequential order. Let us think, for example, of the parties in a national parliament; if we begin with the far right wing and proceed toward the far left, placing each individual according to political position, we already have a partial physiognomical portrait of the nation. Each group is divided further into subgroups, clubs, and associations, but all carry in their physiognomy the expres¬ sion of their time and the mental attitude of their group. Individuals who display these qualities in a particularly ob¬ vious manner can be called “types.” . . . The photographer is here indisputably in a position to produce a telling time exposure by his ability and his physiognomic perception."

the cyclical arrangement and the distribution of such por¬ traits. With the Renaissance, the ranks of the religious and secular aristocracy were complemented with judges, doctors, and artists. Jost Ammann’s Kunstbüchlein is one of the most important examples from the German-speaking countries.

1 02

The prestigious portrait medium was never used for the representation of the lower classes until recent times. How¬ ever, in the form of genre figures—types rather than specific persons—we find many farmers, vagrants, and artisans in¬ cluded in graphic series from the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries, for example in Callot’s famous etchings of beg¬ gars.103 As lithography and other improved reproduction techniques emerged along with a broad middle class during the nineteenth century, the production of cheap picture series was boosted once more. Next to landscapes, promi¬ nent contemporaries and curious folk types still proved to be

It is in view of this passage that Citizens of the Twentieth Century can be referred to as a social typology of German society in the 1920s,

the most popular subjects. In this highly profitable sector of the publication market,

even though that is a somewhat

photography was by no means immediately successful. Of

simplified designation. Sander did not restrict his portrait

course, the newly invented medium afforded faster and

manual within the boundaries of the concrete historical phe¬

more precise depiction of a given model than any manual

nomenon of the Weimar Republic. His cyclical conception

technique, but cheap mass production of camera images be¬

of history and his belief in “generally human” qualities led

came practical only toward the end of the century with the

to a certain separation of the picture material from definite

perfection of photomechanical reproduction methods. Be¬

historical and geographic coordinates."10 As in an indistinct

fore that, the publishers of photographic picture series were

double exposure, characteristics of a general human pan¬

faced with the dilemma of either keeping the size of their

orama appear blended into his Weimar landscape.

The

editions small or transposing each picture into another

rather broad title, Citizens of the Twentieth Century, already

medium, usually lithography, which would allow for larger

gives an indication of this. Similarly, the intended combina¬

editions.1"4 The Album of Contemporaries which the portrait

tion of the basic material of the 1920s with photographs

photographer Franz Hanfstaengl put on the market in 1861

from the Kaiser’s, Hitler’s, and Adenauer’s times does not

consisted of original pictures and was produced in such lim¬

show a strict adherence to historical boundaries. To be sure,

ited numbers that today not a single complete set can be

24

traced.11,3 Similarly small were the various editions of the Galerie Contemporaine (1870 ff.), which counted the greatest Parisian

photographers

among

its

contributors.106 The

Woodburytype used here was a mechanical process, but it did not significantly change the publisher’s high costs and limited output.

Alvin Langdon Coburn’s Men of Mark

(1913) was still made up of photogravures which were printed and tipped in by hand.11,7 A very interesting portrait series by the Berlin photographer Waldemar Titzenthaler seems not to have been published as a book at all but was presented to the public in exhibitions. We know neither the commissioner nor the purpose of the series, which portrays representatives of various occupations,

especially crafts¬

men."’’' With its emphasis on working conditions and its

29

frontal,

ca. 1870. From Galerie Contem¬

1908. From Coburn’s Men of

poraine.

Mark.

straightforward approach,

it comes remarkably

close to Sander’s portrait style. (See figures 31-34.)

E. Carjat, Alexandre Dumas,

30

A. L. Coburn, Mark Twain,

Other publications, reproduced by special techniques, were aimed from the outset at the widest possible audience. For example, German National Gallery, published in 1849 and “drawn on stone after Biow’s photographs,” could be produced by the thousands.109 Twenty years later, several Carjat photographs of Parisian middle-class types were transferred to lithography by Courbet and published with a text by Etienne Baudry under the title Le Camp des Bourgeois.1111 Henry Mayhew’s famous multivolume study London Labour and The London Poor, too, made use of photo¬ graphic illustrations which, for publication purposes, were “translated” into woodcuts.111 The nineteenth century and the early twentieth were in¬ deed marked by a boom of portrait and folk-type series which were either directly or indirectly based on photo¬ graphic images.112 Obviously we are dealing here with forerunners of Citizens of the Twentieth Century, though it is impossible to determine how many of them came to Sand¬ er’s attention. Apart from that we should not overlook the differences. For example, the above-mentioned sequences focus on occupationally or socially homogeneous groups of people. Put differently, instead of the complete social pyra¬ mid they represent only particular segments of society. However, photography had brought a new quantitative di¬ mension to picture making. Ever since Daguerre and Tal¬ bot, the compilation of a portrait atlas comprising many hundred specimens from all social levels was a definite possibility. Moreover, the great improvement of photo¬ mechanical reproduction methods around 1890 provided the means to distribute such a picture collection to the public. August Sander was the first photographer to recognize and take full advantage of these latent possibilities. To properly judge this undertaking, however, one must realize that pictorial cross-sections of complete social sys¬ tems had been attempted in European art long before Sander, though in other forms than portrait and folk-type series. After tentative beginnings during the Enlightenment and the Revolution, the comprehensive analysis of a nation’s complete social structure was first accomplished in the French caricatures and “physiognomies” of theJuste-Milieu period. These swiftly sketched, humorous scenes repre-

31-34

W. Titzenthaler, four portraits, 1898-1900.

25

sented the habits and customs of all levels of society and

35

were published in more or less systematically arranged col¬

rabble here,” 1921.

G. Grosz, “It smells of the

lections—among them the nine-volume work Les Fran^ais peints par Eux-Memes (1840-1842), which contained contri¬ butions by Daumier, Gavarni, Grandeville, and others. In Germany similarly sharp-sighted and comprehensive social inventories began appearing in Kladderadatsch, in Simplizissimus, and in other satirical magazines, but only after the political upheaval of 1918-19 did this art form rise to promi¬ nence. Grosz, Dix, Hubbuch, and Beckmann switched from painting to the graphic media—that is, to the serial form— in order to capture the many facets of the restless, antago¬ nistic postwar period.113 Full-fledged portrait types such as Grosz’s arrogant Prussian bureaucrat (figure 35) are seldom to be found in these cycles; like the French “physiog¬ nomies,” they were predominantly narrative in character.

36

Considering, though, that the entire social spectrum of the

1925.

T. T. Heine, “Republic,”

Weimar Republic, from the worker to the factory owner, from the auto racer to the rapist, is represented here with great satirical zest, it seems safe to say that Sander’s photo¬ graphic cross-section of postwar Germany owes much to this source of inspiration. The fact that Sander eagerly col¬ lected George Grosz’s picture books could be inferred even if it were not known to be the case.114 Apart from entire graphic cycles, we should note in this context a number of single prints and paintings which at¬ tempt to portray a broad range of contemporary types. Heinrich Zille’s cartoon “Berliner Koppe”115 is a simple ex¬ ample in which well-observed details from the hustle and bustle of city streets are assembled in a typological medley that seems not too far removed from Sander’s city port¬ folios. Similarly, Thomas Theodor Heine in his “Republik” caricature (figure 36) parades eight party representatives from right to left, as if to illustrate Sander’s idea of compos¬ ing the nation’s “physiognomic portrait” out of parlia¬ mentary representatives

of varying political stripes.

In

Grosz’s painting “Pillars of Society” (figure 37) the attempt is made to visualize a much more abstract subject than bus¬ tling street life or the political party system, namely the general social structure of postwar Germany. In spite of the seeming lack of “order” shown in this painting, it is still comparable in principle to Sander’s intention to delineate the “existing social order.” Whether Sander could have achieved or even formulated his goal without the stimulat¬ ing example of the contemporary German artists seems questionable.

Sander’s Technical Methods As important as it is to clarify the theoretical conception and the art-historical antecedents of Citizens of the Twentieth Century, it is even more vital to understand Sander’s practi¬ cal approach to portraiture. In other words, we need to scrutinize the photographic equipment and the posing pro¬ cedures he employed.

26

37

G. Grosz, “Pillars of Soci¬

ety,” 1926.

To begin with purely technical questions: In contrast with

Along with his prejudice in favor of things tried and true

Lerski, Stone, Hess, and other contemporary portrait pho¬

and his chronic lack of money, it appears that artistic consid¬

tographers, Sander lacked not only the financial means but

erations were decisive in this matter. Orthochromatic plates

also the mental predisposition to enthusiastically avail him¬

emphasized flaws such as skin blemishes and generally ob¬

self of the newest optical and chemical instruments. Al¬

structed a smooth, pleasing photographic style, and these

though he enjoyed experimentation, it was always the old,

drawbacks seem to have been in the best interest of Sander’s

craftsmanly, already forgotten or surpassed means that he

critical rather than flattering portrait art. The example of the

found most intriguing. (Typical of this is the note he at¬

“barman” (plate 388) underscores this observation: Sander’s

tached to a photograph of Cologne Harbor made around

initial orthochromatic portrait brought out the pockmarks

1930:

year

in the man’s face so distinctly that he protested vigorously

“Taken

with

a

hand-polished

lens

of the

1848. ”116) Thus, it is hardly surprising that the equipment in

and had to be pacified with a more merciful panchromatic

the Lindenthal studio was quite old-fashioned. Throughout

picture.119 In Face of the Time, of course, the first version was

his career Sander depended for portrait work on an aged

reproduced. Which of the portraits is more “true” can no

ariastigmatic Voigtländer lens (/6.8) and a small view cam¬

longer be determined; in any case, Sander decided for publi¬

era that required the use of a tripod.117 With this apparatus

cation purposes in favor of the more “characteristic” solu¬

an exposure took from 2 to 4 seconds. Since Sander dis¬

tion. Here as in other cases he appears to have been well

trusted the snapshot approach and preferred to give his sub¬

aware of how useful the application of supposedly outdated

jects the opportunity to consciously pose before the camera,

technical methods could be to his own special objectives.

this was more an advantage than a drawback; predictably, a

Many of Sander’s pictures were made in the home or the

sitter who must collect himself and remain motionless for a

workplace of the model. This procedure required mobility

certain time span presents to the photographer a rather cal¬

and occasionally a willingness to travel, which Sander did

culated, representative appearance. Sander’s consistent use

not lack. In his studio, Sander was adept at creating quite

of large glass negatives (8 X 12 cm to 18 X 24 cm) must

authentic and characteristic sitting arrangements with only a

have had a similar effect. When inexpensive roll film is em¬ ployed (a technique disdained by Sander), a few exposures more or less do not matter; the negative eventually chosen for reproduction is often an entirely accidental product. On the other hand, a photographer who works with expensive negative plates is apt to plan each exposure carefully. Sander seldom took more than two or three exposures per person. In some cases, several negatives from the same sitting can still be traced in Sander’s archive. It is worthwhile to study some of these cases for the light they shed on the creative process of portrait making, even though it often can no longer be determined which of the portraits Sander would have chosen for publication. This is true, for instance, of the “Jerusalem pilgrim.’’ In figure 38 the man stands in a deso¬ late field; in figure 39 he sits on some sort of farm imple¬ ment. In the first picture the homelessness of the vagabond comes out more clearly; the second seems richer in “local color.” Without sufficient legitimation, one of the photo¬

38,39

A. Sander, Jerusalem pilgrim, 1929.

40,41

A. Sander, teacher, ca. 1910.

graphs had to be eliminated from the present edition. In the case of the “schoolmaster,” whom we encounter once out¬ doors (figure 40) and once in a living room (figure 41), the editorial dilemma is avoided; Sander himself chose the first version for Face of the Time, presumably because it offers a better picture of the “outpost” situation in which this cul¬ tivated academician found himself. The list of examples could be continued further, but we shall return for the mo¬ ment to technical questions. Sander demonstrated his dogged reliance on antiquated technical methods not only by refusing to use small hand cameras and the snapshot technique; he also remained loyal to orthochromatic plates long after the more efficient pan¬ chromatic process had established itself.1' ~ Why Sander was one of the few photographers who could not be moved to adopt this innovation can be answered with some certainty.

few accessories. To save time and trouble, however, he in¬

42

creasingly resorted to the use of gray backdrops. These pro¬

1932.

A. Sander, photogram, ca.

vided an up-to-date “objective” background, but one that was also rather inexpressive. In most cases this loss of milieu did not work to the advantage of the portrait. (See plates 145, 146, 386, and 387.) Unlike his avant-garde colleagues, Sander could not mus¬ ter any enthusiasm for artificial lighting. In a letter he once commented: “I rely primarily on natural light and switch to artificial light only as a makeshift arrangement. I value one ray of daylight above any artificial light source.”120 At the same time, Sander had an antipathy against fashionably harsh black-and-white contrast, and he often repeated that “there must be no unrelieved shadows in a picture.”121 The same aversion to brilliant effects, which all too easily be¬

still demonstrated a feel for the authentic ambience; in the

come ends in themselves and detract from the actual subject,

arrangement of significant poses and the adherence of time-

is evident in Sander’s strict avoidance of extreme close-ups

tested procedures he stands in the tradition of the commer¬

and unusual angles, so overused in “functionalist” photog¬

cial studio photographer; and he shares a preference for

raphy. To place a person’s face in a conventional sense “cor¬

unretouched, “exact” photography with the most advanced

rectly” in space—that is, in the picture plane—was most

of his colleagues. There is reason to believe that Sander gave

important to him; his maxim was: “When a person is shown

much thought to the respective virtues of these three photo¬

seated in the photo, the viewer must have the feeling that he

graphic styles and that he was able to fuse them in his por¬

will not bump the ceiling if he stands up.”122 In view of

trait work in a largely deliberate and meaningful manner.

Sander’s great interest in objective visual evidence, it is only

The clearest signs of this analytical attitude can be found in

logical that he preferred the widest possible picture angle,

Sander’s 1931 radio lectures. It should also be remembered

showing the model from head to foot or at least to the knee.

that, since his days in Linz, Sander had been an increasingly

In contrast with the close-up-happy portrait photography of

active collector of old photographs and albums. With partic¬

the 1920s, Sander allowed people “to show themselves in

ular eagerness he searched for daguerreotypes, whose com¬

their own full dimensions.”123 In this way the distance be¬

positional excellence and pictorial precision delighted him.

tween model and photographer, or viewer, was maintained,

Beginning in 1926 he even attempted to make daguerreo¬

reflecting the impartial, almost scientific nature of the por¬

types himself, in spite of all the difficulties involved in the

trait collection as a whole.

preparation of the silver plates and their treatment with the

In spite of all his conservative principles, Sander did take

poisonous mercury vapor. He was hardly less enchanted

part in the movement toward straight photography, inas¬

with the albumin photographs of the 1860s and the 1870s;

much as he abandoned the “painterly” gum print in favor of

these small, early mass-produced portrait cards were per¬

sharply detailed glossy prints that were clearly recognizable

meated with the sense of self-representation that Sander

as technical products. Accordingly, he once explained: “For

aimed for in his own portraits. Sander spared no effort in

those who wish to practice photography in its modern form

order to reproduce the particular appearance of these pic¬

and thus to keep up with its chemical-optical evolution, the

tures as well, making special silver paper according to for¬

shiny silver bromide papers are the right printing materials.

gotten chemical formulas and copying old frames. The final

With them one can perfectly copy fine detail from the nega¬

products looked deceptively like “antique” photographs. In

tive which is impossible even with the best of the artistic

the long run, they proved to be an unaffordable luxury,

printing techniques, the pigment print.”124

especially since no customers could be found for them.

Sander did not stop with the adoption of these “modern” printing techniques. His still lifes, advertising photos, and

Sander was forced to abandon his experiments;125 they could not fail, however, to enrich his portrait work.

photomontages occasionally come rather close to the styl¬ istic tenets of contemporary avant-garde photography. (See figure 42.) Such experiments remained peripheral to his

The Portrait Dialogue

work, however; he could never be diverted from his conser¬ vative approach to portraits.

In the first pages of this text several exemplary pictures were

To classify Sander’s technical and stylistic principles in art-historical terms is a rather difficult proposition.

shown to illustrate Sander’s highly individual way of plac¬

He

ing his subjects and arranging scenes before his camera. Al¬

cannot be called an enthusiastic pioneer of modern, ex¬

though these “staging” principles have a lot to do with his

perimental camera work, nor did he perpetuate painterly

idiosyncratic use of technical resources, it would appear that

mannerisms, ä la Diihrkoop, or the pompous commercial

the consideration of optical and chemical factors alone is

style of the 1870s, and yet he assimilated something from all

insufficient here. As an extremely complex artistic phenom¬

ot them. As a former Art Photographer, Sander in the 1920s

enon, Sander’s stylistic approach to composition demands

28

separate treatment, even though the division of “technique”

tional studio procedures: While the average studio portrait

and “style” must always remain unsatisfying, especially in photography.

was aimed at the subtle beautification of the subject, and

Most noticeably, Sander’s posing strategy aimed at en¬

dialogue between photographer, model, and public as trans¬

thus the deception of the viewer, Sander tried to keep the

couraging his subject to project a self-image and to express

parent and candid as possible, always looking for a way to

social aspirations by means of clothing and gestures. This

introduce an element of distance, if not alienation, into this

does not mean, however, that Sander’s role was reduced to

deceptively harmonious triangle.

merely pressing the shutter release. Representative, telling portrait poses are not simply there; even an exceptionally articulate and vivacious personality does not automatically

The Demonstrative Gesture

present to the camera its most characteristic aspect.126 In each case this aspect must be newly discovered and effec¬

The didactic, distant attitude of Sander’s portrait art can be

tively “staged,” which can be done only by means of a

studied especially well in the many pictures that are narra¬

“dialogue” between the model and the photographer.127

tive in nature. Rounding out the portrait to a scene by means

For Sander the exploratory dialogue was not just a

of narrative features is, of course, an old method of avoiding

streamlined routine but a process charged with mquisitory

conventional poses, emphasizing the subject’s occupation,

curiosity and emotional intensity. During sittings measured

and generally appealing to the viewer’s imagination. For

in hours rather than minutes, Sander was able to provoke or

instance, Titian put a marble statuette in the hand of the

detect an astounding wealth of psycho-social attitudes and

antiquarian Strada, and Rembrandt’s “Master Shipbuilder”

significant physical details in his models. Every pose is the

is shown receiving a letter. Sander perfected this traditional

result of an intelligent mutual agreement; every camera an¬

technique without falling victim to the danger of carrying

gle reflects a deliberate decision. The pictures thus are sur¬

the narrative element too far. Making lively snapshots of

prisingly free of aesthetic conventions and exhibit a variety

everyday life or work situations would have been easy and

of unexpected features which call for thoughtful analysis on

tempting, but there was no place for such purely momen¬

the part of the viewer.

tary views in a portrait anthology. On the other hand, a

Sander’s portraits are “representative,” but in a com¬

gallery of monotonously posed pictures would have been no

pletely different way than the average studio product. The

better. From the aesthetic and sociological points of view it

commercial portrait photographer has hardly any time for

was desirable to include “local color” and scenic elements.

an in-depth examination of the individuality of his subject.

Sander gave some thought to this problem and found a

Rather, he relies upon standardized poses and stage props

happy compromise. While making use of narrative features,

which are “representative” only of the general tastes of the

he combined them with some sort of “alienation effect”

time, not of the particular person shown. Each of Sander’s

(as Brecht would say) in order to render the picture unsuit¬

portraits, on the other hand, is based on a thorough dialogue

able for mere vicarious experience and open it to critical

with the sitter and therefore stands for a specific social level,

evaluation.

professional activity, regional origin, or psycho-social at¬

A simple example of this procedure is offered by plate

titude. In order to distill such concrete qualities, Sander

217, in which the postman’s profession is signaled to us by

turned away from the slick studio style and developed the

his uniform, his poised pencil, and his delivery form. Sander

objective, didactic method of presentation by which his

here carried on the tradition of the Titian and Rembrandt

portraits may be instantly identified in exhibitions and

paintings just mentioned and of countless studio photo¬

anthologies. This leads to a related conclusion. In the course ot the

graphs of the nineteenth century in which the subject holds some attribute of his profession—a learned book, perhaps,

portrait dialogue, however intensive it may have been and

or a scientific instrument. In comparison with Hill’s or

however close the rapport between the two parties may

Hanfstaengl’s idyllic pictures of this genre, Sander’s clini¬

have grown, Sander always maintained a considerable de¬

cally analytic rather than decorative approach becomes

gree of critical reserve. He refused to enter into an alliance

evident.127

with his models and to lend automatic support to their social

One can learn more about this matter from plate 396. An

ambitions and self-projections.128 Owing to this disciplined

accordion player and a fiddler give a serenade in a rear court¬

approach, Sander’s camera became, in a manner of speak¬

yard—a cozy little motif worthy of a snapshot, one might

ing, the eye and agent of the general public, rather than just

say. But Sander’s picture represents more than that. It can¬

of the sitter. It recorded revealing poses which prescribed to

not be proved, but the arrangement of the three figures, the

the viewer an attitude of disinterested observation and

violin case, the hat, and the music stand can hardly have

classification rather than sympathy and admiration. In this

been altogether incidental. The musicians directly under an

respect, Sander’s approach fits ideally the purpose of the

open window and a friendly listener, the fiddler facing the

portrait atlas, which has nothing in common with a family

camera, the accordion player sitting in clearly pronounced

album but which, rather, attempts to document a differ¬

profile, and both men holding still so that a sharp negative

entiated social order. Thus we become aware of a second

may be made—all these circumstances point to a deliberate

contrast between Sander’s portrait strategy and conven¬

“staging” on the part of Sander. Evidently the opportunity

to make a candid snapshot of an actual scene did not appeal

43

to him, as it would have to Brassai, Cartier-Bresson, or

work is done,” 1855.

R. Fenton, “After the day’s

Doisneau. Sander tried to record the constitutive and typical rather than the momentary and accidental features of the event, without concern for the fact that it consequently as¬ sumed a “posed” quality. Owing to this procedure, the pic¬ ture of the musicians oscillates between narrative scene and didactic, formal portrait, thus keeping well within the scope of Sander’s great picture manual. The farmers playing cards in plate 56 would have lent themselves to snapshot treatment too, but again Sander em¬ phatically rejected this possibility. One can safely say that he did not find this group as it appears in the picture. To avoid the overlapping of figures and objects and to emphasize the

44

W. Titzenthaler, barracks in¬

terior, 1898.

table’s central position, the chairs have been pushed back. The cards are visibly held forward, the beer glasses have been freshly filled, and most of the men have unlit cigarettes in their mouths. Again, Sander has unmistakably directed the scene. Instead of “spying” on the young farmers play¬ ing cards, smoking, and drinking, he persuaded them to paradigmatically demonstrate for the benefit of the camera all the characteristics of a sociable evening of these pleasures. One looks in vain for poses showing strained gaiety or al¬

that was among the bloodiest blunders in military history

coholic fraternization, which might easily have been set up.

remains rather doubtful, however. When one reads in his¬

Rather, the photographer and his subjects cooperate in the

torical accounts about the chaotic supply situation, the hor¬

interest of factual information, thus keeping the picture

rible sanitary conditions, and the cruel waste of a whole

from being lost in anecdote or sentimentality. Once more, a

army in the trenches of Sebastopol, one cannot avoid the

delicate balance between group portrait and genre scene is

impression that Fenton’s cozy camp scenes present a mis¬

achieved.

leading picture of the war designed to appease the public

In plate 50, too, a tone of objective demonstration is re¬

back home. Figure 43 is an eloquent example of Fenton’s

tained. Whether the horses are being harnessed or unhar¬

style, which was aimed at sentimental illusion rather than

nessed and whether they are heading for the fields or

objective information.

returning from the blacksmith cannot be determined, and

In pictures of this type the decisive criterion is not

such narrative details are irrelevant to Sander’s sociological

whether the photographer has directed a scene, but how. In

point. That point is primarily expressed in simple spatial

other words, it is of little relevance that both Fenton and

juxtaposition of the farmer with riding whip and boots in

Sander produced posed portraits; more important is the dif¬

the foreground versus the stable boy with clogs and pitch-

ference between

fork in the background and that of the proud owner on the

exemplified by their photographs. Sander’s position is, in

right versus the handsome team of horses on the left. The

this regard, much closer to Waldemar Titzenthaler’s photo¬

clarification of these social and material relationships is

graphic

the main purpose of the dry, instructive image.

barracks. Titzenthaler’s didactically minute depiction of a

illusionistic and realistic scene

excursions

into

slaughterhouses,

setting

factories,

and

In the cases discussed here Sander draws consciously upon

Prussian barracks (figure 44) has obvious parallels in Citizens

didactic, demonstrative means in order to reduce the illu¬

of the Twentieth Century, although Sander would surely have

sionary aspect of the photographic images and to counteract

dealt more critically with the authoritarian aspects of this

the viewer’s tendency to react emotionally rather than ra¬

scene.

131

tionally to the visual evidence. In the 1920s this was an

Sander’s particular achievement lay in refining his didactic

unusual procedure, but it had certain historical precedents.

attitude into an almost scientific method, and this at a time

One must bear in mind that the only alternative to the more

when other leading photographers were adopting the snap¬

or less formally posed picture—the snapshot—had not be¬

shot approach and “posed” photographs were quickly going

come practical until the end of the nineteenth century. Be¬

out of style. Ultimately, Sander’s arranged photographs

fore that time the artistically ambitious photographer had

were perhaps more timely and “real” than the spectacular

had to rely upon a certain degree of stage direction. Proba¬

but often superficial snapshots of his avant-garde colleagues.

bly the most illustrious example that comes to mind in this

The virtues of Sander’s carefully posed, anti-illusionary

context is Roger Fenton, whose photographic documenta¬

portraiture can best be studied in a series of pictures that

tion of the Crimean War can bear any comparison as far as

concentrate on a significant, “demonstrative gesture” (to

careful figure arrangement is concerned.1311 That these picto¬

borrow another term from Brecht). A good example is the

rial groups can pass for adequate representations of a war

“farmer sowing” (plate 51), who is not actually sowing but

rather has stepped before the camera to demonstrate how

more of Sander’s portraits. All these scenically enhanced

seed is strewn. With this somewhat prosaic arrangement,

portraits give evidence of a calculated and, for the viewer,

aimed at the viewer’s objective instruction, Sander is able to

intelligible and verifiable

eliminate all the romantic notions traditionally associated

rapher and model. Between the two parties a procedure is

with the subject and to characterize sowing as a normal job

worked out which allows the model to bring into play his

like carpentry, bookkeeping, or cooking.

professional skills (sowing, baking, conducting, etc.) while

cooperation

between

photog¬

Sander’s “conductor” (figure 45) is conceived no differ¬

it also accommodates the photographer’s practical needs as

ently. With his lifted baton, he too demonstrates what is for

to camera placement and picture composition. The perfor¬

his profession a recurring, typical attitude. Similarly, his

mance for and the operation of the camera are thus coor¬

tuxedo and the baroque setting are intended as indications of

dinated

his particular occupation. In this place, in this suit, and in

precisely this academic, anti-illusionary procedure that was

this pose—so one may infer from Sander’s picture—the

meant by the observation above that Sander introduced an

conductor appears every evening on the podium. However,

element of objectivity and rational reserve into the decep¬

there is no sign of the orchestra or the audience. Sander

tively harmonious triangle of photographer, model, and

frankly lets the viewer know that this scene is played for his benefit alone; it is a “dry run” which yields a more concise

public. A short quotation from Brecht shows how closely Sand¬

photographic result than the less controllable concert situa¬

er’s portraits of the sower, the conductor, and the pastry

tion. While Citizens of the Twentieth Century was in the mak¬

cook correspond to Brecht’s concept of the alienation effect:

ing,

to

produce didactically

optimal

pictures.

It is

Felix Man132 perfected his technique of “candid”

“The prerequisite for producing the [alienation] effect is that

photography in dimly ht interiors, which allowed him to

the actor must accentuate what he has to show with a clear

catch (among other subjects)

Igor Stravinsky in action

demonstrative gesture. It is necessary, of course, to abandon

(figure 46). No one would deny that Man’s snapshots of

the concept of a fourth wall fictionally closing off the stage

Stravinsky are valuable, and at the time they were a sensa¬

from the audience and creating the illusion that the staged

tion, but one learns more about the conductor as a social

scene takes place in reality, in the absence of the audience.”

type from Sander’s portrait.

Apparently, Sander’s photographic staging principles come

Further examples of well-articulated “demonstrative ges¬

remarkably close in this respect to Brecht’s “epic theatre.”

tures” can be found in plates 98, 120, and 394, and in many

Brecht’s general definition of the viewer’s role, too, may be applied without reservation to Citizens of the Twentieth Cen¬ tury: “The purpose of this technique . . . [is] to give the viewer an attitude of inquiry and criticism toward the

Living Environments It is always tempting to accept photographs as they seem to present themselves, as “objective” representations of reality. Whatever it is that we see in a picture, we automatically assume the photographer simply came across it and exposed it. This belief is as erroneous as it is convenient. Upon care¬ ful examination, every photograph reveals a great many cir45

A. Sander, conductor, ca.

1922.

46

F. Man, Igor Stravinsky con¬

ducting, 1929.

cumstances under which it has come into being and a variety of measures taken by the photographer in order to “master” his subject. In the end, little remains of what at first glance had appeared so natural. Citizens of the Twentieth Century was not meant for naive viewers. It takes conscious effort to decipher the visual evi¬ dence. This is what the anti-illusionary “demonstrative ges¬ ture” aims at; it also explains why Sander took such great care in investigating characteristic living environments. The localities in Sander’s portraits can never be taken for granted; they do not fit into known picture conventions. Thus the viewer is startled; he finds himself obliged to scrutinize the evidence and reach his own conclusions. The farmer portfolios offer the best proof of this point. In the numerous related images we rarely encounter a particular location or compositional arrangement more than once or

47

A. Sander, farm girl, 1926.

48

E. Lendvai-Dircksen, farm

girl, ca. 1930.

twice. Sander constantly changes the scene, creating a vision of farm life that is not only multifaceted but sociologically novel and significant as well. Armchair, spinning room,

aware of the social rank and aspirations of these men. In¬

hearth, doorway, courtyard, stall, vegetable garden, barn

stead of timeless, mythical plowmen, they are presented to

wall, village lane, country road, field, forest—every loca¬

us as contemporaries of gentlemanly status.

tion is represented in an expressive configuration with its

However, Sander’s portraits are not completely free of

inhabitants. For Sander these locations are more than back¬

mythological elements. To realize this we need only look at

grounds; he portrays them as representative living and

plates 10, 12, and 42. These farm people must have hiked a

working environments.

certain distance, chair in hand, in order to be photographed

Next to Sander’s thorough inventory of the village world,

at the edge of a forest. Presumably, the arrangement was

the rural photographs of Lendvai-Dircksen and Retzlaff,

meant to suggest a kinship between the hardy, upright

based as they are on diffuse romantic notions, lose all credi¬

farmers and the straight, robust trees. The rocks in the back¬

bility. To attempt just one comparison: Sander’s farm girl in

ground of the earliest surviving Sander portrait (plate 18)

figure 47 has, as a matter of course, been dressed up by her

may have a similar symbolic function.

parents for a conventional souvenir picture. Unimpressed

Sander was exceptionally familiar with the farm milieu

by that preparation, the photographer pursues his own

and was further aided in its documentation by the fact that it

goals,

furniture arrangement.

possessed much local color to begin with. Thus, it is easy to

Overshadowed by the dark interior and flanked by a long-

see why the spectrum of typical localities is comparatively

legged chair and a monstrous cabinet, the little farm girl

narrow in the other divisions of his portrait manual. But

strikes us as a shy and lost creature. This child, we can

there, too, we can observe Sander’s tendency to represent

gather from Sander’s arrangement, lives in a stark world of

every social group in its own unique environment. The self-

grownups that exhibits no trace of the merry folklore com¬

satisfied small-town middle-class existence, for example,

especially

in

the

curious

monly associated with the rural sphere. In comparison with

appears demarcated by breakfast table, mantelpiece, lace

such a penetrating study, Lendvai-Dircksen’s overly charm¬

curtain, espalier fruit tree, and church doorway. The outsid¬

ing and innocent village girl in her traditional folk costume

ers of society are shown in front of closed gates and on street

(figure 48) can only be considered a sentimental fiction. Had

corners, bridges, river escarpments and flat land far from

Sander chosen a similarly narrow frame, thereby eliminat¬

any habitation.

ing the large piece's of furniture, he would have achieved a

The more examples one studies, the clearer becomes Sand¬

more conventionally pretty picture. Rather than make such

er’s tendency to lift people out of purely private environ¬

concessions to popular taste, he preferred compositions that

ments and to define them in terms of their appearance in

tended to be unusual, trenchant and—as figure 47 demon¬

more or less public places. This is certainly unusual, since

strates—not always easy to read. In much the same way, the

private family pictures are a portrait photographer’s stock in

inclusion of the rough brick wall in plate 72 makes the

trade. This is not to say that Sander excluded portraits of a

viewer aware of the couple’s poor living conditions and low

private nature from his picture atlas; on the contrary, his

social status. Another picture shows three formally dressed

commercial archive, which contained many photos of this

farmers on a harrow in the middle of an open field. Why

type, was a major source for many of the portfolios. How¬

they are there remains a mystery. In any case, we are con¬

ever, even in the earliest Westerwald portraits, and more

fronted with a striking discrepancy between their Sunday-

noticeably in the 1920s, Sander developed a new portrait

best clothes and their everyday work. Quite clearly, the

form in which the subject appears not as his family knows

ragged work pants and patched jackets we would expect to

him but rather as anyone might meet him on the street, at

find in such a situation are withheld in order to make us

work, or in some other generally accessible place. In the

32

cases of the farmers, the vagabonds, and the circus people,

family business run by husband and wife under a certain

the validity of this statement may be questioned, since a

division of labor; in his dark suit, the man appears to be in

clear demarcation between private and public or profes¬

charge of the official side of the business, i.e., reception and

sional life hardly exists for them. That objection does not

bar service, while his wife, in her wrinkled work dress,

apply to the middle-class portraits, however, and several of

evidently takes care of the kitchen and room service. To¬

these will serve to demonstrate Sander’s growing preference

gether, these three pictures provide a remarkably concrete

for the public sphere. The Cologne notary, for example, is

view

shown not in his study or living room but in front of his

Significantly for Sander, this environment is defined in

house, and in outdoor clothing (plate 228). The elegant

terms of both its material and its social structure. Above all,

stairway and the doberman also transfer the picture’s em¬

however, it is a professional milieu: Not only is the hotelier

phasis from personal aspects to those of rank and prestige.

shown outside his living quarters,

Sander portrays the notary not as a private individual but

teacher, and the student; he is also shown in his work clothes

rather as a typical representative of the privileged classes. As

and his place of work. Here Sander’s tendency to transpose

of

the

environment

of

a

German

innkeeper.

like the notary,

the

a result, the portrait seems unsuited for a family album;

people out of the familiar and into the social sphere arrives at

most likely it was intended from the outset for Sander’s

its clearest expression.

social inventory. The same change of purpose is signaled by many other pictures—take for example the promenading “businessman” (plate 285), the “delegate of the German

The Professional Portrait

Democratic Party,” with his emphatically elevated umbrella (plate 297), the “student teacher” (plate 271), with his dog

Portraits of people in their work clothes and their work¬

and his hiking clothes, or the “high school graduate” (plate

places are not at all unusual for Sander; in fact, these “pro¬

379), whose flawless, stylish attire designates her as a pro¬

fessional portraits” are his favorite and most characteristic

tected, well-bred product of the middle class. In all these

picture form. Many of his best-known portraits are among

images Sander focuses on how a person appears on the

them. In plate 120, the hod carrier’s load of bricks and his

street, in public, in his or her most socially relevant role.

defiant attitude emphasize that he is a member of the “work¬

Another interesting insight into Sander’s methodical doc¬

ing class,” not only a private person. The pastry chef in plate

umentation of social rather than private living environments

98 (the brother of the innkeeper discussed above) is also seen

is offered by a series of three portraits of the same person, a

practicing his profession, as indicated by his white uniform,

Cologne innkeeper. In figures 49 and 50 the man is pre¬

the spoon and pot in his hands, and the large kitchen space

sented in two different locations,

corresponding to the

around him; this man’s pose and attitude betoken pride in

twofold nature of his occupation: once in front of the door¬

his occupation as well as in his workplace, which is still his

way and once at the bar. In both cases Sander tries for a

private property.

significant visual configuration of proprietor and property.

The somewhat forlorn but industrious stenotypist in plate

In figure 51 we see the innkeeper together with his wife, but

192 occupies a workplace that is clearly not owned by her.

the title “Herr Wirt und Frau Wirtin”134 (i.e., “Mr. and

Sander has diligently included in this picture objects (the

Mrs. Innkeeper”) suggests that no digression into the pri¬

typewriter, the rubber stamp and stamp pad, the blotter, the

vate sphere is intended, only that Sander’s interest shifts

desk lamp, the fire extinguisher, and the electrical fuses) that

from the material “topography” of innkeeping to its social

give a well-rounded impression of this woman’s highly

aspects. More precise, Sander demonstrates that the inn is a

rationalized and hopelessly prosaic office life.

49

A. Sander, innkeeper, ca.

1930. 50

A. Sander, innkeeper, ca.

1930. 51

A. Sander, innkeepers, ca.

1930.

52

Quite in contrast with the timid typist is the Cologne

O. Dix, “The Doctor,”

1921.

attorney in plate 229. Not only filling but overflowing his judicial robes, and sitting casually on his paper-covered desk, he demonstrates sovereign mastery over his profes¬ sional responsibilities. This obviously successful attorney will never be a prisoner of the narrow occupational limits that are drawn around a hod carrier or a stenotypist. Sander recognized his subjects’ occupations as the princi¬ pal agent determining their human identities; consequently, it was the classification by professions that provided the dominant (though not the only) principle for the organiza¬ tion of the portfolios. It appears that Sander did not develop the “professional

53

portrait” form without external suggestion. To be sure, the

H. Davringhausen, “The

Profiteer,” 1920.

above-mentioned graphic and photographic genre series of the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries had included only itinerant trades. The members of the upper classes, on the contrary, had always liked to have themselves represented with professional attributes, but not actually in their workplaces or in the act of performing their work. It appears that this changed only in the twentieth century— specifically in German painting of the 1920s, in which “oc¬ cupational roles” were often treated. For example, there is a painting by Otto Dix which depicts a particular person (a Dr. Koch) but which is known by the general title “The

and Davringhausen, and Franz Seiwert certainly kept him

Doctor” (figure 52). Rather than at home, the doctor is

abreast of the newest developments in German art. Further¬

represented in his office, surrounded by the most modern

more, “The Profiteer” and “The Doctor” date from 1921,

technical instruments, which look somewhat frightening

and

and which, incidentally, identify him as a gynecologist. He

around 1924. It is quite possible, then, that Sander was in¬

wears a white coat with rolled-up sleeves, and he holds a

fluenced by contemporary painting. However, the painters

hypodermic syringe in his hand. Everything adds up to a

were interested in newly emerged professional roles, while

precise portrayal of his professional role, the role of the

Sander coveted those of a traditional if not obsolescent

modern doctor-engineer. This painting would be as out of

nature.136

Sander’s

earliest

professional

portraits

were

made

place in a living room as many Sander photographs would be in a family album. The intended audience in both cases is the general public. Also relevant in this context is Kate

Style and Standard

Hoch’s “Portrait E.M.”13:i Whoever the initials may stand for, it is clear that dull office life is his fate. Telephone,

We have attempted to describe constant elements in Sander’s

typewriter, lamp,

and bare walls reveal that he is not

portraits, and have subsumed these elements under the con¬

situated in a cozy private environment but rather at work,

venient label “portrait style.” We must take into considera¬

probably in some kind ofjournalisticjob. A third example is

tion, however, that the concept of “style” may be applied to

provided by Heinrich Davringhausen’s “Profiteer” (figure

the photographic medium only with reservations. In art his¬

53). Occupying a bleak cubical room in some tall office

tory one speaks of “style” when certain paintings or sculp¬

building and surrounded by desk, telephone, and safe, he is

tures share common characteristics which may be traced

ready for the big financial coup. The form of Davring¬

back to the artist or his personal background. Of course this

hausen’s picture is that of the portrait, but instead of a par¬

concept of style may be carried over into photography, but

ticular person we are obviously confronted with the epitome

it is insufficient to cover all the visual characteristics on the

of a social type.

basis of which a number of pictures are combined into a

The above three examples demonstrate that German por¬

related, more or less homogeneous group. The photog¬

trait painting of the 1920s did not confine itself to the repre¬

rapher relies upon sophisticated technical tools and pro¬

sentation of private persons but increasingly took an interest

cesses, which leave their own imprint on the resulting pic¬

in the role played by the individual in a semi-public, profes¬

tures. It must be expected, then, that many similarities

sional milieu. After all, it is this role in which one faces

between photographs depend not so much upon the artist,

society and which determines what desirable or undesirable

or the place, time, and school influencing the artist, as upon

actions one’s fellow men may expect from one. Whether

his technical equipment.

Sander knew these or similar paintings cannot be proved

by these latter factors, “norm” or “standard” seem to be a

beyond doubt, but he was personally acquainted with Dix

better designation than “style.” Even so, the photographer

34

For formal affinities produced

possesses considerable freedom in the arrang ment of the

able he became to make portrait excursions, the more he

objects, the lighting, and the choice among various technical

indulged his predilection for combing the accumulated

methods; in other words, he is certainly capable of tran¬

negatives, discovering hidden relationships, and composing

scending the purely technical, automatic character of pho¬

picture sequences according to various points of view. His

tography. A prime example for the full use of this freedom

accomplished printing technique permitted him to add spe¬

is Lerski, who evolved a highly personal “style.” Even in

cial emphasis to such visual relationships, that is, to produce

his work, however, one can sense the influence of “stan¬

“standardized” print series tailored for comparison. Occa¬

dardizing” technical factors of a kind unknown in painting.

sionally such work led beyond the boundaries of his great

Like every other photographer, Sander had to find a path

portrait project. For example, he searched for years through

between style and standard, and here again he arrived at his

his archive for portraits with characteristic eyes, hands, and

own unspectacular but functional solution. By exercising

other details suited for enlargement. Isolated from their

self-discipline wherever the technical process offered him

original context, such close-ups assumed new significance.

creative options, being content with a few simple (some¬

A farmer’s hands were placed alongside those of a crafts¬

times stereotyped) patterns of composition, and denying

man, and the eyes of a sculptor next to those of a student.

himself a brilliant personal manner, he produced the impres¬

Together with freshly made exposures, these archival trea¬

sion that his pictures were meant much more as visual data

sures formed the basis of an evidently fragmentary portfolio

than as art works. Instead of camouflaging the technically

on the “organic and inorganic tools of man.”139

standardized character of his pictures, Sander consciously

Had Sander been able to publish his great portrait manual,

accentuated it, thus reinforcing the “objectivity” of the por¬

the standardization of the picture material by means of spe¬

trait atlas and facilitating comparisons between the images.

cial printing techniques would have been a major prepara¬

Too much deviation from the average form, too many arbi¬

tory step. That this step was never taken means, among

trary or accidental elements, too much personal “style”

other things, that the present publication is deprived of one

would have made these photographs unsuitable for depend¬

significant dimension of Sander’s photographic art. Perhaps

able comparison. Of course we are not dealing here with

it will be possible in the future to reconstruct his printing

pure scientific measurement, but we are also far from pure

habits on the basis of portrait series now preserved in inac¬

artistic interpretation; in a way peculiar to the photographic

cessible private collections. At this point a single, somewhat

medium, Sander’s portraits are a product of both factors.

curious example must suffice. Although it is not apparent

Further considerations along this line are raised by Sand¬

at first glance, the double portrait in plate 26 is no ho¬

er’s printing methods. Whenever an exposure was made and

mogeneous image but rather a pastiche produced in the

however it has turned out, in the darkroom a photog¬

darkroom. Various details offer proof that the two farm

rapher has a limited opportunity to make corrections and

children are standing in the same doorway and therefore

modifications. This possibility assumed special significance

must have been exposed successively on two separate nega¬

in Sander’s project. Made at different times, in many differ¬

tives. In the process of enlargement, though, the actually

ent places, and under changing and often highly unfavorable

younger and smaller girl grew out of proportion so that she

conditions, his portraits were bound to exhibit a wide range

appears to be larger (or a bit nearer to the viewer) than her

of formal variation. In fact, we may assume that the pictures

older brother. Whether or not this montage experiment was

often differed more in composition and conception than

intended to deceive the viewer must remain in question. In

Sander could find to his liking while trying to arrange them

any case, here Sander used the printing process to bring two

in coherent sequences. As has already been suggested, he did

different negatives into the closest possible relationship and

try to achieve a certain formal uniformity and stylistic aus¬

thereby to make it impossible for us not to make a compari¬

terity in his photographs; however, the standardizing im¬

son. Thus he proved once more his great talent of loosening

pact of these measures was limited by his avoidance of a

up routine procedures for creative purposes. To most pho¬

rigid, automatically repeated portrait procedure.137 Since it was neither practical nor advisable for Sander to

tographers darkroom work is nothing but a mindless chore; in Sander’s hands it was refined into a scientific method.

aim at strict uniformity in the making ot his exposures, the printing phase became even more important for the pur¬ pose of formal compensation and standardization. In the darkroom, quite heterogeneous picture material could be brought to a common denominator by means of caretul cropping, enlarging, lighting, and so on. A small full-hgure portrait lost in a wide space could be enlarged to become a companion piece for the close-up of a half-figure filling the entire negative, or a negative made in brilliant sunlight could be processed so as to yield prints showing the diffuse light usually found in Sander’s work.1 w It is well known that Sander invested much time and care in such printing activities. The older he grew and the less

54,55

A. Sander, examples from “Organic and Inorganic Tools ot

Man,” ca. 1953.

4

THE PORTFOLIO ARRANGEMENT

The Farmer “Germinal Portfolio”

“Like a Mosaic”

Group 1 Sander’s artistic work did not end with the stylistic compo¬ sition of the photographic portraits. In order to make the “existing social order” visible, the picture material had to be accumulated and arranged according to a well-thought-out system. Years before the Cologne Art League exhibit of 1927, Sander decided upon a broadly differentiated arrangement of seven sections and 45 portfolios, each containing twelve images. Whereas most other photographers of the 1920s

M. 1

The Young Farmer

M. 2

The Farm Child and the Mother

M. 3

The Farmer (his Life and Works)

M. 4

The Farmer and the Machine

M. 5

The Gentleman Farmer

M. 6

The Small-Town People

M. 6a

Sport

M. 6b

The Farmer of the Second Half of the Twentieth Century

concentrated only on creating impressive individual pic¬ tures, Sander based everything on the fact that photographs

The Craftsman

could be reproduced in large numbers, in “standardized”

Group 2

form, and in sequential combinations, with each individual image consequently acquiring a whole new dimension of

M. 7 and 7a The Master Craftsman

meaning. In dozens of carefully arranged portfolios, Sand¬

M. 7b

The Industrialist

er’s portraits make us aware of social conditions and rela¬

M. 8

The Worker (His Life and Work)

tionships that even the greatest single images could never

M. 9

Worker Types (Physical and Intellectual)

suggest.

M. 10

The Technician and Inventor

Especially in comparison with his avant-garde colleagues, who talked so much about the “proper” use and the unex¬

The Woman

plored “possibilities” of photography, Sander was excep¬

Group 3

tional.

Without intention,

he may have been a better

“functionalist” than any of them. This is not to say, how¬ ever, that he applied the principle of sequence naively; on the contrary, he utilized it with careful consideration, as can be gathered in a letter of 1951: “A successful photo is only a preliminary step toward the intelligent use of photography. . . . I would very much like to show my work again, but I cannot show it in a single photo, nor in two or three; after all, they could as well be snapshots. Photography is like a

M. 11

The Husband and the Wife

M. 12

The Woman and the Child

M. 13

The Family

M. 14

The Elegant Woman

M. 15

The

The Woman as Domestic

M. 15b

The Woman as National Socialist

1924, which along with various handwritten additions may be considered as the authentic “ground plan” of the large portrait atlas.141 The draft reads as follows (later handwrit¬ ten additions are given in italics):

and

The Professions Group 4

of the Time.”140

shown by a typewritten draft, probably set down around

Intellectual

Occupations

masse. That is the way I used photography in my work Face

How Sander intended to arrange his picture material is

in

M. 15a

mosaic that becomes a synthesis only when it is presented en

The Original Arrangement

Woman

M. 16

The Student

M. 17

The Scholar

M. 18

The Official

M. 19

The Doctor and Pharmacist

M. 20

The Judge and Lawyer

M. 21

The Soldier and National Socialist

M. 22

The Aristocrat

M. 23

The Clergyman

M. 24

The Teacher and Pedagogue

M. 25

The Businessman

M. 26

The Politician

M. 26a

The Family

Practical

The Artist

He did not construct a pyramidal gradation from “poor" to

Group 5

“rich”; instead he attempted to demonstrate that society

M. 27

The Writer

M. 28

The Actor

M. 29a

The Architect

M. 29

The Sculptor

M. 30

The Painter

M. 31

The Composer

M. 32

The Musician

M. 32a

The Art Historian

The Metropolis Group 6

represents a circular formation of historically ascending and descending social groups,142 that is, a simultaneous fusion of subsequent steps in the course of civilization. According to this model, agriculture is the earliest form of civilization and supplies the roots and vital resources for all further cultural development; the highly industrialized metropolis, the latest product of the evolutionary process, suffers from over¬ refinement and decadence. In a newspaper review of Sander’s Cologne exhibition of 1927 we find this cyclical model of civilization precisely described by Paul Bourfeind, a local journalist and politi¬ cian. Since it appears that Bourfeind did not read his own ideas into the pictures but rather relied upon explanations by

M. 33a

Vagrants

the photographer, who was his personal friend, his review

M. 33

The Street (Hustle and Bustle)

deserves to be quoted extensively:

M. 34

Good and Bad Architecture

M. 35

Celebrations

M. 36

City Youth

M. 37

Traffic

M. 38

Servants

M. 39

Metropolitan Types and Characters

AT 39a

Return to the Reich

Rural natural man is the source of life for the bustling me¬ tropolis; the oversupply of unbroken vitality flees from the country into the cities. To the extent that man removes himself from nature he becomes more complicated and uses himself up. Two or three generations are enough to reveal this process of decay. This transformation is surprisingly shown by the progression of Sander’s pictures. There before the viewer stand pictures of the farmer with an inner firmness almost unknown to the city dweller. In spite of all internal and external restraint imposed by nature on these faces, we find in them first signs of that mental openness that, passed on to later generations as a fateful legacy, will develop under city conditions into a one-sided specialization foreign to nature. This brings about the decay which is after all shown to be only a necessary result of the high develop¬ ment that we so highly prize. Thus the tragedy of human existence becomes apparent. Out of rural restriction grows, over various stages, urban lack of restraint. Out of the unity of the individual, his family, and his environment proceeds the breakdown of all classes in an uprooted society. Whether it is the worker or the author, the woman or the politician whose physical likeness we see, the great human tragedy appears before us with inexorable love of truth resulting from the simplicity of the medium. Does the way lead to the stage in which we find those in the seventh group, “The Last People”? Is the idiot, with his instinctive vitality geared only to self-preservation, the final result? Should humanity after its detour away from nature again return to her so confined?143

AT 39b

Radio

AT 39c

Political Prisoners of the National Socialists

The Last People Group 7 M. 40

The Idiots, Sick, Insane and Matter

Why this arrangement could not be strictly adhered to in the present publication remains to be explained in a later chap¬ ter. For the moment we will focus on the question of how this arrangement is to be read, what concept of the existing social order it reflects. Such a “reading” is by no means a simple matter. At first glance Sander’s portfolio grouping appears rather unsystematic,

and closer examination reveals very het¬

erogeneous elements. The system appears most understand¬ able if one reduces it to three different structural principles, which do not always seem to be clearly and logically in¬ terlocked. Upon thorough analysis, Sander’s arrangement reflects the assumption that history follows a cyclical pat¬ tern, that society is made up of a guild hierarchy, and that the world of work and the private world are distinct.

In

these

words

Bourfeind

certainly paraphrased

Sand¬

er’s central idea for the portfolio arrangement correctly. Whether the picture material contained in the portfolios sup¬ ports every point of this central idea, however, is another matter. On the contrary, Sander’s “vagrants”—vagabonds

The Cycle of Civilization

and beggars—hardly appear to be infected by decadence; rather, Sander gave them a heroic aspect. Also, the higher

Sander’s idea that society proceeds from the “earthbound

classes who make up the major portion of the city dwellers

man” upward through all classes and walks of hie to “the

make a much less “broken” or “uprooted” impression than

representatives of the highest civilization" and then descends

one might expect given the theory.

“back again to the idiot” indicates clearly that, in contrast

It must be taken into consideration, however, that Sander

with currently accepted theories, Sander did not consider

may have detected “decadence” in many cases where to¬

income or wealth to be the main standard lor social status.

day’s audience would not suspect anything of the kind. The

obvious contrast between the self-confident, voluminous

which in the nineteenth century formed a reservoir from

father and the slight, awkward sons in plate 179, for ex¬

which the proletariat originated. Finally, the proletariat’s

ample, once led him to comment: “The degeneration is ex¬

overflow gave rise to an army of vagabonds, part of which

pressed here especially strongly.”144 This isolated example

flooded the countryside and another part of which was

should not be overemphasized, though. Generally speaking

forced back into the “squalid slums of the great industrial

Sander had a high opinion of “youth.” He made a conscious

cities,” which were a breeding ground for “pauperism and

effort to present the emerging generation along with the

crime.” There the pattern of overpopulation was broken by

established one in each of the various social groups. “In my

the interference of “depressive measures: vice, hunger and

work the young generation, too, should find itself repre¬

misery.

>>149

sented,” he proclaimed, and accordingly he set side by side

It is not being claimed here that Sander was familiar with

the farmer and the young farm boys, the master and the

Hansen’s treatise. It and similar decadence theories had long

apprentice, the teacher and the pupil, the professor and the

since become common knowledge by the 1920s; they may

student, the pastor and the confirmand, the parent and

have come to Sander’s attention in various indirect ways.13"

the child.143 This respect for the “new” generation—this be¬

In any case, the congruity between Hansen’s view of society

lief in constant rejuvenation and, therefore, in the future of

and the arrangement of Citizens of the Twentieth Century is

society—again does not seem to fit into the decadence

obvious. Both assume a historical succession rather than a

theory that Sander developed at the same time.

merely simultaneous existence of social groups. Both con¬

On several points, then, the portrait compendium reveals

ceive of the peasantry as the permanent foundation, the in¬

inconsistencies, which should not be disguised for the sake

exhaustible energy source of society. And in both cases, two

of “artistic unity.” One must accept the fact that the in¬

further levels of population are distinguished, namely the

tended philosophical arrangement of Sander’s picture mate¬

middle class and workers. The only incongruity lies in the

rial and its visual content are partly contradictory. The

fact that Sander placed the workers before rather than after

“intelligent utilization” of the portraits presented Sander

the middle class as Hansen had postulated. Two things seem

with problems which he was only partly able to solve with

to be responsible for this peculiar reversal. First, Sander had

the help of attractive but not necessarily applicable theoret¬

only hazy ideas of the proletarian class; he believed he could

ical concepts. The philosophical and historical roots of these

legitimately combine it with the craftsmen, who actually

concepts will be explored in the following pages.

were historical forerunners of the middle class. Second, it was important to Sander to show that physical work was inferior to mental work, and in order to clarify this differ¬

The Philosophy of Decadence

ence in rank (which was also emphasized by Hansen) he placed the hierarchical order ahead of the cyclical. A further

The concept of decadence recurs frequently in the philo¬

instance of agreement between Sander and Hansen is the

sophical writings of the 1920s; in fact, by that time it had

fiction of a historically last and qualitatively lowest popula¬

become a commonplace, indiscriminately applied by a great

tion group including those called “vagrants” and “met¬

variety of conservative authors.146 Georg Hansen was re¬

ropolitan characters” in the portrait compendium and “the

sponsible for a pioneering effort in this field, which was at

physically weak, the mentally inferior” in Hansen’s treatise.

first sociologically oriented. In an 1889 book called The

There is no doubt what ideological position Sander took

Three Levels of Population he undertook to trace the “causes

up with his acceptance of the cyclical view of society. Ac¬

for the flowering and aging of peoples” on the basis of his¬

cording to Hansen’s blunt explanation, the ostracism of the

torical and statistical data.147

outcasts and the creation of slums was necessary for the

Hansen’s point of departure was the theory, current in his

“harmony” of the three principal classes and the well-being

time, that society was divided into three major groups: the

of society. In other words, the society as a whole passed on

“landowners,” from the farmer to the aristocrat; the “mid¬

its “living expenses” to the disadvantaged, but it did not

dle class,” from the craftsman to the professor; and the

have to feel guilty about this; those who had to pay the bill

“class of the propertyless worker and proletarian.” The

were themselves to blame, because they lacked the “neces¬

common opinion that these three segments of the popula¬

sary character traits.” It is not very difficult to detect in this

tion existed “independently side by side in the nation” was

theory an expression of the interests of particular social

countered by Hansen with the theory that the “three classes

groups. With the call for harmony, the middle class at large

do not exist side by side but rather represent different levels

was defending its property and its privileges against attacks

of development of the same population.”14* In particular,

from below. The charge of decadence seems to reflect the

Hansen added that the landowners constituted the first class

concerns of the industrialists who did not wish to be respon¬

to become skilled and the only “lasting” class. Made up of

sible for the results of their economic conduct. All in all, it

healthy, vigorous people, it produced an “oversupply of

can be said that Hansen’s scientifically disguised philoso¬

labor,” which was at first absorbed by the medieval monas¬

phy of decadence attempted to provide a shield of self-

teries but later led to the emergence of the middle class in the

justification for the propertied classes.

cities. The middle class also caused a surplus, which during

Oswald Spengler’s later adaptation of these philosophical

the Renaissance overflowed into the mercenary armies and

tenets is also relevant here.13' Sander was a passionate reader

of all kinds of theoretical writings. (Except for Goethe, he

Here again the arrangement of the portfolios does not

did not bother with novels and poetry.) In view of the great

fully harmonize with their contents. For the sake of a ro¬

prominence of Spengler’s Decline of the West in the 1920s, it

mantic theory, Sander divides some things that belong to¬

is not surprising that Sander familiarized himself thoroughly

gether and combines others that have nothing in common.

with this voluminous study.152 According to Spengler, the

It appears that, at least in certain areas, an arrangment ac¬

“village” and the “metropolis” marked the two poles be¬

cording to social classes would have been more appropriate

tween which the process of civilization took place. “The

than the guild rubrication. On the other hand, it should not

peasant is the eternal man. . . . The village stands outside

be overlooked that the class or rank system generally ac¬

history. . . . The peasant’s dwelling is . . . the prerequisite

cepted

for every culture.” This persuasive retrospective on the

manifold gradations in the social structure; basically it is

roots of civilization is complemented by an equally eloquent

restricted to a handful of primary and secondary subdivi¬

anticipation of its grandiose end: “The colossal stone met¬

sions (upper, middle, lower, upper middle, middle middle,

ropolis terminates the life span of every great culture. Spiri¬

lower middle, and so on) which are much too closely tied to

tually formed by the land, civilized man is seized by his own

quantitative, material criteria. In contrast, Sander’s “func¬

creation, the city. It possesses him, makes him into its crea¬

tional” model is relatively fine-grained. With all its old-

ture, its executive organ, and finally its victim.” A decisive

fashioned trappings, it still lays out a magnificent catalog

factor in this process is the supposed “sterility” of civilized

of professional, cultural, and psychological roles, and there¬

man: “The last man of the metropolis no longer wants to

fore it must be taken more seriously than many statistical

today

allows

only

a

rough

accounting

of the

live; more precisely, he may strive for survival as an individ¬

compilations—aside from the great advantage of its visual

ual but not as a type, as an aggregate, because in this collec¬

descriptiveness.

tive body the fear of death is extinguished. . . . Thus the

Sander’s romantic guild arrangement presents still an¬

history of the city comes to an end. Growing from primitive

other difficulty: If indeed twentieth-century society con¬

barter place into culture-city and finally to metropolis, it

tinues to consist of a solid, respectable guild structure of

sacrifices the blood and soul of its creator to this magnificent

medieval origin, how can this assumption be reconciled

evolution and its final flower, the spirit of civilization, and

with the simultanous postulate of an unstable society com¬

thereby at last destroys itself as well.”153

posed of cyclically ascending and declining groups which

It appears that Sander did not read The Decline of the West

include many disreputable elements? The contradiction is

in vain. He too saw the “eternal man” rooted in the land and

only superficially resolved by construing a complete guild

the “last man” wasting away in the urban hospitals.

hierarchy in groups 1-5 and creating a reservoir of decadent, asocial types in groups 6 and 7. This inorganic, artificial juxtaposition lacks plausibility and casts serious doubt on both the cyclical and the professional theory. Something

The Hierarchy of Occupations

must be wrong with the guild order if so much disorder exists right beside it. And as to the decadent phase of the

Sander’s arrangement of the portfolios was guided by still

civilizational cycle, one wonders whether the misery of the

another concept: that society was made up of professional

disinherited is not the prerequisite, the constantly exacted

organizations or guilds. Here again he found himself in op¬

price for the general prosperity, rather than a subsequent

position to the modern division of classes or social strata

development.

according to the quantitative distribution of income and

whether a person’s relegation to the “decadent,” disin¬

property. How high or low a given occupation ranked on

herited groups of society is a matter of natural necessity, as

Furthermore,

it

remains

to

be

proved

Sander’s scale was determined by ancient traditions which

Sander assumes, or whether it is not rather determined by

dated back to the medieval “estate” and “guild” system and

human ostracism, as might be suggested from a sociological

often contradicted the actual division of wealth and power

point of view.

in modern society.154 For example, in purely sociological

However that may be, it is precisely because the homeless

terms Germany’s rural population consisted of proletarian

and the disenfranchised are so abruptly added onto Sander’s

tenant farmers, independent middle-class farmers, and aris¬

guild hierarchy that they create a formidable counterbalance

tocratic estate owners. In the guild arrangement of Citizens

to the established society. Do these often very vigorous

of the Twentieth Century, however, they are all lumped

characters really represent sickness and decline, or should

together into a single social group. In the next section

they be understood as harbingers of an alternative culture?

Sander assembled under the ambiguous designation “the

From a modern point of view the latter interpretation ap¬

craftsman” (“der Handwerker”) a second, even less unified

pears more convincing than the first. Sander himself took a

“estate,” which ranges from the factory worker to the in¬

somewhat ambiguous position. To be sure, as a philosopher

dustrialist. While groups 1 and 2 thus combine social groups

he was quick to assign the stigma of “decadence” to many

with very different incomes and living conditions, groups 4

contemporaries; however, as an only marginally integrated

and 5 tabulate dozens of professions that, almost without

artist and a “Wandervogel” seeking to escape the stuffy air

exception, are filled by members of the socially homoge¬

of middle-class culture, he had a great deal of sympathy for

neous middle class.

social dropouts on an individual basis.153

The Guild Ideology

Brauweiler’s rhetorical efforts are nothing but a pompous disguise for the simple desire of management that the

Sander's belief in guilds as the principal building blocks of society could easily be misinterpreted as a personal whim, but it was more than that. It echoed a widely circulated concept of the “ideal state” which was especially dear to those contemporary groups who were dissatisfied with the existing German state.

The main characteristics of the

Weimar Republic—democracy and party rule—seem much more a matter of course today than they did 50 years ago. At that time many serious people felt that it would be both desirable and possible to reorganize the fledgling democratic government along the lines of a professional or guild hierar¬ chy. The impulse in this direction was so strong that the Weimar constitution provided for the establishment of a Reichswirtschaftsrat (Federal Business Council)—an advi¬ sory forum of professional associations.156 Naturally, the ideal of government by guilds was a rather vague and ambiguous one. That is to say, the representa¬ tives of the various political and economic groups made it subservient to a variety of material and ideological interests. In relevant writings several of these conflicting positions can be identified. For example, the entrepreneurs, from estate farmers to industrialists, welcomed the guild ideal as a suit¬ able vehicle for propaganda to dissuade rural and industrial workers from the Marxist goal of class struggle. The fol¬ lowing statement-by Hans Brauweiler, one of the exponents of this interest group, is typical. The most unfortunate effect of Marxist teachings is this: Every unbiased worker, as long as he has not been “enlight¬ ened,” views and values the working process as a coopera¬ tive relationship between employer and employee. The socialistic doctrine, however, injects a social conflict into this relationship, which then culminates in the devastating principle of class pitted against class—capital against labor. As a result the worker loses a great deal of respect for his own work and the majority of workers are deprived of all inner attachment to their occupation. The comradeship and the community spirit that dominated the guilds are thus extinguished. Consequently, Brauweiler expresses this demand: The working class must once more become an “estate” by means of incorporation in a guild. The guild must gain for the worker the social recognition and position which he deserves and inversely bring him to a valuation and support of society.157

worker should work more and earn less. The devotion to the general good of which he is persuaded is, of course, in the special interest of certain individuals. That Sander was not indifferent to this kind of guild ideology is most apparent in his representation of the working class. Insofar as authentic industrial workers are portrayed at all, they seem to project a craftsmanlike oc¬ cupational ethos. Some of them even stand beside their ma¬ chines as proudly as if they were their own property. (See plate 125.) In pictures such as these, factory work does not appear to have an alienating and demoralizing impact but rather seems to facilitate the full development of the work¬ ers’ personalities. It is no accident that Sander never took notice of the conveyor belt, that highly significant innova¬ tion in contemporary production methods, which most di¬ rectly contradicted his antiquated ideal of work. Sander could have easily studied conveyor belts in Ford’s auto¬ mobile plant at Cologne, but he chose not to go there—his resolve was

not even

altered by the movie “Modern

Times,” in which Charlie Chaplin satirized automated fac¬ tory work. The demand lor a social reorganization along guild lines also played a role on another ideological front, one that cut directly across the bourgeois camp. The small employers (shopkeepers, craftsmen, and small-scale farmers) felt as threatened by corporate employers (industrial concerns, banks, wholesalers, and large estate owners) as by the work¬ ing class. In competition with department stores, factories, and mechanized agriculture, the middle class gradually fell behind and was driven to an ideological and political counterattack. One main target of this attack was the in¬ stitution of political parties. Parties were considered to be unfair in two ways: Insofar as the strength of the parties depended upon the number of voters, the working masses had greater political weight than the numerically smaller middle class; and inasmuch as the parties were financed and manipulated by big business, the financially weak family businesses were again the losers. The logical consequence was to call for the replacement of the parties by guilds or professional interest groups, which would have afforded heavy representation for the middle class. There was yet another reason that the return to a guild hierarchy seemed desirable: It was believed that this would be a way of avoiding capitalistic competition. Had not the

The true intention of this eloquence becomes apparent when

medieval guilds taken protective measures to ensure that no

the “willingness to produce” is declared to be the primary

craftsman had to fear for his living? Statements indicative of

purpose in the establishment of a guild or “estate” system:

this idea can be found in Othmar Spann’s treatise on the

First the willingness to produce, the joy of achievement must exist; only then can work responsibility and general responsibility develop, which in turn give rise to social and occupational honor. The honor of the working class must be the collective honor of the guild. The worker must belong to and feel himself to be a part of the occupational guild to which all belong who cooperate in production, the entrepre¬ neur and the employer as well as the laborer.158

“true” (that is, the guild-governed) state: “Here, every indi¬ vidual is integrated into a whole, the guild and ‘estate,’ so that he is protected and sheltered in business as well as in life. ... In an individualistic order, competition rules, leav¬ ing each individual prey to the insecurity of existence gnaw¬ ing at the core of his being. ... In the guild society, competition is not and should not be completely eliminated, but it does recede into the background, offering even the

contemplative individual the possibility of a full life,” that

arrangement, the separation of photographs from the two

is, “peace, spirituality, composure.”159 A similar tone was

complementary spheres of life was not possible here. Repre¬

set by Werner Sombart when he lauded the medieval guild

sentations of occupations are in the majority in portfolios 7-

as a “stable organization of men in particular occupations

10, but interspersed among them we find private motifs

and estates . . . that offered every individual the secure struc¬

which, on the basis of the portfolio titles, would not be

ture within which he could develop and fulfill his personal

expected there.

potential.”160 In these words we are confronted with wishful

The “germinal portfolio” and portfolios 1 and 2 predomi¬

thinking on the behalf of the small businessman who feared

nantly illustrate the family structure of the rural population.

that he would be overcome by corporate enterprise. The

Portfolios 3 and 4, on the other hand, concentrate on farm

talk of contemplative tranquility and undisturbed personal

work. The dividing line between the two areas, however,

development also points to the interests of another group

is less sharply drawn here than in the case of the middle

within the middle class: the academics and the intellectuals,

class, since in agricultural environments living and work¬

who were concerned about their educational privileges and

ing quarters, family and occupational lives are still closely

the leisure necessary for intellectual pursuits.161 How deeply

connected.

Sander was influenced by this version of the guild theory is

In group 6, portfolios 35 and 36 deal with the private

demonstrated by his sympathy for the academic professions

sphere and portfolios 38 and 39 with the occupational. Port¬

and the traditional crafts and trades and the comparatively

folio 33a has mixed contents, and the remaining portfolios

little attention he gave to big business. Moreover, it was not

(including number 40) pursue the “decadence” theme or

by chance that he preferred to portray vigorous, “fully de¬

have been included here only because of a lack of more

veloped” personalities.

suitable locations elsewhere. In “the street,” “traffic,” and “good and bad architecture” we are dealing, strictly speak¬ ing, with subjects that are foreign to a portrait collection.

The Private Sphere

All in all, these last portfolios offer a somewhat checkered impression and thus are vulnerable to criticism. However,

Neither Sander’s cyclical concept of history nor his guild

here as elsewhere, Sander’s unsystematic procedure has its

theory offers a completely satisfactory explanation for his

positive side; as unorthodox as the inclusion of extraneous

peculiar portfolio arrangement.

Upon closer analysis,

a

themes may be, it does enrich the total. Sander’s passionate,

third constitutive assumption becomes evident. The discus¬

expansive empiricism goes far beyond the narrow limits of

sion of Sander’s portrait style has already shown that, along

his theoretical concepts, and this is certainly a strength, not a

with the newly introduced “occupational portrait,” Sander

weakness, of his work.

continued to use the traditional form of the family picture. Not only did he photograph people in their working envi¬ ronment; he also analyzed their private spheres, and this

Work, Leisure, and Identity

affected the composition of the portfolio collection. To be sure, classification by occupation is the leitmotif of the por¬

Sander never fully realized that he had hit upon one of the

trait atlas, but there is also an important series of com¬

principal problems of modern industrial society by distin¬

plementary picture groups dedicated to domestic life and

guishing between family and occupation, or between living

consisting of photographs of mothers, children, married

and working. In economic and sociological treatises he

couples, families, and social gatherings.

could have found many relevant attempts to explain the

This separation of the private from the occupational sphere can be seen most clearly in groups 3-5. The first four

growing

polarization

and

alienation

between

the

two

spheres. Conservative authors expressed particular alarm

portfolios in the group entitled “the woman” are reserved

that the once-ideal congruence of occupation and personal¬

for domestic motifs; only in “the woman in intellectual and

ity was undermined by this new dichotomy. In the age of

practical occupations” is the transition made to the two fol¬

division of labor, bureaucracy, typewriters, and conveyor

lowing groups, in which each portfolio represents a particu¬

belts, it could no longer be ignored that dignified callings or

lar profession. In spite of the rather general title, group 3

occupations were being broken down into abstract, frag¬

is not devoted to women or to the family sphere of all

mented activities or indifferent “jobs,” and that conse¬

social levels, but only to middle-class women, so that this

quently the individual would have to seek “fulfillment” in

section stands in a complementary relationship to the mid¬

other areas, such as the family and the growing entertain¬

dle-class occupations in groups 4 and 5.162 In other words,

ment industry. This is what the German economist Fried¬

Sander here portrays both the familiar and the professional

rich Zahn had in mind when he wrote in 1929: “The inner

physiognomy.

relationship to one’s occupation has been largely lost; all

Further study reveals that the remaining social groups are

vital satisfaction has been transferred to life outside of work.

also characterized in this dual way. In group 2 we find under

In other words, for many people occupation and life are

the somewhat misleading title “the craftsman’ a variety of

growing further and further apart. The industrialization of

social groups (craftsmen, workers, engineers, industrialists)

our lives

condensed into only five portfolios. Owing to this cramped

jobs.”163 This rather nostalgia-tinged analysis reflects the de-

increasingly

replaces

real

callings

with

mere

sire for an ideal union of “personality” and “occupation” in the sense of vocation and fulfillment—without, of course, denying the fact that this ideal could no longer be realized except perhaps on the fringes of society.164 Sander’s smooth division of living and working environ¬ ments strangely denies this virulent social problem. It ap¬ pears that he considered the two spheres to be the natural realms of man and woman, which organically comple¬ mented each other without calling into question the tradi¬ tional concept of personality.

In Sander’s photographs

people are farmers, workers, bakers, and doctors “with their hearts and souls.” That is, work is not alien to them; instead of constraining them, it is actually the medium in which they develop “character” and reach personal ful¬ fillment. Only in a few isolated cases in Sander’s work are we confronted with a subject who is not in complete har¬ mony with his occupation and who suffers under its restric¬ tions. Even the vagabonds and beggars are presented as strong, unbroken personalities who fill a niche in society, even though it is a lowly one. Sander believed that, even in a private environment and without occupational attributes, every person could be rec¬ ognizably portrayed as a representative of his particular pro¬ fession. To what extent this assumption holds true is disput¬ able, but it certainly helps us understand Sander’s position. Basically, he sought to demonstrate the agreement rather than the contradiction between professional and private identity, the former being considered as the principal force whose formative influence extended into the private sphere. In keeping with this, he had a great preference for those social groups whose working and living places still coin¬ cided: farmers, craftsmen, and circus people. Much as Zahn’s diagnosis contradicts Sander’s belief that vocational fulfillment was still the rule in the 1920s and that distinct occupations continued to function as the backbone of society, contemporary reviews of Face of the Time express related doubts. Eugen Szatmari took the volume as “proof that today’s life has almost completely erased the physiog¬ nomical signs of occupations, particularly the intellectual professions.” “This industrialist,” he continued, “could just as well be a doctor or an attorney, and vice versa.”165 In Sander’s effort to understand people as products of their respective environments and occupations there is a clear challenge to the middle-class ideal of the “autono¬ mous personality,” which Sander himself had propagated throughout his life. As Sander declared often enough, he wished to represent the “type.” However, he sacrificed the autonomy of the individual only in favor of a larger social framework, namely a half-medieval guild structure that held the romantic promise of support, security, and personal fulfillment for everyone. In this, of course, he strayed far from the realities of the Weimar Republic. Where Sander imagined true order, others saw contradiction and disorder; history has proved them correct. Ultimately, then, the great portrait compendium does not reflect an actually existing order, but rather the need for one.

42

5

ON THE PICTURES

Although the systematic arrangement is highly significant,

Sander’s exhaustive treatment of this population segment

in the final analysis the value of the portfolio work will be

in its own world is exceptional in the artistic and literary

decided on the basis of the pictures. Sander played two roles

spectrum of the time and thus deserves special recognition.

in the making of Citizens of the Twentieth Century. First, he

Occupying the first of seven main divisions of the portrait

was a portraitist who produced new pictures day by day;

atlas, the “farmers” receive an amount of attention that cor¬

second, he was the organizer and interpreter of the picture

responds quite well to their quantitative share of the German

archive thus accumulated. About Sander’s role as an orga¬

population and economy.

nizer enough has been said; in this chapter we will consider

In view of the generous allotment of space, Sander’s nar¬

the picture material itself—Sander’s primary artistic accom¬

row-minded, selective approach to this social group is all the

plishment, and an accomplishment that is certainly superior

more surprising. In his mind the only “real” farmer was one

to his organizing efforts.

whose property had been passed down through generations

The picture material is so broad and varied, and can be

and basically represented a family operation. Consequently,

“read” on so many levels and from so many points of view,

Sander never photographed tenant farmers (who owned no

that any attempt at an adequate understanding is likely to

land at all) or marginal farmers (who owned too little to

remain unsatisfactory. The problem is compounded by the

support a family with agricultural work alone); since this so-

fact that we look back at this social inventory from a dis¬

called proletarian group occupied one-third of the 2.2 mil¬

tance of many years, over which it has become increasingly

lion farms registered in Germany in 1925, Sander’s omission

difficult to comprehend essential aspects of Sander’s now

is significant indeed. Except for one or two examples in the

historical

“worker” portfolio, Sander also did not consider farm¬

documentation.

For this

reason,

a historical-

sociological commentary is desirable to facilitate the reader’s

hands, maidservants, and day laborers suitable portrait sub¬

access to the complex picture world of Citizens of the Twen¬

jects, although with 2.5 million they accounted for no less

tieth Century ,166 Such a commentary will also prove useful in

than 10 percent of all gainfully employed people in Ger¬

explaining the relationship between the original portfolio

many.168 Finally, one misses the large-scale agriculturists, a

arrangement and the present picture material (more precise,

group that was relatively small in number but employed

the relation of the plan to the execution). A number of major

millions of workers and exercised great influence over Ger¬

and minor discrepancies reflect the uneven composition of

many’s economy and politics. Sander had planned for this

the surviving negative collection. While some divisions of

capitalistic type a portfolio with the title “gentlemen farm¬

the Sander archive overflow, others contain few if any

ers,” but for reasons already mentioned he did not gain

photos. Citizens of the Twentieth Century has remained a

entree into the proper circles and had to be content with a

torso, and we have no reason to disguise this fact.

single example from the Cologne area (plate 73). Thus, the “farmer” portfolios are more exclusive than had been origi¬ nally planned; they are limited to the agricultural middle

Farmers

class, which in the Rhineland region actually was in the majority.

Toward the turn of the century, Germany changed from a

The “germinal portfolio,” composed at an early point and

predominantly rural to a predominantly industrial state. In

always dear to Sander, serves as a kind of preface not only to

1882, 40 percent of the population was in the agricultural

the “farmer” section but to Citizens of the Twentieth Century

sector; by 1925, this figure was reduced to 23 percent.167 The

as a whole. The careful structuring of the series befits its

latter percentage, still substantial, stands in striking contrast

prominent position. The individual, the couple, the fam¬

with the very limited attention that was paid to the rural

ily—these are the most basic building blocks of human

population in German literature and art of the 1920s (apart

society, and Sander juxtaposes them here in simple and

from the trivial and the provincial genres). Flow foreign and

monumental form. As already mentioned, Sander attrib¬

distant this world was to middle-class intellectuals is dem¬

uted to the farm people of the “germinal portfolio” an

onstrated in Fallada’s novel Bauern, Bonzen und Bomben

archetypal, generally human quality, and he intended to

[Farmers, Bosses, and Bombs], in which farmers do play an

subordinate the rest of the portfolios to it in some way that

important role but not in their own environment but rather

can no longer be reconstructed.

as unloved intruders in the city.

In strong contrast with the “germinal portfolio” stands a

43

series of portraits of “young farmers,” many of them com¬

In order to compensate for the absence of two originally

mercial confirmation and wedding pictures. As the stand-up

planned portfolios, “the gentleman farmer” and “the farmer

collars and cigarettes on the young men and the low-waisted

and the machine,” the editors have added two new se¬

dresses on the young women indicate, these village teenag¬

quences to the present selection: “farming families” and

ers were eager to imitate the newest city fashions. Sander

“rural characters.”

here shows his superiority as an observer and an analyst.

It is not quite clear why Sander included in the “farmer”

Lendvai-Dircksen and other rural romantics closed their

group a portfolio on “small-town people.” Presumably he

eyes to anything that might have clouded the ideal of the

reasoned that most of these portraits were taken in Herdorf,

eternal peasantry with its roots deep in native soil. Sander

which was hardly more than a village and whose inhabitants

clearly admired the patriarchal farm characters, but with his

sprang directly from a farm background. More puzzling is

great gift for observation—and with a bit of sympathy—he

the fact that here suddenly Sander used settlement rather

also gave the younger generation some attention. The gen¬

than occupation as a criterion of classification. While this is

erational theme is pursued further in the portfolio called

deplorable from a strictly logical point of view, it seems to

“the farm child and the mother.”

make sense sociologically; after all, types of habitation have

The portfolio entitled “the farmer (his life and work)”

as much of a formative impact on people as types of occupa¬

presents a vivid and detailed description of the “subcultural”

tion. Most of these portraits were made in the undisturbed

customs of the rural population. We become acquainted

private atmosphere of the prewar period, and they are prime

with agricultural vehicles both as functional tools and as

examples of middle-class “Art Photography.”

status symbols. We learn about the ritual of the lunch break

The “sports” theme also does not seem to fit the general

in the fields, about relaxation after work hours in the family

structure of the portrait atlas. Perhaps Sander incorporated

room, and about prize-winning singing clubs, weekend card

these pictures in the “farmer” section because, according to

games, and so on. All in all, this is one of the richest port¬

contemporary ideas, physical exercise was to take place out¬

folios in the whole compendium, and one can only wish that

doors and far from the city.

Sander had recorded the “life and work” of other social groups with the same wide-ranging observation.

Apart

from that, Sander deserves credit for having kept away from

Craftsmen

the outdated, artificially preserved folklore (costume fes¬ tivities, folk dances, and the like) that Lendvai-Dircksen and

In group 2 Sander assembled under the heading

“the

Retzlaff considered to be the very definition of the rural way

craftsman” (more precise, “the manual worker”) a highly

of life. To the extent that contemporary artists took any

heterogeneous guild or “estate” which did not exist in real¬

notice of agriculture, their emphasis tended to be differently

ity to begin with and which cannot even be detected as a

placed. Georg Scholz’s 1920 painting “Industrial Farmers”

romantic fiction in the writings of the most conservative

(figure 56), for example, is a grotesque amalgam of the old

economists. In this highly questionable “estate” Sander in¬

peasantry, politics, and modern technology. The mechanization of agriculture was so advanced by the

cluded first of all the craftsmen in the narrow sense, that is,

the shoemakers and blacksmiths, who according to

1920s that Sander could not mistake its revolutionary im¬

sociological standards belong to the lower and intermediate

portance and decided to document it in a portfolio called

ranks of the bourgeoisie and might therefore be expected to

“farmer and machine.” However, since he was not gen¬

be found in group 4. As a rule, though, they were not

uinely interested in the subject and continued to prefer

university-educated, and this appears to be why Sander ex¬

plows and horse-drawn wagons to tractors and combines,

cluded them from the middle class.

he never actually made any related pictures.169

In terms of numbers we are dealing here with a sizable social group. According to statistics, approximately 1.5 mil¬ lion craft businesses with 3.3 million employees existed in Germany around 1925.170 Thus, while the craftsmen do rep¬ resent a smaller proportion of the whole economy than the farmers, it appears safe to say that a single portfolio is hardly enough to represent them adequately in Sander’s portrait manual. In this one portfolio, however, Sander was completely in his element. Having grown up in a “pre-industrial” world, and conceiving of himself as a craftsman, he had a strong preference for shoemakers, bakers, and smiths, who still were engaged in “occupations” in the traditional sense of the word. The tools of their trades were still their own prop¬ erty, and every one of their products represented a personal

56 G. Scholz, “Industrial Farm¬ ers,” 1920.

44

accomplishment rather than the cumulative result of divided labor. Craftsmen did “visible” work; their shops, their

tools, and their work processes were well suited to rep¬

57

resentation in pictures. Sander made optimal use of this opportunity.

tion,” 1930.

C. Quemer, “Demonstra¬

Although these portfolios create the impression that in the 1920s Germany still possessed a well-to-do, competent class of craftsmen continuing to work according to old, proven methods, contemporary sociologists and economists saw the situation quite differently. The rapid industrialization of Germany had thrust the craftsmen into a severe crisis. Only a few family-size craft businesses remained unaffected by the rising competition from factories and department stores. The others either expanded to industrial dimensions or sank to the proletarian level.171 Sander’s pictures give little indica¬ tion of this crisis. Apart from the craftsmen proper, group 2 also includes industrial laborers, whose actual role in the economy is dis¬

between “physical” worker types (such as the rural laborers

guised by the time-honored “craftsman” designation. Only

in plate 127) and “intellectual” types (such as the above-

by means of a misleading label such as this was it possible

mentioned functionaries); in other words, here again Sander

for Sander to integrate the “class” par excellence into a semi-

could not separate himself from somewhat patronizing

medieval guild or “estate” system. Even more telling is the

middle-class notions.

fact that, whereas the 14.5 million workers made up almost

Added to the pictures of proletarian families and func¬

half of all gainfully employed people in Germany at that

tionaries is the third and largest group: a series of photo¬

time,172 they fill only two of the 45 portfolios of the portrait

graphs in which the worker is shown in working clothes,

atlas.

significant distortion of the economic facts

usually at his workplace. In which of the two originally

reflects limitations and “blind spots” on the part of the pho¬

This

planned portfolios Sander would have placed each of these

tographer. The proletarians were probably the social group

can no longer be determined. For the most part, the pictures

furthest removed from Sander’s experience. He did come to

seem to reflect craftsmanly rather than proletarian attitudes.

respect their political activity thanks to his son Erich, but he

For example, the textile worker in plate 125 poses in front of

never understood their enjoyment of beer and card games

a spinning machine as proudly as if it were his own prop¬

and

erty. But even in the case of the “hod carrier” and the

their

apparent lack

of interest

in

“establishing

a

home.”173 Thus, almost without exception, Sander’s por¬

“painter” (plates 120 and 122), who face the camera with a

traits of workers are seen through middle-class eyes and

strong dash of proletarian class consciousness, one senses

make an overdomesticated, inoffensive impression. Legiti¬

a certain antiquated pathos which recalls Titzenthaler’s

mately or not, we remain aloof from the hungry, frustrated,

gnarled working-class heroes of the turn of the century.

and aggressive proletarians as Nagel and Querner painted

Large industrial installations, such as shipyards, blast fur¬ naces, and automobile factories, are noticeably absent from

them. (See figure 57.) Sander originally intended to divide the “worker” por¬

Sander’s working-class portraits; nor is there any trace of the

traits into two thematically different portfolios, which can

newly introduced assembly line. Once again Sander’s docu¬

no longer be completely reconstructed

mentation lags behind the actual stage of economic develop¬

(prompting the

editors to establish a large single portfolio in the present

ment in Germany.

volume). Several pictures aimed at analysis of proletarian

Strangely, the “inventors and engineers” were placed in

family structure (plates 156, 157, 164, and 174) may safely

closest proximity to the proletarians. Of these key figures of

be assigned to the “life and work” portfolio.1 4 It should be

the increasingly technological world Sander chose to repro¬

understood, though, that most of them represent “rural

duce only a few modest and unimpressive examples, which

proletarians” situated in a relatively secure agricultural envi¬

hardly add up to a social group with a distinct outlook or

ronment. Characteristically, Sander chose to overlook the

character. Since engineers and inventors work with their

unimaginable misery of the worker families in large city

brains, and since in prestige and income they are more

slums as it was publicized in contemporary literature and

closely related to professors and doctors, they seem out of

depicted in the Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung and in Tucholsky’s

place here in the “craftsman” section. Of course, the objects

and Heartfield’s famous photo and text montages.17:1

of their mental work are technical problems, and it appears

proletariat—the

that Sander excluded them from the traditional middle-class

“workers’ council,” the “revolutionaries,” and the “labor

professions in group 4 because of a prejudice against modern

leader” in plates 132—134—definitely belong in the portfolio

technology.

The

political

representatives

of the

of “worker types (physical and intellectual).’

While these

The “industrialists,” who obviously did not work with

pictures show that Sander recognized the proletariat as a

their hands but rather directed those who did, fell victim to

politically organized class,

the fact remains that he in¬

the same prejudice. In other words, the business leaders who

troduced a dubious form of censorship by distinguishing

determined Germany’s economic and political destiny and

who clearly occupied the highest place in society were rele¬

Press on the tenth anniversary of the end of the wrar. The

gated in the antiquated hierarchy of Citizens of the Twenti¬

emblem chosen to represent the new age was a young

eth Century to one of the lowest levels. The acrimonious

woman, with short hair and skirt, astride a motorcycle,

attitude of the little man who made a slim living from indus¬

with a lighted cigarette in her hand—truly a sensational

trial assignments, combined with the pride of the artist-

usurpation of traditionally male attributes (figure 58).

have

In Sander’s work, women look rather different. Bobbed

contributed to this misclassification. Be that as it may, since

hair, neckties, jumpers, lowered waistlines, and the like are

Sander did not have access to the Krupps and the Thyssens,

rare, even under the heading “the elegant woman”; for the

the portfolio is dominated by businessmen of small and

most part, a solid middle-class style dominates. Sander also

medium caliber who, almost without exception, wear im¬

took only half-hearted notice of the visually less apparent

photographer

aspiring

to

“higher

culture,”

may

peccable clothing and project a responsible and considerate

but socially more significant phenomenon of rising female

image. But this gallery of honorable men does not make an

employment. Filling only a single portfolio in Citizens of the

entirely convincing impression. For example, why is there

Twentieth Century, the many million working women are

no sign of the profiteer, so common in contemporary novels

reduced to a dwindling minority that falsifies their actual

and films? Furthermore, here, as in other sections of the

numerical proportion. In general, Sander adhered to the idea

portrait work, one searches in vain for representatives of a

of the woman as wife and mother, as soul of the home and

criminal milieu. Oriented as he was toward a functional,

the family; in other words, he perpetuated the traditional

harmonious social order, Sander was evidently unwilling to

but increasingly inadequate division of sex roles.180

countenance

any

disturbing

elements

in

his

In spite of such conservative concepts, Sander’s portraits

portrait

of women stand without rival in German photography of

compendium.

the 1920s and the 1930s. They mirror the objective, docu¬ mentary style that Sander applied to men; that is to say, they

Women

show real persons with recognizable social positions. Most other German portrait photographers represented women

Middle-class women occupy a section of their own, which

only as romantically glorified objects of male desire, as

originally comprised five portfolios but has grown to six in

status symbols for their husbands, or as fashion puppets on

the present volume because of the addition of several chil¬

the strings of the textile industry. Today it is hard to believe

dren’s portraits. Giving shape to this section presumably

how much effort even the most respected studios (including

was not an easy task for Sander; after all, he was dealing

those of Hess, Riess, Perscheid, Lendvai-Dircksen, Stone,

with a segment of the population that was more strongly

and Grainer) devoted to the contrivance of affected poses,

affected than most by the sweeping political and economic

pretentious costumes, artificial lighting effects, and hazy

changes of the time.176 To begin with, the First World War

contours as soon as a woman stepped before the camera.181

had made greater independence possible, or even necessary,

(See figure 59.) A prose equivalent of this type of picture

for women in many areas of life. Then came the revolution

appeared in 1926 in the widely read illustrated magazine Die

of 1918-19, which assured them of the same political rights

Dame, where a certain Polly Tieck remarked on the problem

and responsibilities as men: to vote and to hold public office.

of the photographic portraiture of women: “But she, the

At the same time, the economic development favored em¬

woman, no longer a child and never completely rational,

ployment for women. Between 1907 and 1925 the number

changeable, always new and different, where should one

of women in clerical positions tripled, exceeding a million.

catch hold of her? Where is the instance when she, so seem¬

The already considerable number of women working at

ingly childlike and yet so invincible and impossible to in¬

lower-level jobs increased in the same period to about 3.5

fluence, completely reveals her world? I believe I would

million.177 In the academic professions it was much more difficult for women to get a foothold; nevertheless, in 1925 there were twice äs many female university students as in 1913. Nor should we underestimate the fact that after the war the activities of women in charitable and pedagogic fields gradually took on professional character; educational training was now required for these positions, and they were, as a rule, no longer unpaid.176 Over 11 million female wage earners were counted in Germany around 1925 (in¬ cluding, of course, the considerable number of “family helpers”); that is, one-third of the total labor force was made up of women.179 The legal and economic progress made by women in the 1920s was reflected—if not caricatured—in new clothing fashions,

hairstyles,

and

consumer

habits.

“Only

ten

years—a different world,” announced the Munich Illustrated

46

58

Cover picture, Münchner Il¬

lustrierte Presse, 1928.

cine

ander«

Well

59 N. Perscheid, portrait of a woman, ca. 1921.

dence between persons with a particular form of education and a clearly defined area of economic functions requiring that type of education. As the nonacademic sporadically penetrates the professions once reserved for academics, so an army of young academics pours into economic sectors that have nothing to do with their academic training.”184 Sander’s fixation on an antiquated educational ideal, which led to a distortion of certain social realities, requires the viewer to approach his portrait compendium with cau¬ tion. Specifically, his portraits of the middle class are almost exclusively restricted to members of the old “independent” professions (attorneys, doctors, and merchants) and the classic civil-service occupations (professors, teachers, and post office and railroad personnel), which by the 1920s had

never dare to photograph a woman in the certain light of

long since ceased to be “the” middle class and represented

morning. . . . Through pictures woman should be able to

only a shrinking fraction of it. As contemporary experts

become again that which she actually is: that bit of fairy tale,

pointed out, the continuing economic concentration led un¬

that part of nature, that large and dangerous child, who

avoidably to a decline in the number of “self-employed”

knows and yet wants to dream.”182

professionals while a rapidly growing class of dependent

One cannot thank Sander enough for making the “certain

office workers was gaining prominence and political power.

light of morning” mandatory for his portraits of women—

Technically speaking, this was the first stage in the mas¬

even in the “elegant woman” portfolio, which does not

sive expansion of the “tertiary” social sector, which still

project a personal ideal but rather analyzes a social one.

continues

Moreover, in spite of his conservative attitudes, Sander’s

“secondary” (industrial) sector.185 In Sander’s time, tertiary

today

and

has

recently

overshadowed

the

observation was keen enough to capture moments of social

(“white collar”) service jobs were being created primarily

change. Thus, for example, the breakdown of the authorita¬

in response to commercial and technical needs for buy¬

rian nineteenth-century family structure is unmistakably re¬

ers, salesmen, agents, stock clerks, accountants, bookkeep¬

corded in several family photographs of the 1920s, and not

ers, secretaries, engineers, economists, chemists, foremen,

only in those where the place of the father is vacant because

superintendents, machinists, draftsmen, and so on. From

of the war. A relaxation of rigid social roles is also implied in

among this “gray army” of 3.5 million salaried employees

various double portraits in which husband and wife are

only a few found their way into Sander’s portrait atlas (for

posed at right angles to each other, defying conventional

example, the “savings-bank cashier” in plate 221 and the

formulas suggestive of close community.

“stenotypist” in plate 192). Evidently, Sander failed to fully

Contrary to an intention expressed in an amendment to

comprehend the complicated production, management, and

the original portfolio layout, Sander did not proceed to ana¬

distribution mechanisms of the modern economy; conse¬

lyze the role of the woman in National Socialism. Also, the

quently, he overlooked the growing cultural significance of

temporarily planned sequence “the woman as domestic”

the new class of white-collar workers. He could not have

was eventually integrated in the “servants” portfolio in

avoided coming into contact with members of this group,

group 6.183

but their unspecific working environments and abstract ac¬ tivities must have been so contrary to his work ideal that he only seldom felt motivated to make portraits of them.

The Educated Middle Class

Moreover, as a photographer Sander was dependent upon visually distinctive types. In this respect, the outwardly un¬

In groups 4 and 5 Sander developed extensively his ideal of a

differentiated service jobs were by nature unsuited to his

professional hierarchy in command of the nation’s political,

project. The nature of the medium was as much a hindrance

economical, and cultural destiny. As the placement of stu¬

here as Sander’s own personal disposition. With good rea¬

dents and professors at the beginning of this group and the

son, the theme of white-collar work was neglected in con¬

banishment of the socially equal craftsmen to group 2 signal,

temporary painting as well, with isolated exceptions such as

academic qualification provided the primary criterion for

Radziwill’s “One Among Many” (figure 60). (Writers had it

determining who belonged to the better “estates” and who

easier, and in the wake of Kracauer’s famous study Die

did not.

Angestellten [The Employees] they often concentrated on the

One could not really say that this great admiration of university degrees was altogether warranted by the contem¬

fate of salesmen and secretaries, as in Fallada’s Little Man, What Now?186)

porary situation. German sociologists of the 1920s had good

The onesidedness of Sander’s preoccupation with the

reason to speak of a “proletarization” of university gradu¬

traditional academic professions can be demonstrated sta¬

ates, and in 1932 Theodor Geiger soberly observed that

tistically.

there was in the younger generation a lack ol “correspon¬

two portfolios, and 3.5 million white-collar workers none

While

15

million

wage

earners

are assigned

at

all,

the independent

professions

and

the

old

civil-

service occupations, with under 2 million members, occupy eighteen portfolios (about 40 percent of the entire picture documentation). Sander was especially generous in the representation of artists and writers, of whom there were barely 20,000 in Germany but who nevertheless fill three portfolios. Clearly Sander looked up to this group, as one who would have liked to be an artist but who was prisoner to an allegedly mechanical medium and therefore was not fully accepted by that set. The 14,000 German attorneys187 are also heavily repre¬ sented, with a portrait series of their own. Even if one thinks in terms of political and cultural influence rather than sheer numbers, Sander appears to have given them a dispropor¬

61

A. Räderscheidt, “Man and

Street Light,” 1924.

62

A. Sander, Räderscheidt,

1927.

tionate amount of recognition. Precisely because Sander concentrated on the old, estab¬

German politics of the 1920s was a playground for the frus¬

lished, prestigious professions, his gallery of the German

trated and the displaced, who sought in party membership

middle class makes an imposing general impression. The

what private life had denied them.

best liberal traditions and the comfort and respectability of

Why Sander wanted to include a portfolio of aristocrats

the nineteenth century appear to enjoy an Indian Summer

in the middle-class section is difficult to say. As a still-

here, even though a stuffy conventional tone takes over in

powerful social group, they did demand recognition in any

places and immaculate ready-made clothing tends to level all

case, and next to the military officers they found a reason¬

differences. This lack of vitality is particularly noticeable

ably suitable slot. But Sander was unable to assemble more

among the authors, of whom only integrated, successful

than a few incidental examples of moderate interest for this

specimens were admitted. One would look in vain under

category.

this heading for outsiders, provocateurs, and oppositionists

Containing veterans of two world wars, the “soldier”

of Brecht’s stamp. The same is true of the painters, sculp¬

portfolio represents a somewhat heterogeneous mixture

tors,

and architects—except for the “Cologne Progres¬

which Sander intended to expand even further to include

sives,” with whom Sander was well acquainted and in

members of National Socialist groups. The oversimplified

whose portraits he occasionally planted hidden points.

equation of National Socialism and militarism would have

(Räderscheidt, for example, is rendered in such a way as to

been avoided by the arrangement of a separate Nazi series,

resemble the anonymous dark men who play a major role in

which has been introduced tentatively in the present edition.

his paintings; compare figures 61 and 62.) A certain range of

That Sander once toyed with the idea of honoring art

decorative, superficial variety characterizes the actors and

historians with an entire portfolio in the “artists” group is a

the performing musicians. But the most peculiar departures

further curious example of his abnormally high estimation

from the norm of the educated middle class, strangely

of comparatively irrelevant academic exercises. The few ex¬

enough, are to be found among the politicians. Sander did

isting examples seem to fit best in the “scholars” portfolio.

not have access to members of parliament or government ministers. However, precisely because he had to be content with the lower echelons and sometimes with rather odd

The Metropolis and The Last People

figures, the resulting portfolio seems to be of particular value. Here we find vivid proof of the historical fact that

The last two groups contain thematically mixed picture ma¬ terial which, apart from some city youths, servants, and celebrating artists, may be called a reservoir of social out¬ casts. Sander provides an amazingly varied anthology of such types, which could not have been assembled without extensive searching and travel. As a result, this is the most impressive and colorful picture sequence in the whole com¬ pendium, a strong counterpoint to the rather bland middleclass hierarchy on the preceding pages. Some of the pictures clearly illustrate the fact that Sander, in spite of his philo¬ sophical prejudices, had a great deal of sympathy for these displaced existences and even envied what appeared to him as their freedom.

60

F. Radziwill, “One among

the Many,” 1927.

48

The abundant picture material may be tentatively divided into several main categories reflecting different kinds of so-

cial ostracism. Sander’s persecuted and imprisoned subjects

the urban entertainment and social sphere—was not left out

obviously come from the upper middle class but have lost

altogether. For example, the portfolio “celebrations” con¬

their privileged position for political or racial reasons. Next

tains mostly pictures of carnival balls of Cologne and Berlin

come those in need of special care: the elderly, the sick, and

artists but may have been intended to include photographs

the invalids, who are shut up in institutions unless they have

of cabaret and cinema performances as well. On the periph¬

been reduced to selling matches on street corners. Closely

ery of Sander’s work, then, we encounter a theme that for

related to them are the “waste products” of the modern

Grosz and Dix occupied a more or less central position.

economic system: materially and psychologically ruined in¬

Characteristically, though, Sander did not dare to pursue the

dividuals who were not robust enough to assert themselves

amusement theme into the twilight areas of prostitution

in the competitive world of business and who have been

(figure 63) and perversion.

,

forced to live as beggars, peddlers, and asylum inmates.188

Further relevant material may be found in the “street” and

Another category consists of vital, adventurous “escapists”

“traffic” portfolios (blended into a single series in the pres¬

who, uncomfortable in the stuffy middle-class world, turn

ent edition), which not only reflect Sander’s enormous inter¬

instead to the vagabond life. Finally, Sander has included

est in the street as a functional space and site of public

many examples of anachronistic, pre-industrial lifestyles—

gathering but also testify to his fascination with the motori¬

gypsies, circus performers, musicians, and traveling actors.

zation or electrification of the urban transportation system.

These are the various minorities who have been condemned

(The “hustle and bustle” of the big city was also a favorite

by a majority of their fellow citizens but who, in turn, con¬

subject of contemporary painters; note W. Heise’s “Stigl-

sciously or unconsciously indict that majority. Whether

mairplatz in München” and O. Möller’s “Bahnhofsplatz in

they have failed to keep pace with the fast-changing main¬

Steglitz.”190)

stream society, have broken out of its narrow confines, or

A

daring

excursion

into

architectural

criticism

was

have fallen victim to its latent violence, the outsider groups

planned for the portfolio “good and bad architecture.” After

preserve elements of humanity that the established classes

the presentation of some pertinent examples in the Cologne

have lost.

exhibition of 1927 led to the cancellation of commissions by

Statistically, the minorities featured by Sander in his last

insulted patrons, Sander appears to have abandoned the

portfolios in no way represent a negligible quantity. The

theme. The surviving pictures have never been shown and

Weimar Republic inherited the somber legacy of a half-

would be rather difficult to fit into a portrait collection.

million disabled soldiers, more than a million war orphans,

In the case of the “radio” portfolio, practical execution

and 350,000 children depending upon public assistance or

once again fell far behind Sander’s theoretical concept. To

welfare. It is more difficult to estimate the number of people

analyze the representatives of the new radio technology as

left homeless by the war, but it has been estimated that a

key figures of contemporary society was certainly a good

million apartments were destroyed between 1914 and 1918.

idea. Yet again Sander lacked either the inclination or the

As a result of this and related factors, around 1.5 million

opportunity to realize this idea.

overnight stays in public shelters were recorded annually in

The portfolio “political prisoners of the National Social¬

Berlin alone (although every homeless person would have

ists,” begun in 1935, is a remarkable document of Sander’s

been permitted up to twenty overnight stays in such lodg¬

steadfast, albeit silent, sympathy with the opposition to the

ings). In 1910 Bavaria and Prussia were combed by 260,000

regime. Unfortunately no examples were available for the

peddlers—an army which seems to have grown substan¬

present edition. A portrait series of persecuted Jews, under¬

tially after the war. The largest minority of disadvantaged

taken somewhat later, was probably meant to be added to

Germans consisted of the unemployed, whose numbers ex¬

the prison pictures,

ceeded 6 million in 1932.189 Contemporary painters and writers were no less inter¬

though the portfolio title was not

changed accordingly. In the present edition the portraits ol Jews have been placed in a separate category. What kind of

ested in these minorities than Sander, but they proceeded more selectively. Above all, it was the war invalids, the unemployed, and the proletarians who, from Dix to Nagel, from Döblin to Bredel, were treated again and again. In other words, contemporary literature and art tocused on those disadvantaged groups that were most closely con¬ nected with the great historical factors—the world wars, the economic crisis, and communism. In contrast to this, Sander specialized in the documentation of less topical and less celebrated outcast roles, thus making an unparalleled and particularly valuable contribution. In spite of Sander’s weakness for Spengler’s ideas, it would be inaccurate to create the impression that he repre¬ sented the city only as a hotbed of decadence and social

63

misery. A second, more positive aspect—the attractions of

[“Prostitutes”], 1921.

O. Dix, “Zuhälter”

pictures Sander planned to subsume under the politically

What had at first appeared to be a spectrum of generally

precarious label “return to the Reich” remains open to

human or at least (ignoring Sander’s universal aspirations)

speculation.

rural types now is shown to be gender-specific as well. A

Nor may we be sure today of the original composition of

final widening of our perspective is accomplished by the

the final portfolio in the portrait atlas. Our lack of informa¬

portraits of two couples and a family at the end of the port¬

tion is particularly regrettable in the case of this last section

folio (plates 10-12), which refer to the particular social or¬

because it seems to possess important ideological implica¬

ganization of the farmer class that was at first described only

tions.

in terms of the individual.

Apparently

Sander intended

to

prove here that

biological aging and the cyclical decline of civilization both

In light of such a complex portfolio arrangement, it seems

lead ultimately back to “matter” (i.e., to inanimate nature),

indeed to be accurate to speak of an “architectural” ap¬

where, with the fundamental work ol the farmer, the con¬

proach. Sander used single, double, and quadruple modules

tinual renewal of life and civilization starts again. The begin¬

in order to build up by methodical steps a structure in which

ning and the end of this cyclical process seem to meet in the

the final family portrait assumes the function of a keystone.

picture of the peasant woman on her deathbed, with which

Picture sequencing is introduced here as a means to develop

we tentatively conclude the portrait selection.

a theme in all its dimensions and to make available to the viewer ways of reading and levels of understanding that go beyond the possibilities of a merely anthological and decora¬

Macrostructure and Microstructure

tive picture selection. Sander was a pioneer in the develop¬ ment of this “third dimension” of photography. Eugene

At the close of this commentary on Sander’s portrait com¬

Atget seems to have been one of very few photographers to

pendium, we return to the problem of its complex internal

precede him in this area, but only in a tentative way and in

structure. Its cyclical portfolio arrangement, from the farm¬

unpublished albums of which Sander was certainly not

ers upward to the artists and down again to the ill and the

aware.

declasse,

192

was discussed sufficiently at an earlier point.

Because of the scarcity of other original portfolio compo¬

Meanwhile, the detailed examination of the picture material

sitions, we revert to Face of the Time in order to gain addi¬

has sharpened our eye for another structural characteristic:

tional material for our study of picture sequencing. Though

We begin to understand that our perception of an individual

it is true that the sample edition of 1929 was much too small

picture relies upon the pictures located next to it in the same

to allow the reproduction of large groups of portraits, it was

way that the significance of a single portfolio is determined

just this need for condensation that made the selection of

by its placement in the cycle. Any attempt to “read” Citi¬

pictures an especially critical process requiring Sander’s full

zens of the Twentieth Century must remain unsatisfactory as

personal involvement. That nothing here was left to chance

long as the interrelation of the pictures is not taken into

is demonstrated, for example, by several “worker” portraits

account along with the interrelation of the portfolios. According to Sander’s plan, the macrostructure of the

that make up a miniature series of their own (pictures 17-26 in Face of the Time; plates 35, 124, 156, 164, 132-134, 174,

portrait atlas was to be complemented by a corresponding

120, and 200 in the present edition). The sequence opens

microstructure. Careful selection and sequencing of pictures

with the double portrait “mother and daughter, peasant

was to ensure that every portfolio would form a meaningful

woman and miner’s wife” (plate 35), which forges a link

entity rather than an accidental aggregate. Unfortunately,

between farmer and worker in terms of Sander’s civiliza-

the present edition is hampered in this respect by one more

tional theory. Similarly, “part-time students” (plate 200), at

limitation. Sander’s plans for the precise composition of

the end of the series, provides a bridge to the following

each series cannot be reconstructed today and would proba¬

“middle class” section. By academic education the proletar¬

bly have evolved only in the course of publication had his

ian climbs to the level of the middle class—this is how one

great project reached this stage in his lifetime. As a model

might paraphrase the thought behind this pointed picture

series carefully composed by the photographer himself, the

placement. Framed in such a highly deliberate manner, the

“germinal portfolio” offers at least an isolated example of

“worker” sequence contains three general elements: family

the kind of internal “architecture” originally envisioned for

pictures (18-20 in Face of the Time; plates 156, 164, and 174

each of the 45 portfolios.

in the present volume), occupational portraits (21 and 23;

Plates 1-4 of this series are individual male portraits in

plates 120 and 124), and pictures of political representatives

which Sander represents four basic human characters, from

of the working class (22, 24, and 25; plates 132, 133, and

the “earthbound man” to the “wise man.”191 Labeling and

134). Within this extremely narrow selection of ten pictures,

packaging the pictures in this manner, Sander was obviously

Sander achieved a remarkably differentiated diagnosis en¬

aiming to establish visual interrelations; he knew that,

compassing

grouped together and made suitable for comparison, the

political aspects and recognizing the proletariat as a class

socio-historical,

familial,

occupational,

and

portraits would assume aspects of meaning that they never

with a fully developed infrastructure. Neither in the 1920s

could possess as isolated images. In a second sequence of

nor later could this be taken for granted.

four pictures (plates 5-8), these basic characters are repeated

How easily such a delicate picture architecture could be

in the female variation, thereby again modifying our view.

disturbed and deprived of all socio-historical meaning is

demonstrated by two later portrait books that were pub¬

by including mothers and children, couples, and whole

lished

families, giving his portrait atlas a social complexity that is

without

Sander’s

supervision,

ln Deutschenspiegel

[German Mirror] (1962) and in Menschen ohne Maske [Men

absent in comparable contemporary publications.

without Masks] (1973) we find series of worker portraits, but

Nevertheless,

Sander’s

repertoire of motifs remained

they are hardly structured and they do not constitute a “leg¬

small. Seldom did he go beyond the few compositional for¬

ible” context. In both these volumes the framing pictures

mulas

and the proletarian family motifs are missing. Furthermore,

raphers. His interest in the milieu, the social context, might

the political representatives have been strictly screened in

easily have led Sander to contrive genre pictures or to take

one and completely eliminated in the other. Thus, a com¬

narrative, scenic snapshots. For the proletarians and the so¬

plete class has been downgraded to a modest occupational group. 193

cial outcasts such a photographic method might even have

However, we should not lose sight of the fact that the

dle-class portrait photography. But only by the application

“germinal portfolio” and Face of the Time are special cases

of the same set of motifs to all social groups could Sander

which demonstrate the optimal possibilities rather than the

ensure that any given picture would be fully comparable to

routinely

used

by

commercial portrait

photog¬

been more adequate than the standard arrangements of mid¬

average level of Sander’s structural work. The great ma¬

all the other—a point that was pivotal for the scientific va¬

jority of the portfolios contain relatively uniform, if not

lidity of the portrait manual. The strictness with which Sand¬

monotonous, photographs. A dozen engineers, a dozen mu¬

er repeated these motifs proves that his production of

sicians, a dozen lawyers—by nature such series offer little

portraits of children, couples, and families—at first only a

opportunity for creative sequencing. But here, too, pictorial

routine

relationships are important; here, too, the many possibilities

analytical method. Thus, it is no coincidence that different

for comparison enable the viewer to see the individual pic¬

motifs from the same social group add up to a complex

tures under ever-changing, surprising aspects. By system¬

picture of its particular character and organization. Like¬

atic juxtaposition Sander succeeds, for example, in directing

wise, it was fully planned that the comparison of identical

our attention to historical changes (compare the school

motifs from different social levels would reveal contrasts

classes before and after the First World War, plates 274 and

that would make the nature of each level more clearly

matter—gradually

evolved into

a

sociological-

275), to social differences within a given profession (the

understandable. This statement is illustrated by four pictures

neighborhood shyster versus

which are set far apart in the portrait atlas but are closely

the

civil-service attorney,

plates 231 and 232), to variations ot mentality and character

related to each other as variations of a basic motif.

(the narrow, old-fashioned businessman versus one who is

Our first example is a farm family in rather stiff, frontal

farsighted and dynamic), and in general to the contrast be¬

alignment (figure 64). This typical “pre-industrial” family

tween the average and the exceptional representative of a particular group or occupation. Comparisons of this kind

64

give every portfolio many levels of meaning and great depth

1912.

of focus,194 but only the active reader or viewer will achieve

65

an understanding of this microstructure underlying the

ily, ca. 1905.

more overt, philosophically ambitious macrostructure of

67

the portrait atlas.

1926.

Standard Motifs We have by no means exhausted the possible ways of read¬ ing Sander’s portrait work. Alongside the internal com¬ position of each individual portfolio, yet another latent structural principle can be detected. This has nothing to do with portfolio -boundaries; it relies upon the regular re¬ currence of what one might call standard motifs. To be spe¬ cific, we are speaking here of these motifs: “woman" (wife and mother), “married

“man” (private or occupational),

couple,”

“mother and child,”

“child,"

“family,”

and

“club.” Only a very few of these quite conventional picture motifs appear in the countless portrait books whose publica¬ tion was so popular in Germany between 1929 and 1933. Lerski’s Alltagsköpfe, Lendvai-Dircksen’s Volksgesichter, the book Deutschen Menschen from the publishers Langewiesche, and other works were restricted to images of individual men and women. Only Sander diversified the moth selection

A. Sander, farm family,

A. Sander, proletarian fam¬

A. Sander, circus family,

includes three generations. The eldest generation is domi¬ nant, the children must fit themselves into the spaces be¬ tween grownups. One searches in vain for any sign of affection or even communication. In the proletarian family in figure 65 the situation is already somewhat different. Again, a grandfather is included, but only on the outer edge. The mother, who was completely missing in figure 64 and who in any case occupied an inferior position in the patriar¬ chal peasant world, is here at the center. At least in terms ot sheer numbers, the typically proletarian wealth of children dominate the scene. And, as the many cases of hand contact show, affection is demonstrated openly. In the average mid¬ dle-class family in figure 66 the straight alignment is aban¬ doned in favor of a rather relaxed arrangement. Fully facing the camera and dressed in dazzling white, the daughter is

68

A. Sander, farm girl, ca.

69

A. Sander, middle-class

1919-20.

child, ca. 1927.

clothing and location calling for special attention. In figure

70

71

68 Sander presents a little farm girl who, accustomed to

1932.

presented as the jewel of the small bourgeois family, which is as free of grandfatherly presence as of numerous, un¬ planned offspring. The father discreetly plays the role of head of the family, and mama is content with a place in the background. A fourth “family” type is to be found in the itinerant occupations. The colorfully mixed assembly of cir¬ cus people in figure 67 is held together less by blood rela¬ tionship than by occupational necessity. Over and above the differences in social background, race, and biographical vicissitudes, the circus costume here designates a close-knit (if temporary) working and living community. Similar social gradations may be traced in the recurrent themes “married couples” and “mother and child.” Perhaps more rewarding, though, is an examination of the various versions of the standard motif “child,” with changes in A. Sander, city children,

A. Sander, circus child, 1926.

unobstructed exploration, has just entered her parents’ fruit or vegetable garden. Her dress appears pretty and clean but somewhat old-fashioned and not exactly cut to fit its

seclusion of a house on wheels before which the world

wearer. Perhaps it has been handed down to her by an older

passes, out of reach.

sister, or maybe the mother sewed it up for her as best she

The series of children’s portraits could be enlarged to in¬

could out of cast-off remnants. The middle-class child in

clude, among others, the picture of young inmates of a

figure 69 does not need to content herself with second-hand

home for the blind in the last portfolio. In the present

clothes. Her little dress fits perfectly and suggests that it may

context, however, it is sufficient to have pointed out the

have been an expensive, lovingly chosen gift. It is decorated

principle function of such comparisons across portfolio

with a flower pattern and thus specifically adapted to a

boundaries. It might be added that the children’s portraits

child’s taste rather than being an imitation of grown-up

offer proof of Sander’s inclination to judge people less ac¬

fashion. This child is presented in a sheltered interior, en¬

cording to their possessions and social rank than by their

throned self-confidently on a carved chest. While she does

cultural forms and living habits. While it is easy to guess the

not enjoy the same freedom of movement as her little col¬

social status of the parents from the kind of clothing worn

league in the country, she does happily reign over her little

by their children, the primary criterion for judgment is in

playroom empire. Socially located somewhere between the

every case how much freedom of movement, or literally

proletariat and the middle class, the “urban children” in

how much play, they have.

figure 70 are dressed in a simpler but still childlike manner.

Apart from the standard motifs of middle-class portrait

The environment typical for them is not the playroom but

photography, such as “child” and “married couple,” Sand¬

the city street, where they grow up under less privileged but

er’s

also less controlled circumstances than the children from

“club” portraits. These athletic, cultural, and political or¬

better homes. Finally, in figure 71 we see the child of a

ganizations, of which every leisure-oriented industrial soci¬

circus performer. Her simple smock does not betoken any

ety has an inexhaustible supply, cannot be valued highly

special motherly care. The girl appears imprisoned in the

enough as a source for sociological insight, even if the pho¬

gaily painted circus wagon; her life is listlessly spent in the

tographs are arranged quite stereotypically.

picture

compendium

is

irregularly

sprinkled

with

Very much

aware of this, Neal Slavin published an impressive crosssection of American society made up of conventional group pictures.19’’ A similarly rich series of club portraits could be extracted from Sander’s Citizens of the Twentieth Century. In addition to the traditional standard compositions from the family and club spheres, Sander employed a few unusual picture motifs specifically adapted to the requirements of his 72

A. Sander, tramps, n.d.

hotel domestics, customs officers, railroad employees, in¬

73

A. Sander, railway employ¬

dustrial workers, young farmers, or tramps are represented,

ees, n.d.

great portrait atlas. The most important of these newly in¬ troduced motifs, the “occupational portrait,” has been dis¬ cussed thoroughly in another context. Another new coinage may be described as the “cross-section portrait.” By this we mean photographs that present to the viewer several mem¬ bers of the same social group in relatively monotonous jux¬ taposition (figures 72-75). Whether unemployed people,

Sander lets us know that they are chosen not because they are relatives, friends, or club members but because they all belong to a particular occupational, social, or age group. Choosing a strictly paratactic arrangement excluding every sign of interaction, he emphasizes the lack of personal or other genuine connection between these people. We under¬ stand that the photographer only lined them up in front of the camera in order to present us with a “cross-section” or sample selection of various human characters typically located within a given segment of society. Evidently, Sand¬ er succeeded in these portraits in extending the basic princi¬ ple of his portrait manual, the comparative element, into the picture form itself.

74

Closer study shows that Citizens of the Twentieth Century

A. Sander, workers, ca.

1928.

is traversed by long strands of “standard motifs.” An ar¬ rangement

of the

picture

material

according

to

these

motifs—that is, the creation of portfolios of “families,” “children,” and “clubs” from the most varied areas of soci¬ ety—would be altogether possible and meaningful. That Sander chose to arrange the pictures along occupational lines and to use the “professional man” as the leitmotif of the whole work should not hinder the exploration of alternative configurations. This “practical study atlas” [Ubungsatlas], as Walter Benjamin called it,196 should be read horizontally as well as vertically. It invites us to turn the pages forward and backward, skip over sections, and create new connec¬ tions—in short, to redeem the pictures’ latent significance

75

by bringing into play our own talent for visual observation.

ca. 1920.

A. Sander, young farmers,

FACE OF THE TIME

6

Published in 1929, Face of the Time became the subject of numerous contemporary reviews. Some of these seem rele¬

Progressive

reviewers

remained

equally

resistant

to

Sander’s basic beliefs. While judging the book as a whole

vant not only to the sixty portraits contained in that slim

much more favorably, they objected to Sander’s “pastry

volume but also to the portrait atlas as a whole. Rather than

chef” (plate 98), “master locksmith” (plate 101), “police

studiously analyzing Sander’s photographic cross-section of

officer” (plate 215), and others as antiquated “museum

Weimar Germany as a historical undertaking, these reviews

pieces.” In keeping with this they discarded the notion that

passionately debate it as a topical publication dealing with

people were still characteristically shaped and fulfilled by

burning issues of the day. Witty and elegant but also biased

their occupations. Rather than to individual occupations, the

and obstreperous, the contemporary journalists open our

progressive reviewers ascribed all formative power to social

eyes to new and thus far unacknowledged aspects of Sand¬

classes. Rejecting Sander’s guild concept (which, admittedly, is

er’s work.197 Surprisingly often, the reviews expressed the basic con¬

only sketchily outlined in Face of the Time) and emphasizing

viction that the 1920s represented a period of rapid transi¬

the trend toward a collective social order, the conservative

tion, a decade in which old and new forces were mired in a

and the progressive critics arrived at remarkably similar

chaotic struggle. No consensus existed as to the cause, the

diagnoses; however, they drew contradictory conclusions

nature, and the eventual result of the crisis (or “shift in

from them. The conservatives condemned it; the liberals

power,”

but everyone agreed that

and the leftists welcomed it, expecting it to lead to a re¬

Sander’s portrait photographs either consciously interpreted

juvenated, better, and more just society. (In this preface to

or unconsciously reflected precisely

Face of the Time, Alfred Döblm had discreetly expressed his

or “revolution”198),

this

crisis.

Conse¬

quently, the evaluation of the pictures depended much less

hope for an imminent revolution.

on the aesthetic sensitivity than on the political conviction of

Sander’s portraits as records of the “economic development

the commentator.

of the last decades,” he concluded: “Let us not overlook the

In the conservative camp, voices of “cultural despair”

After characterizing

end, the further course of this development as exempli¬

were particularly prominent.199 Contrary to Sander’s efforts

fied by the workers’ councils,

to construe a differentiated social hierarchy, they took his

revolutionaries. ”201)

the anarchists,

and the

pictures as proof that social differences had been “leveled,”

Switching from general evaluations of the whole book to

that modern man had become a “serial product,” that an

interpretations of specific pictures, one finds further proof

“army of ants” had replaced the great “characters” and

that Sander’s portraits included provocative details and sent

“leaders” of the past—in short, that “Americanization” had

out signals that, although largely lost upon the modern

taken over. To quote only one typical review of this kind:

viewer, were responded to with emotion by contemporary

[Sander’s] line of march is: collectivism. . . . Mereshkowsky once referred to the Advance of the Mob. In the present volume this advance is recorded. ... It is not true that the face of our time looks like this. Everything truly religious, everything visionary, every quest for the ideal has been con¬ sciously eliminated from this picture selection. . . . [The book is] a physiognomical document of anarchy, of inferior instincts and of indiscriminate greed, rather than a docu¬ ment of uplift, enthusiasm, let alone essence.200

critics. In an analogy to what is commonly meant by the term “catch-word,”

one might label Sander’s portraits

“catch-pictures.” The latter-day audience may take only a distant historical and aesthetic interest in them; to the public of 1930, however, they possessed immediate relevance as segments from a troubled social reality. Like the Weimar Republic itself, Sander’s portrait collection was understood in terms of social conflict, as a collection of types who “still” represented the old or “already” belonged to the new social

Biased as it is, this review does not do justice to Sander’s

order; the viewer’s ideological tenets determined whether

portraits;

old was good and new bad or vice versa.

nevertheless,

it

deserves

attention

because

it

characterizes the political climate in which the portraits were

Sander’s farmers, with their traditional lifestyle, appealed

conceived and received. We might add that this reviewer’s

very much to conservative critics, who praised their whole¬

refusal to share Sander’s ideal of a semi-medieval guild

some, solid, and religious appearance. The “young farmers”

hierarchy was due not only to his radical opinions but also to

(plate 13) and the “farm girls” (plate 19), however, were

the inherent weakness of the theory.

excepted from these eulogies as deplorable by-products of

54

the contemporary “cinema and department-store culture.”

construct the social makeup of the Weimar Republic cannot

Progressive reviewers paid little attention to Sander’s old-

be decreed; it is a matter of personal judgment. In this re¬

fashioned farmers, but insofar as they did they welcomed

spect not even Sander has a monopoly.

aspects of social change. Döblin, for example, emphasized

To distinguish the “old” from the “new” in Sander’s so¬

“how the farmers’ faces change under the new conditions,

cial inventory was a legitimate undertaking. The passion

how wealth and easier work loosens up the faces.”202 Sand¬

with which this question was debated by the contemporary

er’s “gentleman farmer” (plate 73) understandably drew

critics should be approached with caution, yet it should

emotional comments from all sides. Some acclaimed it as a

serve as a reminder to the present-day viewer. Today it has

“masterful”

austere”

become customary to cultivate a nostalgic enthusiasm for

model German, while others ridiculed it as a “caricature” of

Sander’s wonderfully stalwart characters and for that envi¬

character study of a “self-reliant,

a “potato profiteer,” if not the incarnation of a “Prussian

able historical period when everyone still had a clearly ex¬

‘Junker’: fat, ostentatious, and dimwittedly arrogant.”

pressed identity and function in society. Obviously, this

Almost all of the 60 portraits published in Face of the Time

kind of sentimental retrospection does not do justice to the

were subjected to ideologically biased speculations of this

German society of the 1920s as it is recorded in Citizens of the

nature. Though it is unnecessary to mention every one of

Twentieth Century. By the same token, it would be wrong to

them, we should focus for a moment on a few portraits of special political significance.

regress to the simple old-new, black-white contrasts of the

Like the other social types, Sander’s businessmen were

neither Sander’s portrait atlas nor its critical reception was

placed in

categories

by

the contemporary critics.

contemporary reviewers. As we have attempted to show,

The

free of ideological distortion. We cannot simply accept and

“wholesaler” (plate 142), for example, was generally labeled

believe what is offered to us here, but we cannot reject and

as a nineteenth-century figure, while the “manufacturer”

ignore it either. We are invited to take up an inheritance, and

(plate 110) and the “industrialist” (plate 114) passed as mod¬

in doing so it is important (as Ernst Bloch puts it) not only

ern types. In this isolated case, the conservative critics took

to “unmask the ideological pretense” but also to “register

the side of the modern rather than the antiquated type and

the possible balance.”2"4

the progressive reviewers proceeded to criticize rather than to defend it. Conservatives exalted the two business leaders in plates 110 and 114 as “self-assured, energetic, competent, and indefatigable” men of a “high order of intellectuality.” The prominent leftist critic Kurt Tucholsky, on the other

NOTES

hand, described them as beneficiaries of a corrupt system. He admits that they may have a cultivated appearance, they even may attend exclusive theater premieres and collect

1. Already in 1929, in his introduction to Sander’s Antlitz der Zeit, Döb¬

china, but “as far as the consequences of their actions are

lin referred to Sander’s approach as a kind of pictorial sociology.

concerned they are inhuman—even if one cannot im¬

2. Compare Bell’s observation: “Social frameworks are not ‘reflections’

mediately read it in their faces.”203 (The explanation for this apparent shift in the critics’ attitudes can easily be found: The rightist sympathy with and the leftist antipathy against the undisputedly “modern” industrialists can be taken as a repercussion

of

the

alliance

between

the

reactionary

bourgeoisie and big business that brought victory to Nazis and defeat to the socialists and the communists.)

of a social reality but conceptual schemata. History is a flux of events and society a web of many different kinds of relations which are known not simply by observation.” (Bell 1973, p. 9) 3. Communicated by G. Sander, who assisted in the making of the portrait. 4. Sander’s absence from the “Film und Foto” exhibition in Stuttgart in 1929 is particularly strange. (See Film und Foto, 1929, pp. 51 ff; Film und Foto der Zwanziger Jahre, 1979, p. 17.) Pollack and Gernsheim mention Sander’s name but do not reproduce a picture by him.

We do not know how Sander took the contemporary

Newhall, on the other hand, reproduces a Sander portrait without

criticism of his portraiture. Most likely he felt that even the

referring to him in the text. (Pollack 1969, p. 248; Gernsheim 1971,

most benevolent reviewers did not really comprehend his intentions. After all, he had made a considerable effort to reinterpret Germany’s unstable, contradictory social reality

p. 209; Newhall 1964, p. 148) 5. On Nadar see Prinet and Dilasser 1973 and Gosling 1976. 6. Nadar’s autobiography gives vivid proof his talent for establishing and sustaining friendships (Nadar 1900, passim).

in terms of a durable, well-ordered structure. However, this

7. On Strand see Strand 1971 and Strand 1976.

does not necessarily mean that his critics were mistaken in

8. On Strand’s various photo series and their ideological implications see

pointing to elements of social antagonism in his portraits. Sander interpreted the contemporary reality by photo¬ graphing it; he interpreted the photographs by labeling and ordering them. However, in spite of this double filtration, his portrait atlas retains aspects of reality that remained out¬ side his awareness and control and must be uncovered by critical analysis. Especially on the second level ol interpreta¬ tion, the ordering and evaluation of the finished pictures, everyone can compete with the photographer. How to re¬

Keller 1974. 9. On Arbus see Arbus 1972. 10. On the development of commercial photography before 1900 see Gernsheim 1969, pp. 113 ff. and 234 ff.; on commercial photography in Germany see Das Photoalbum, 1975, and Kempe 1962. 11. On Silvy see Gernsheim 1969, p. 297. 12. Such staged portraits may have been more acceptable to the contem¬ porary viewer than to the modern viewer; after all, Victorian parlors consisted of a similarly irrelevant “montage of cultural heritage” from diverse sources (Neumann 1966, pp. 47 ff.). 13. On the role and function of photo albums see Das Photoalbum, 1975

14

In this respect I largely agree with G. Freund, who credits Nadar, Le Gray, the Bissons, and other French primitives with too many bohe¬

36. For a somewhat more extensive discussion of ideologically tinged photographic portraiture in Germany, see Keller 1977.

mian and too Few business qualities but points out correctly the dev¬

37. Jaspers 1933, p. 181.

astating impact of the “carte-de-visite” craze upon these outstanding

38. Jaspers 1933, p. 180.

photographers (Freund 1980, pp. 38 ff.). Unfortunately, no critical

39. See Clauss 1938; Schultz 1934; Fischer n.d.

edition exists of the early Nadar portraits from the studio in Rue St.-

40. Unless it is stated otherwise, the biographical information contained

Lazare from the time when his work was not yet subject to the laws of

in this chapter is derived from Sander 1973, pp. 287 ff. A valuable

mass production.

supplement to these memoirs of Gunther Sander is R. Kramer’s re¬

15. On the simplification of the medium see Gernsheim 1969, pp. 405 ff. 16. On international Art Photography see Gernsheim 1969, pp. 463 ff.; Naef 1978; Pictorial Photography, 1978. On German Art Photography see Kempe 1962, Brevern 1971, and the following contemporary treatises: Lichtwark 1894, Raphaels 1895, Matthies-Masuren 1897,

cently published text, which largely is based upon Sigrid Sander’s reminiscences (Sander, 1980). 41. For a good characterization of this mixture between worker and farmer see Geiger 1932, p. 94. 42. Quoted from A. Sander, “Mein Werdegang als Photograph” (manu¬ script in the possession of G. Sander).

Juhl 1897, Loescher 1917, Warstatt 1919, Spörl 1924. 17. Veblen was aware of the sociological causes of the return to the ideal

43. Sander, 1975, nos. 19-26.

of craftsmanship. As he pointed out, machine-made products are

44. Letter to Allgeyer, Feb. 2, 1935. The poem’s first line is “Wenn die

more perfect than manually made goods, but the latter are more

Nebel auf und nieder steigen. ...” Letter and poem in the possession

expensive and are therefore available only to the well-to-do. “Hence it

of G. Sander.

comes about that the visible imperfections of the hand-wrought

45. For more information about Sander’s beginnings as a photographer

goods, being honorific, are accounted marks of superiority in point of

see Sander 1973, pp. 287 ff. I doubt the accuracy of a family tradition

beauty, or serviceability, or both. Hence has risen that exaltation of

according to which Sander’s earliest pictures already reflect documen¬

the defective of which J. Ruskin and W. Morris were such eager spokesmen at their time.” (Quoted from Naylor 1971, p. 9) 18. “Inwardly blooming islands” is an expression used by D. Sternberger (quoted from Huse 1975, p. 137). On the general sociological and cultural situation see Hamann and Hermand 1975, pp. 26 ff. 19. On Dührkoop see Wolf-Czapek 1908; Kempe 1976, pp. 86 ff.

tary intentions of the kind later pursued in Citizens. 46. Communicated by G. Sander. 47. Communicated by G. Sander. 48. This assimilation may occasionally have been undermined, however, by Sander’s close friendship with a discontent, anti-bourgeois figure destined to rise to political prominence in the 1930s: Julius Streicher.

20. The advantages of home-made portraits, as opposed to studio prod¬

49. Leaflets in the possession of G. Sander.

ucts, are frequently emphasized in contemporary photographic pe¬

50. Review in the possession of G. Sander.

riodicals.

51. Das Atelier des Photographen, vol. 13, 1906, following p. 92.

Loescher,

too,

writes

extensively

in

favor

of home

portraiture (Loescher 1917, pp. 120 ff.). For an article on this subject

52. Leaflets in the possession of G. Sander.

by Dührkoop—whom Sander admired—see British Journal of Photog¬

53. In a radio lecture of 1931 Sander states that he began his project in

raphy, Sept. 22, 1911, p. 720 (quoted from B. Newhall in Sander,

1910. In the short text “Chronik der Stammappe” of 1954 Sander

1980, p. 9).

claims that the basic idea “originated in my earliest youth.” The first

21. Neumann speaks of the “incorporation of the pose in the photog¬ rapher’s own attitude” (Neumann 1966, p. 55). 22. The appearance of a typical Art Photography exhibition around 1900 can be studied in the illustration in Kempe 1976, p. 5. 23. On Moholy-Nagy as a photographer see Moholy-Nagy, 1930; Rice and Steadman 1975; Haus 1980; Moholy 1972. 24. Moholy-Nagy 1969, pp. 7, 27 ff, 35 ff. (Translator’s note: Even

actual work was begun in 1911. 54. In view of the project’s drawn-out genesis and general complexity, it is bold to say “It appears that he knew what he wanted from the outset” (J. von Hartz in Sander, 1977, p. 7). 55. See the gum print of a middle-class lady in Sander, 1976, fig. 1. 56. On Sander’s relationship to this group of artists see Sander, 1973, pp. 298 ff.; Dadamax, 1975, especially pp. 78 ff. Also relevant are Schmied

though I cite existing English translations of the writings of Moholy-

1969, pp. 56 ff., and Realismus, 1974 (both with bibliographies).

Nagy, Jaspers, Spengler, and others, I do not quote them exactly; I

57. In his “Erläuterung zu meiner Ausstellung im Kölnischen Kunstver¬

prefer to offer my own translations.) 25. I am referring here to the concept of “functionalism” as it is used by architecturaj historians. See Müller 1974; Huse 1975, pp. 59 ff.

ein” of 1927 he states; “Photography has opened new possibilities for us and, compared to painting, it pursues different purposes” (Dadamax, 1975, p. 148).

26. Moholy-Nagy 1969, p. 34.

58. Sander, 1973, p. 298.

27. For a further discussion of the “new vision” developed by Moholy-

59. Dadamax, 1975, p. 92. Seiwert’s statement was originally published in

Nagy and his avant-garde colleagues see Kemp 1978, pp. 51 ff.

Die Tat 15, 1923-24.

28. Sowjetische Fotografie, 1975, p. 105.

60. Given by Seiwert to Sander; today in the possession of G. Sander.

29. Sowjetische Fotografie, 1975,, p. 120, 56. On Rodshenko see Karginov

61. Sander 1931, lecture 5.

1975; Rodtschenko, -1978.

62. Sander’s use of the mirror metaphor was communicated by G.

30. Moholy-Nagy and Rodshenko have been chosen for discussion as

Sander. Also see Sander, 1977, p. 6: “The portrait is your mirror” (a

typical representatives of the photographic avant-garde during the

Sander motto, quoted by J. von Hartz after Gerd Sander). For

1920s. A more complete picture of the overall situation is given in

Sander’s claim to be completely unbiased and objective see his

Molderings 1979; Steinorth 1979; Film und Foto, 1929; Film und Foto

“Erläuterung zu meiner Ausstellung im Kölnischen Kunstvercin,”

der Zwanziger Jahre, 1979; Germany, 1978; Bertonati 1978.

where he states: “If, as a healthy human being, I am bold enough to

31. For the social and historical background sec Bracher 1971, pp. 135 ff.

see things as they are rather than the way they should be or could be, I

32. Jaspers 1933, p. 182. ln modern terms, we are largely dealing here

ask for forgiveness—but I cannot do otherwise” (Dadamax, 1975, p.

with “ersatz ideologies” that ignored the discomforting socio-political facts in order to connect the national crisis with “deeper,” psychologi¬

148). 63. For a progressive evaluation of the contemporary artist’s role de¬

cally more attractive causes such as heredity, race, or “blood and

manding his full integration into the industrial and social framework

soil.”

see G. Grosz and W. Herzfelde’s manifesto of 1925 (Realismus, 1974,

33. Erjurth, 1960; Hrjurth, 1961; Erjurth, 1977. 34. Biographical information about Lcrski and a picture selection will be found in Der Mensch, 1958. A critical analysis of his portrait style is offered in Tönnis 1975, pp. 93 ff. 35. For biographical data one has to depend on Lendvai-Dircksen’s own, not always trustworthy declarations: Lcndvai-Dircksen 1961, pp. v ff.

p. 182). 64. Communicated by G. Sander. 65. From the diary ot Brunhilde van Koevcrden; excerpt in the possession of G. Sander. 66. Sander’s statement quoted in the diary of B. van Koevcrden; excerpt in the possession of G. Sander.

67. Sander, 1980, p. 23.

better in this ideological context. (Illustrated advertising leaflet in the

68. Communicated by G. Sander.

possession of G. Sander)

69. Rather than going to Berlin on his own volition, Sander seems to have followed a suggestion by Kurt Wolff, the publisher of Face of the Time, who wanted to include a few celebrities in the book.

98. In the possession of G. Sander. 99. Sander 1931, lecture 6. 100. In view of this it appears understandable—though still irreconcilable

70. Obviously it would have been a good idea for Sander to read a few

with Sander’s principal intentions—thatj. Szarkowski attempted to

informative books before embarking on the bold photographic por¬

transpose Sander’s work from a firm historical context into a sphere

trayal of a complex social framework. However, from a subscription

of vague mythological assumptions.

announcement of 1929 (later to be quoted more extensively) we can

(1962), Szarkowksi observes: “The book’s subtitle—People of the 20th

Speaking of Deutschenspiegel

gather that Sander did not approach this enormous task “from an

Century—seems shockingly inappropriate, for surely these people

expert’s point of view” and that he “had no scientific aids nor any

were ancient when Herman defeated Varus in the Teutoburg forest.

advice from race theorists or social researchers.” Apparently, Sander

Sander’s old peasant woman saw Bosch’s obscene demons, and his

never realized that his ignorance of the social sciences was bound to be

hod carrier cursed the cathedral builders. His pastry baker . . . stands

detrimental to the validity of his undertaking.

solidly outside time, as ancient and as indestructible as gluttony.”

71. Several pertinent letters are in the possession of G. Sander.

(Szarkowski 1963)

72. Communicated by C. G. Heise. Also see Heise’s letter to Sander, Feb. 13, 1929 (in the possession of G. Sander).

101. The closest parallel in the category of photographic publications seems to be E. Curtis’s great documentation of eighty North Ameri¬

73. This title was not Sander’s own creation but was first used by Seiwert

can Indian tribes. In contrast with Sander, Curtis was lucky enough to

in 1921 in connection with a series of drawings (reproduced in

find a financier whose contributions guaranteed that the pictures were

Dadamax, 1975, pp. 102 ff.).

published in optimal form (Curtis 1907-1930).

74. For a short comment on “the new art form of the photo book” and for several relevant book titles see Molderings 1979, p. 259.

102. See Burckhardt 1930, pp. 146 ff; Prinz 1971, pp. 17 ff.; Amann 1599. 103. Kramer recently compared Sander’s project with Amann’s Ständebuch.

75. See the index of the portfolios, published for the first time at the

It should be kept in mind, though, that Amann shows only narrative

beginning of chapter 4 in the present volume. The deliberate picture

genre scenes of people engaged in various kinds of work, rather than

sequence in Face of the Time is discussed in greater detail in Keller 1976.

actual portraits (Sander, 1980, p. 19). 104. Gernsheim 1969, pp. 539 ff.

76. Sander 1931, lecture 5.

105. Hanfstaengl, 1975, unpaginated introduction.

77. Letter to P. Abelen, Jan. 16, 1951, in the possession of G. Sander.

106. On Galerie Contemporaine see Gernsheim 1969, pp. 307 ff. An almost

78. See Dost 1922; Bossert and Guttmann 1930; Benjamin 1977; MoholyNagy 1969; Schade n.d.; Schwarz 1931. Stenger exhibited his collec¬

complete collection of the numerous fascicles is preserved at the George Eastman House in Rochester, N.Y.

tion as early as 1927 in Basle in conjunction with a catalog which

107. Coburn 1913.

contained a photo-historical essay (unknown to me). His book Photo¬

108. A beautiful selection of Titzenthaler’s Berlin street views and useful

graphie in Kultur und Technik was only published in 1938, but smaller

information about his life and work can be found in Berlin, 1971, pp. 5

studies preceded it; see Stenger 1930 and Stenger 1931.

ff. Also see the picture selection and the short comments in “In un¬

79. The motto was printed in capital letters in Sander’s “Erläuterung zu

nachahmlicher Treue,’’ 1979, pp. 99 and 291 ff. I would like to thank

meiner Ausstellung im Kölnischen Kunstverein” of 1927 (Dadamax,

Barbara Norfleet of the Department of Visual and Environmental Studies at Harvard University for directing my attention to the Tit-

1975, p. 148).

zenthaler portraits reproduced here.

80. The exhibition is reviewed in Lotz 1933. 81. Newspaper clipping of 1930, in the possession of G. Sander.

109. On Biow’s Nationalgalerie see Gernsheim 1969, p. 159.

82. Letter to Görlinger, Oct. 22, 1952, in the possession of G. Sander.

110. Coke 1972, p. 13.

83. Sander, 1975.

111. Mayhew 1968.

84. Sander 1933, 1934 (Mosel, Siebengebirge, Eifel, Bergisches Land, Saar).

112. On photographic cycles of folk types, street vendors, and similar

85. See Sander: Mensch und Landschaft, 1977; Stadt und Land, 1975. 86. Schäfer 1930; Hermanns n.d.; John n.d.; Wolff and Paquet 1942.

genre subjects see Ranke 1977. 113. On German painting of the 1920s see Schmied 1969 and Realismus, 1974.

87. See Gemalte Fotografie, 1975; Molderings 1975. 88. Communicated by G. Sander.

114. Communicated by G. Sander.

89. See Sander, 1980, p. 36.

115. Reproduced in Simplicissimus, vol. 28 (1923-24), p. 387.

90. Letter to Neitzert, June 1, 1943; letter to Boden, Jan. 2, 1946, in the

116. This photograph is in the Stadtmuseum in Cologne. 117. For a series of photographs in the possession of the Deutsche

possession of G. Sander. 91. Sander, 1980, p. 37.

Gesellschaft für Photographie, Sander gave the following data: “All

92. Letter to Neitzert, June 1, 1943, in the possession of G. Sander.

exposures: Ernemann travel camera 13 x 18 centimeters—inbuilt Luc

93. Communicated by G. Sander.

shutter—time exposure—small aperture—objectives: Dagor, Heliar,

94. ln the possession of G. Sander.

Tessar,

95. In the possession of G. Sander.

Metol-Hydrochinon or Pyrodaylight.” I would like to thank L. F.

old lenses—plates by Westendorf-Wehner—development:

Gruber for making the DGPh collection accessible to me.

96. In the possession of G. Sander. 97. Though Sander was not interested in sociological and economical treatises, he did search for scholarly information concerning arche¬

118. On the evolution of orthochromatic and panchromatic plates see Gernsheim 1969, pp. 332 ff.

typal human character forms. From medical and criminological inves¬

119. Communicated by G. Sander.

tigations in this direction he derived the belief that criminals possess

120. Letter to Gundermann, June 17, 1948, in the possession ofG. Sander.

fixed physiognomic traits. Once Sander even published the portrait of

121. August Sander, as quoted by G. Sander.

an upright, honest citizen under the title “criminal type,

122. August Sander, as quoted by G. Sander.

making

sure, however, that the eyes were blocked out and that he had the

123. W. Kemp, in Sander, 1975, p. 54.

consent of the sitter (communicated by G. Sander). In another dubi¬

124. Sander 1931, lecture 6.

ous episode, Sander sold several portraits to the photographic pub¬

125. Communicated by G. Sander.

lishing house of Theodor Benzinger in Stuttgart, to be published as

126. Kramer’s claim that Sander represented people “as they existed'

“occupational types of alpine origins” in a series of “48 photographs

seems to be an undue simplification of a very complex matter (Sander,

concerning the racial character of the German people.

Labeled as

“Nordic Gau Types,” Lendvai-Dircksen’s portraits seem to fit much

1980, p. 13). 127. See Tönms 1975.

128- ln an attempt to separate Sander from the “social-critical authors of his time

and to depict him instead as a “naive” artist, Gasser arrives at

149. Hansen 1915, p. 141. As Bergmann points out, contemporary review¬

the perplexing conclusions that Sander “consciously refrained from

ers

representing his sitters’ surroundings” and that he entered into “a

doubted his “scientific accuracy.” Unfortunately, Bergmann does not

consensus with his models which bordered on complicity.” It seems hardly possible to misunderstand Sander in a more fundamental way than this (Gasser 1964, pp. 254 ff.). 129

148. Hansen 1915, p. 31.

See Hanfstaengl, 1975; Bruce 1973; Early Victorian Album, 1976.

found

“statistical

manipulations”

in

Hansen’s

pursue this question (Bergmann 1970, p. 205, note 168). (1904), in which the philosophy of decadence in dubiously mixed with racial and guild theories. 151. On Spengler see Bergmann 1970, pp. 179 ff.

131

152. Communicated by G. Sander.

Titzenthaler’s work. Photo series were quite often commissioned by

153. Spengler 1932, vol. 2, pp. 90-107.

government and industry around 1900, and occasionally they were

154. Sander was guided here by the concept of “Ständestaat,” which can¬

exhibited or published; for example, the Hamburg-America Line had

not be adequately translated into English. “Polity of estates” (i.e.,

its “Emigration Halls” photographed by J. Hamann in 1909 and sub¬

government through guilds and other organized interest groups such

sequently published the pictures in an advertising brochure, Auswan¬

as the gentry and the clergy) seems too artificial, even though it is

derer-Hallen (n.d.).

sometimes used. For useful comments on this type of government see

132. On Felix Man see Man, 1978; Gidal 1973; pp. 37 ff. and 91. 133. Both quotations are from Brecht 1964, p. 136. 134

and

150. See also the related writings by Ammon (1895) and Thurnwald

130. On Fenton’s Crimean excursion see Gernsheim 1954. It would be interesting to know whether Sander was familiar with

writings

This title can be found on a print personally identified by Sander and kept in the collection of Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Photographie, Col¬ ogne.

Weber 1968, vol. Ill, pp. 1070 ff. 155. The Wandervogel movement was an “anti-establishment” and “backto-nature” movement among young German intellectuals in the early twentieth century. 156. A few major contributions to the problem of “Ständestaat” gov¬

135. Reproduced in Schmied 1969, p. 283.

ernment in contemporary Germany are Herrfahrdt 1921; Tatarin-

136. Sander also differs here from Berliner Illustrierte, which in 1930—31

Tarnheyden

ran a series of cover photographs labeled “figures of the time”

1922;

Brauweiler

1925;

List

1930.

On

the

Reichswirtschaftsrat see Tatarin-Tarnheyden 1922, pp. 160 ff. A Na¬

[Zeitgestalten] and representing modern occupational roles such as

tional Socialist view of the problem is given in Beyer 1941. A rather

“the sports broadcaster.”

unsatisfactory attempt at the historical classification of these theories

137. This avoidance was wise, as may be seen in a comparison with more

is offered in Sontheimer 1962. For the Catholic version of the “Stän¬

recent photographic portrait series in which such an inflexible proce¬

destaat”

dure resulted in a leveling of the sitters’ identities (e.g. Penn 1960;

Ordnung.”

Rose 1972). 138. A good example of Sander’s habit of “standardizing” pictures long

concept

see

Staatslexikon,

1957,

entry

“Berufstandische

157. Brauweiler 1925, p. 36. 158. Brauweiler 1925, p. 38.

after they were taken can be found in a series of four farmers’ faces

159. Spann 1921, pp. 231 ff.

extracted from full-figure portraits (Sander, 1978, figs. 67-70).

160. Sombart, quoted after Brauweiler 1925, p. 22.

139. In such enlargements Sander seems to return to his earlier charac-

161. Ernst Bloch observed that: “Parliamentary democracy is hated be¬

terological interests, i.e. to the idea that human faces (and hands)

cause it guarantees free competition and the corresponding political

possess recurring, archetypal features which can be read and inter¬

structure. The ‘Ständestaat’ is meant to abolish this structure and to

preted much as a graphologist reads and interprets handwriting.

lead back to the level of the small family businesses of early capi¬

140. Letter to Abelen, Jan. 16, 1951, in the possession of G. Sander.

talism. For big business the ‘Ständestaat’ concept is useful as an instru¬

141. In the possession of G. Sander. The abbreviation M. in the left column

ment against communist class struggle, while the middle class turns to

stands for Mappe (portfolio). On the use of the word matter [die

it as a means of salvation and a romantic, yet up-to-date expression of

Materie] in the entry for M. 40, see “The Metropolis and The Last People” in chapter 5 below.

its anachronism.” (Bloch 1973, p. 110) 162. Unfortunately this fact has been obscured in the present edition by the

142- The cyclical concept of history has since lost much of its credibility.

inclusion of four proletarian portraits (plates 155, 156, 164, 174) and

However, with its help Sander was able to deal with a problem which

two farm portraits (158, 169). There is documentary evidence that

is largely ignored by statistically oriented social scientists; the problem

Sander intended to place these pictures in the “worker” and “farmer”

of anachronism. Consider Bloch’s important statement: “In contrast

portfolios, respectively.

with England and France, Germany was and is the classical country of

163. Zahn 1929, p. 238.

Anachronism, that is, of unresolved remnants of older economic con¬

164. See Sombart 1929, pp. 285 ff. See also the very interesting comments

ditions and mentalities” (Bloch 1973, pp. 113 ff.).

offered by Tönmes under the entry “Stände und Klassen” in Handwör¬

143. Paul Bourfeind was a Social Democratic (SPD) alderman in Cologne-

terbuch der Soziologie, 1931, pp. 621 ff. Also note Kracauer’s observa¬

Lindenthal. He also was a personal friend of Sander’s, had his portrait

tion: “What’s the use of talking about the fully developed personality,

taken by Sander, and seems to have shared with him many political

considering

convictions. A typewritten draft of the article (Bourfeind 1928) which

(Kracauer 1974, pp. 30 ff.; related comments in Jaspers 1933, pp. 65 ff.)

seems to have been submitted to Sander for corrections is in the

165. Review from unidentified newspaper, 1929; in the possession of G.

possession of G. Sander. 144 145

See Sander’s personal comment on the print (in the possession of

147

the

occupations

are

increasingly

fragmented?”

Sander. 166. The following paragraphs are largely based upon Aubin and Zorn

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Photographie, Cologne).

1976; Bracher 1971; Hoffmann 1965; Geiger 1932; Gablentz and Men-

Communicated by G. Sander. In this respect Sander follows a con¬

nicke 1930.

temporary trend fittingly diagnosed by Jaspers: “Youth as highest

146

that

167. Die Angestellten, n.d., p. 8. In all, there were 9.7 million employees in

vital capability and erotic exaltation is the desired form of life in

the German agriculture, forestry, and fishing trades (Hoffmann 1965,

general” (Jaspers 1933, p. 49).

p. 206). On German agriculture in specific, see Aubin and Zorn 1976,

Bibliographic references to the prolific writings of philosophers of

pp. 758 ff.

decadence are given in Handwörterbuch der Soziologie, 1931, p. 527

168. Geiger 1932, pp. 22 and 92.

(entry “Siedlungen II, Städtische Siedlungen, Stadt,” by W. Som-

169. On the mechanization of German agriculture see Albrecht 1926, p. 58;

bart). For detailed and enlightening discussions of the philosophy of

Aubin and Zorn 1976, pp. 758 ff. The portfolio “the farmer of the

decadence in its historical evolution see Bergmann 1970 and Stern

second half of the 20th century” represents a late addition to the

1961.

portrait atlas. The relatively numerous pictures belonging in this cate¬

I quote from the edition of 1915. On Hansen, see Bergmann 1970, pp.

gory have been excluded from the present volume because they

50 ff.

seemed to go beyond its historical framework.

170. Bechtel 1956, p. 416; see also Aubin and Zorn 1976. pp. 302 ff.

prints (in the possession of the Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Photo¬

171. Geiger 1932, p. 87; Pesl 1926, pp. 70 ff.

graphie, Cologne). To give just a few examples: “In this picture I have

172. Die Angestellten, n.d., p. 25.

tried to demonstrate the difference between part-time students having

173. Communicated by G. Sander.

to pay their own way and regular students.”

174. Against the documentary evidence, these portraits (plates 155, 156,

trait in plate 200)

164, and 174) have been included in the “woman” group, which

(concerning the por¬

“This picture, called ‘vagabonds’ is related to an¬

other one, called ‘tramps.’ It is supposed to demonstrate the difference

Sander planned to reserve for middle-class portraits.

between vagabonds and downright tramps.”

(concerning plates

175. Tucholsky 1929. On AIZ see Willmann 1974.

358, 362)

176. On the role of women in the 1920s see Bäumer 1932; Glass and Kische

between the elastic, elegant and the bullish boxer.”

1930; Jaussi 1928; Die Kultur der Frau, 1931

plate 85)

“This picture is supposed to demonstrate the difference (concerning

Sander’s scientific attitude is very dearly expressed in such

177. Die Angestellten, n.d., pp. 27 and 85.

comments. For a couple of contemporary reviews which were not

178. Handwörterbuch der Staatswissenschaften, vol. 4, 1927, pp. 315 and 321

accessible to me, see the bibliography in Sander, 1980.

(entry “Frauenfrage und Frauenarbeit”).

195. Slavin 1976.

179. Die Angestellten, n.d., p. 21. On the exact distribution of female em¬ ployees in the various occupations see Bäumer 1932, p. 59.

196. Benjamin 1977, p. 381. 197. This is a greatly condensed version of the last chapter of the German edition. Unless otherwise stated, the quotes are taken from contem¬

180. For a description of sex roles largely coinciding with Sander’s views

porary newspaper clippings in the possession of G. Sander. Since the

see Oekinghaus 1925, p. 46. 181. The contemporary illustrated newspapers, photo periodicals, and

clippings are poorly identified and the quotes have been greatly ab¬

portrait publications (such as Brieger’s Frauengesicht der Gegenwart)

breviated, I have omitted many citations. For more complete quota¬

offer abundant proof of this.

tions and citations see the German edition. 198. “Shift of power”: Benjamin 1977, p. 381; “revolution”: M. Gesell, in

182. Die Dame 1926-27, no. 1, pp. 15 and 37.

Vossische Zeitung (Berlin), Dec. 19, 1929.

183. In the present edition the “servants” portfolio consists largely of male employees, which does not seem to be in keeping with Sander’s origi¬

199. On the ideology of “cultural despair” see Stern 1961.

nal intentions. Among other things, Sander planned to include por¬

200. F. Evers in unidentified newspaper, ca. 1929-30.

traits of women engaged in cooking and laundry work. In other

201. Sander 1929, p. 14.

words, he conceived of such housework as an occupation just like

202. Sander 1929, p. 14.

farming or bookkeeping.

203. P. Panter (i.e., K. Tucholsky), “Auf dem Nachtisch,” m Die Welt¬ bühne (Berlin), March 25, 1930, p. 471.

184. Geiger 1932, p. 100. 185. Geiger 1932, pp. 97 ff.; Lederer and Marschak 1926, pp. 120 ff.;

204. Bloch 1973, p. 18.

Kracauer 1974; Die Angestellten, n.d.; Die wirtschaftliche und soziale Lage, 1931; Bloch 1973, pp. 29 ff. 186. See Wendler 1974, pp. 181 ff. 187. Die Angestellten, n.d., pp. 18-21 and 47. 188. Most of the beggars and peddlers in Citizens of the Twentieth Century were simultaneously included in a separate picture series which

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Sander called “people who knocked at my door.” (See Sander’s titles on several portraits in the possession of Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Photographie, Cologne.) The purpose of this separate series is un¬ known. 189. Flandwörterbuch der Staatswissenschaften, vol. 5, 1923, p. 961 (entry

B. Abbott, The World of Atget. New York, 1964. G. Albrecht, Das deutsche Bauerntum im Zeitalter des Kapitalismus. In

“Kriegsbescahädigten- und Kriegshinterbliebenenversorgung”) and

Grundriss der Sozialökonomik IX:

p. 518 (entry “Jugendamt”); vol. 6, 1925, pp. 749 If. (entry “Obdach¬

Tübingen, 1926.

lose”); Pesl 1926, p. 109; Geiger 1932, p. 96.

J. Ammann, Kunstbüchlein, darinnen neben Fürbildung vieler geistlicher und

190. Reproduced in Bertonati 1969 (plate LVII); Schmied 1969 (plate 146). Also consider movies such as Ruttmann’s 1927 “Berlin, Symphonie

Das soziale

System

des Kapitalismus.

weltlicher Standespersonen auch die sieben Planeten . . . auf das zierlichste gerissen. Frankfurt/Main, 1599.

einer Grossstadt (Gregor and Patalas 1973, p. 70), and the sociologi¬ cally oriented photoessays published by Münchener Illustrierte Presse

1895.

and Berliner Illustrierte Zeitung (see Gidal 1973). 191. In the present edition the originally envisioned sequence of the “ger¬ minal portfolio” was disregarded. According to indisputable evidence (negative inscriptions and handwritten lists),

O. Ammon, Die Gesellschaftsordnung und ihre natürlichen Grundlagen. Jena,

Sander wanted the

twelve portraits, arranged as follows: Plate 1 in the present edition

Die Angestellten in der Wirtschaft. Eine Auswertung der amtlichen Berufszählung von 1925, ed. Allgemeiner Freier Angestelltenbund. Berlin, n.d. Diane Arbus, ed. Doon Arbus. Millerton, N.Y., 1972.

should be 4; plate 2, no change; plate 3, no change; plate 4 should be 1;

H. Aubin and W. Zorn, Handbuch der deutschen Wirtschafts- und Sozial¬

plate 5 should be 9; plate 6 should be 5; plate 7, no change; plate 8, no

geschichte, vol. 2. Stuttgart, 1976.

change; plate 9 should be 6; plates 10-12, no changes. Since according

Die Auswanderer-Hallen der Hamburg Amerika Linie in Hamburg. Hamburg,

to other documentary evidence Sander labeled portrait 1 as “the earth-

n.d. (ca. 1910).

bound man,” portrait 2 as “the philosopher,” and so on, the correct sequencing of the pictures is by no means an academic question. 192. Atget was well aware of the “third dimension” of photography, as is proved by his self-chosen title “auteur-editeur. ’ Several albums carefully composed by Atget himself are preserved in the Biblio-

Eugene Atget Lichtbilder, revised and enlarged edition. Munich, 1975 (first published in 1930). G. Bäumer, Die Frau im deutschen Staat. Berlin, 1932. H. Bechtel, Wirtschaftsgeschichte Deutschlands, vol. 3. Munich, 1956.

theque Nationale in Paris. On a book project which never materi¬ alized see Abbott 1964, plate 76. On Atget see also Atget, 1975 (with

D. Bell, The Coming of the Post-Industrial Society. A Venture in Social Forecast¬

bibliography).

ing. New York, 1973.

193. See Keller 1976.

W. Benjamin, Kleine Geschichte der Photographie, ln Gesammelte Schriften,

194. How much Sander counted on the viewer’s willingness to study his

vol. 2, ed. R. Tiedemann and H. Schweppenhausen Frankfurt/Main, 1977

pictures actively, imaginatively, and by means of constant compari¬

(first published in 1931).

sons becomes apparent when one reads his personal remarks on the K. Bergemann, Agrarromantik und Grossstadtfeindschaft. Meisenheim, 19/'ü.

Berlin I : Photographien des 19. Jahrhunderts, second edition, ed. F. Terveen.

O. H. von Gablentz and C. Mennicke, Deutsche Berufskunde.

Berlin. 1971.

schnitt durch die Berufe und Arbeitskreise der Gegenwart. Leipzig, 1930.

Ein Quer¬

E- Bertonati, II realismo in Germania. Nuova Oggettivitä—Realistno Magico.

M. Gasser, “Auskunft über den Fotografen August Sander.” In Welt vor

Milan, 1969.

Augen.

E

P. Gay, Weimar Culture. The Outsider as Insider. New York, 1968.

Bertonati, Das experimentelle Photo in Deutschland 1918-1940. Munich,

1978.

T. Geiger, Die soziale Schichtung des deutschen Volkes. Stuttgart, 1932.

J. Beyer, Die Ständeideologien der Systemzeit und ihre Überwindung. Darm¬ stadt, 1941. E

Gemalte Fotografie—Rheinlandschaften

Theo Campion, F. M. Jansen, August

Sander, with a text by J. Fdeusinger von Waldegg. Exhibition catalog.

Bloch, Erbschaft dieser Zeit. Frankfurt/Main, 1973 (first published in

1935). H. T

Reisen und Menschen, ed. Fd. Loetscher. Zurich, 1964.

Bonn, 1976. Germany.

Bossert and Fd. Guttmann, Aus der Frühzeit der Photographie 1840-

1870. Ein Bilderbuch nach 200 Originalen. Frankfurt/Main, 1930.

The New Photography 1927-1933. Documents and Essays, ed. D.

Mellor. London, 1978. Fd. Gernsheim, The History of Photography from the Camera Obscura to the

P. Bourfeind, “Menschen des 20. Jahrhunderts.” Rheinische Blätter für Kul¬

Beginning of the Modern Era, second revised and enlarged edition. New

turpolitik, Jan. 1928.

York, 1969.

K. D. Bracher, Die Auflösung der Weimar Republik, fifth edition. Villingen,

Fd. Gernsheim, Roger Fenton. Photographer of the Crimean War. London, 1954

1971.

(reprint: New York, 1973).

H. Brauweiler, Berufsstand und Staat.

Betrachtungen über eine neue ständische

T. N. Gidal, Modern Photojournalism. Origin and Evolution 1910—1933. New York, 1973.

Verfassung des deutschen Staates. Berlin, 1925. +■

B Brecht, “Short Description of a New Technique of Acting Which Pro¬

F. Glass and D. Kische, Die wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Verhältnisse der

duces an Alienation Effect.” In Brecht on Theater: The Development of an

berufstätigen Frauen. Berlin, 1930.

Aesthetic, ed. J. Willett. New York, 1964 (essay written ca. 1935-1941). M. von Brevem, Künstlerische Photographie von Hill bis Moholy-Nagy. Ber¬

N. Gosling, Nadar. New York, 1976. U. Gregor and E. Patalas, Geschichte des Films. Gütersloh, 1973.

lin, 1971. J. Fdabermas, L. Brieger, as Frauengesicht der Gegenwart. Stuttgart, 1930. D. Bruce, Sun Pictures: The Hill-Adamson Calotypes. London, 1973. FT Buddemeier, Panorama Diorama Photographie.

A. Fdalley, “August Sander,” with a translation of “Die Photographie als

Entstehung und Wirkung

neuer Medien im 19. Jahrhundert. Munich, 1970.

Weltsprache” (lecture 5 in the cycle “Wesen und Werden der Photo¬ graphie”). In Photography. Current Perspectives, ed. J. Liebling. Rochester,

J. Burckhardt, Beiträge zur Kunstgeschichte von Italien (Jakob-Burckhardt-

N.Y., 1978. R. Fdamann and J. Fdermand, Stilkunst um 1900, second edition. Munich,

Gesamtausgabe, vol. 12). Stuttgart, 1930. L. F. Clauss, Rasse und Seele.

Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit, sixth edition. Neuwied,

1974.

Eine Einführung in den Sinn der leiblichen

1975.

Gestalt, eleventh edition. Berlin, 1938 (first published in 1933).

Handwörterbuch der Soziologie, ed. A. Vierkandt. Stuttgart, 1931.

A. C. Coburn, Men of Mark. London, 1913.

Handwörterbuch der Staatswissenschaften, fourth edition, vols. 4-6. Jena,

Alvin Langdon Coburn Photographer. An Autobiography, ed. Fd.

and A.

Gernsheim. London, 1966.

Franz Hanfstaengl. Album der Zeitgenossen. Fotos von 1853 bis 1863, ed. C.

V. D. Coke, The Painter and the Photograph from Delacroix to Warhol. Albu¬ querque, 1972.

Diener and G. Fulton-Smith. Munich, 1975. G. Fdansen, Die drei Bevölkerungsstufen.

E. Curtis, The North American Indians, 20 volumes. Cambridge, Mass.,

Ein Versuch, die Ursachen für das

Blühen und Altern der Völker nachzuweisen, new edition. Munich, 1915 (first published in 1889).

1907-1930. Vom Dadamax bis zum Grüngürtel. Köln in den 20er Jahren. Exhibition catalog. Cologne, 1975. Ein

Beitrag zur Geschichte der photographischen Kunst. Berlin, 1922. An Early Victorian Album. The photographic masterpieces (1843-1847) of David Octavius Hill and Robert Adamson, ed. C. Ford. New York, 1976. Hugo ErJurth, Sechsunddreissig Künstlerbildnisse, ed. O. Steinert. Essen, 1960. Hugo ErJurth. Bildnisse, ed. O. Steinert, with an introduction by J. A. Schmoll gen. Eisenwerth. Gütersloh, 1961. Hugo ErJurth 1874-1948

A. Fdaus, Moholy-Nagy. Photographs and Photograms. New York, 1980. W. Fdermanns, Der schöne deutsche Rhein.

W. Dost (with E. Stenger), Die Daguerreotypie in Berlin 1839-1860.

Der Fotograf der Goldenen Zwanziger Jahre, ed. B.

Lohse. Seebruck, 1977. Film und Foto.

1923 ff.

Landschaft, Kunst und Kultur.

Berlin, n.d. (ca. 1930). Fd. Fderrfahrdt, Das Problem der berufsständischen Vertretung von der französi¬ schen Revolution bis zur Gegenwart. Berlin, 1921. Fd. Fdoffmann, Deutschland erwache!

Munich, 1923.

W. G. Fdoffmann, Das Wachstum der deutschen Wirtschaft seit der Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts. Berlin, 1965. N. Huse, Neues Bauen 1918-1933.

Moderne Architektur in der Weimarer

Republik. Munich, 1975. K. Jaspers, Man in the Modern Age (translation of Die geistige Situation der

Internationale Ausstellung des deutschen Werkbunds. Exhibition

catalog, Stuttgart, 1929 (new edition, with an introduction by K. Steinorth: Stuttgart, 1979).

Zeit, 1931). New York, 1933. N. Jaussi, Der wirtschaftliche Aufstieg der Frau. Zurich, 1928. P. W. John, Am Rhein, am deutschen Rhein. Berlin, n.d. (ca. 1935).

Film und Foto der Zwanziger Jahre, ed. U. Eskildsen and J. C. Fdorak. Exhi¬

E. W. Juhl, Das Lichtbild als Kunstwerk. Halle, 1897.

bition catalog. Stuttgart, 1979. G. Karginov, Rodcsenko. Budapest, 1975. Fd. W Fischer, Menschenschönheit.

Gestalt und Antlitz des Menschen in Leben

und Kunst. Berlin, n.d. (ca. 1935).

U. Keller, “An Art Historical View ofPaul Strand.” Image 17 (Dec. 1974), pp. 1 ff.

G

Freund, Photography and Society. Boston, 1980.

U. Keller, “Photographs in Context.” Image 19 (Dec

1976;

pp. 1 ff.

U. Keller, “Die deutsche Portraitfotographie von 1918 bis 1933.’

In U.

L. Moholy, Marginalien zu Moholy-Nagy. Dokumentarische Ungereimtheiten Krefeld, 1972.

Keller, H. Molderings, and W. Ranke, Beiträge zur Geschichte und Ästhetik

H. Molderings, review of August Sander’s Rheinlandschaften. Kritische Be¬

der Photographie. Giessen, 1977 (second edition 1979).

richte 3, no. 5/6 (1975), pp. 120 ff.

W. Kemp, Foto-Essays zur Geschichte und Theorie der Fotographie. Munich

H. Molderings, “Urbanismus und technologischer Utopismus.

1978.

der neuen Fotografie in Deutschland und Frankreich.” In Paris-Berlin 1900-

F. Kempe, “Die Frühzeit der Photographie in Deutschland.” In P. Pollack,

1930.

Aspekte

Übereinstimmungen und Gegensätze Frankreich-Deutschland. Munich,

1979.

Die Welt der Photographie. Vienna, 1962. F. Kempe, “Die deutsche Photographie um diejahrhundertwende und ihre Beziehungen zum Ausland.” ln P. Pollack, Die Welt der Photographie. Vienna, 1962.

S. Müller, Kunst und Industrie.

Ideologie und Organisation des Funktional¬

ismus in der Architektur. Munich, 1974. Nadar (Gaspard Felix Tournachon), Quand j’etais photographe. Paris, 1900.

F. Kempe, Vor der Camera.

Zur Geschichte der Photographie in Hamburg.

W. C. Naef, The Collection of Alfred Stieglitz. Fifty Pioneers of Modern Photog¬

Hamburg, 1976.

raphy. New York, 1978.

M. Kozloff, “The Uncanny Portrait: Sander, Arbus, Samaras.” In Photog¬

G. Naylor, The Arts and Crafts Movement. London, 1971.

raphy and Fascination, ed. M. Kozloff. New York, 1979.

T. Neumann, Sozialgeschichte der Photographie. Neuwied, 1966.

S. Kracauer, Die Angestellten. Frankfurt/Main, 1974 (first published in 1930).

B. Newhall, The History of Photography, fourth edition. New York, 1964. E. Oekinghaus, Die gesellschaftliche und rechtliche Stellung der Frau. Jena,

Die Kultur der Frau.

Eine Lebenssymphonie der Frau des 20. Jahrhunderts, ed.

A. Schmidt-Beil. Berlin, 1931.

1925. I. Penn, Moments Preserved. Eight Essays in Photographs and Words. New

Vom Leben geformt.

Jugend- und Mannesbildnisse bedeutender Persönlichkeiten.

Kämpen, 1934.

York, 1960. L.

E. Lederer and J. Marschak, “Der neue Mittelstand.” In Grundriss der

D.

Pesl,

“Mittelstandfragen.” In Grundriss der Sozialökonomik IX.

Tübingen, 1926.

Sozialökonomik IX. Tübingen, 1926. Das Photoalbum 1858-1918. E. Lendvai-Dircksen, Das deutsche Volksgesicht. Berlin, n.d. (ca. 1930). E. Lendvai-Dircksen, Das Gesicht des deutschen Ostens. Berlin, 1934. E. Lendvai-Dircksen, Flandern. Das germanische Volksgesicht. Bayreuth, 1942.

Eine Dokumentation zur Kultur- und Sozial¬

geschichte. Exhibition catalog. Munich, 1975. Pictorial Photography in Britain 1900-1920. Exhibition catalog. London, 1978. P. Pollack, The Picture History of Photography. From the earliest beginnings to

E. Lendvai-Dircksen, Norwegen. Das germanische Volksgesicht. Bayreuth, 1942.

the present day, revised and enlarged edition. New York, 1969. R.

E. Lendvai-Dircksen, Ein deutsches Menschenbild. Antlitz des Volkes. Frank¬ furt/Main, 1961.

Pommer,

“August Sander and the Cologne Progressives.” Art in

America 64 (Jan./Feb. 1976), pp. 38 ff. J. Prinet and A. Dilasser, Nadar. Turin, 1973.

H. Lerski, Alltagsköpfe. Berlin, 1931.

W. Prinz, Geschichte der Sammlung. Volume 1 of Die Sammlung der Selbstbild¬

A. Lichtwark, Die Bedeutung der Amateurphotographie. Halle, 1894.

nisse in den Uffizien, ed. U. Middeldorf and U. Procacci. Berlin, 1971.

E. List, Der Berufsständegedanke in der deutschen Verfassungsdiskussion seit

W. Ranke, “Zur sozialdokumentarischen Fotografie um 1900.” In U. Kel¬

1919. Leipzig, 1930.

ler, H. Molderings, and W. Ranke, Beiträge zur Geschichte und Ästhetik der

F. Loescher, Die Bildnisphotographie. Ein Wegweiser für Fachmänner und Lieb¬ haber, fourth edition. Berlin, 1917 (first published in 1903). W. Lotz, review of the exhibition “Die Kamera.” Die Form, Zeitschrift für

J.

Raphaels,

Künstlerische Photographie.

Düsseldorf,

1895.Realismus und

Sachlichkeit. Aspekte der deutschen Kunst 1919-1933. Exhibition catalog. East' Berlin, 1974.

gestaltende Arbeit 7 (1933), pp. 321 ff. F. Lütge, Deutsche Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte, third edition. Göttingen,

A. Renger-Patzsch, Die Welt ist schön. Berlin, 1928. E. Retzlaff, Antlitz des Alters. Düsseldorf, 1930.

1966. Felix FI. Man.

Fotografie. Giessen, 1977.

60 Jahre Photographie. Exhibition catalog. Bielefeld, 1978.

A. Marai and L. Dormandi, 1910-1930. Zwanzig Jahre Weltgeschichte in 200 Bildern. Berlin, 1931.

E. Retzlaff, Menschen am Werk. Göttingen, 1931. E. Retzlaff, Die von der Scholle. Göttingen, 1931. L. D. Rice and D. Steadman, Photographs of Moholy-Nagy from the Collection

F. Matthies-Masuren, Künstlerische Photographie: Entwicklung und Einfluss in Deutschland. Berlin, 1897.

of Williams Larson. Claremont, Calif., 1975. Alexander Rodtschenko: Fotografien 1920-1933. Exhibition catalog, ed. E.

H. Mayhew, London Labour and the London Poor, 4 vols.

New York, 1968

Weiss. Cologne, 1978.

(first published in 1861-62).

K. Rössing, Mein Vorurteil gegen diese Zeit. Frankfurt/Main, 1974 (first

E. Mendelsohn, Amerika.

published in 1932).

Bilderbuch eines Architekten. Berlin, 1925.

Der Mensch mein Bruder. Lichtbilder von Helmar Lerski, ed. A. Lerski. Dres¬

B. Rose and H. Rose, Paare.

den, 1958.

land zu Beginn der siebziger Jahre. Ebenhausen, 1972.

Menschenbilder aus der Bundesrepublik Deutsch¬

Menschen der Zeit. Hundertundein Lichtbildnis wesentlicher Männer und Frauen

A. Sander, Antlitz der Zeit.

aus deutscher Gegenwart und Vergangenheit. Königstein, 1930.

(reprinted: Munich, 1976).

Moholy-Nagy 60 Fotos, with a text by F. Roh. Berlin, 1930.

A. Sander, series “Deutsche Lande Deutsche Menschen”: Bergisches Land

L. Moholy-Nagy, Painting Photography Film. Translation of Malerei, Foto¬ grafie, Film (1925). London, 1969; Cambridge, Mass., 1969.

Menschen des 20. Jahrhunderts. Munich, 1929

(Düsseldorf, 1933); Die Eifel (Düsseldorf, 1933); Die Mosel (Rothenfelde, 1934); Das Siebengebirge (Rothenfelde, 1934); Die Saar (Rothenfelde, 1934)

61

A

Sander, "Wesen und Werden der Photographie." Six radio lectures,

Paul Strand. A Retrospective Monograph. The Years 1915-1968. Millerton,

1931. Original manuscripts in the possession of G. Sander.

N.Y., 1971.

August Sander Deutschenspiegel.

Paul Strand. Sixty Years of Photographs. Millerton, N.Y., 1976.

Menschen des 20. Jahrhunderts. Gütersloh,

1962.

J. Szarkowski, review of August Sander. Deutschenspiegel. Infinity (June

August Sander. Men Without Masks, Faces of Germany 1910-1938. Boston,

1963), pp. 11 and 23.

1973.

E. Tatarin-Tarnheyden, Die Berufsstände.

August Sander Rheinlandschaßen. Photographien 1929-1946. Munich, 1975.

der deutschen Wirtschaftsverfassung. Berlin, 1922.

Ihre Stellung im Staatsrecht und in

August Sander 1876-1976. A Retrospective in Honor of the Artist’s 100th Birth¬

R. Thurwald, “Stadt und Land im Lebensprozess der Rasse.” Archiv für

day. Exhibit catalog. Washington, D.C., 1976.

Rassen- und Gesellschaftsbiologie 1 (1904).

August Sander. Millerton, N.Y., 1977.

G.

August Sander. Mensch und Landschaft. Exhibition catalog.

Rolandseck,

Tönnis,

“Der Einfluss des Dialogs zwischen Fotograf und Foto¬

grafiertem auf die Struktur der Portraitfotografie.” Zeitschrift für Kunst¬ pädagogik 2 (1975), pp. 93 ff.

1977. August Sander. Photographs of an Epoch. Millerton, N.Y., 1980. W. Schade, Europäische Dokumente. Historische Photos aus den Jahren 1840-

K. Tucholsky, Deutschland, Deutschland über alles. Berlin, 1929. "In unnachahmlicher Treue.” Photographie im 19. Jahrhundert—ihre Geschichte in den deutschsprachigen Ländern. Exhibition catalog. Cologne, 1979.

1900. Berlin, n.d. (ca. 1930).

W. Warstatt, Die künstlerische Photographie. Ihre Entwicklung, ihre Probleme,

W. Schäfer, Das deutsche Rheinland. Berlin, 1930.

ihre Bedeutung, second revised edition. Leipzig, 1919. F. Schauwecker, So ist der Friede. Die Revolution der Zeit in 300 Bildern. M. Weber, Economy and Society. An Outline of Interpretive Sociology, ed. G.

Berlin, 1928.

Roth and C. Wittich. New York, 1968. English translation of Wirtschaft und W. Schmied, Neue Sachlichkeit und magischer Realismus in Deutschland 1918—

Gesellschaft (1921).

1933. Hannover, 1969. W. Wendler, “Die Einschätzung der Gegenwart im deutschen Zeitroman.” W. Schöppe, Meister der Kamera erzählen. Halle, 1937.

In Die deutsche Literatur der Weimarer Republik, ed. W. Rothe. Stuttgart,

B. K. Schultz, Erbkunde, Rassenkunde, Rassenpflege. Ein Leitfaden zum Selbst¬

1974.

studium und für den Unterricht. Munich, 1934 (first published in 1933).

H. Willmann, Geschichte der Arbeiter Illustrierten Zeitung 1921-1938. East

E. Schultz and F. G. Jünger, Das Gesicht der Demokratie. Breslau, 1931.

Berlin, 1974.

E. Schultz and E. Jünger, Die veränderte Welt. Eine Bilderfibel unserer Zeit.

Die wirtschaftliche und soziale Lage der Angestellten.

Breslau, 1933.

nisse aus der grossen sozialen Erhebung der GdA. Berlin, 1931.

J. Schumpeter, Das soziale Antlitz des deutschen Reiches. Bonn, 1929.

K. W. Wolf-Czapek, Rudolph Dührkoop und die Neugestaltung der Bildnis photographie.

H. Schwarz, Der Meister der Photographie. David Octavius Hill. 1802-1870.

Ergebnisse und Erkennt¬

Zur Feier des 25jährigen Bestehens seiner Werkstatt. Berlin,

1908.

Leipzig, 1931. P. Wolff and A. Paquet. Der Rhein, third edition. Düsseldorf, 1942. N. Slavin, When Two or More are Gathered Together. New York, 1976. F. Zahn, “Die Entwicklung der räumlichen und sozialen Gliederung des W. Sombart, "Kapitalismus und kapitalistischer Geist in ihrer Bedeutung für Volksgemeinschaft und Volkszersetzung.”

In

Volk und Reich der

deutschen Volkes.” In Volk und Reich der Deutschen, vol. 1, ed. B. Harms. Berlin, 1929.

Deutschen, vol. 1, ed. B. Harms. Berlin, 1929. Unsere Zeit in 77 Frauenbildnissen. Kämpen, n.d. (ca. 1932). K. Sontheimer, Antidemokratisches Denken in der Weimarer Republik. Mu¬ nich, 1962. Sowjetische Fotografie 1928-1932, ed. R. Sartorti and H. Rogge. Munich, 1975. O. Spann, Der wahre Staat. Leipzig, 1921.

SOURCES OF FIGURES

O. Spengler, The Decline of the West. New York, 1932. English translation of Der Untergang des Abendlandes (1920). H Spörl, Die Portraitkunst in der Photographie. Ein Lehrbuch der Portraitphotographie auf neuzeitlichem Wege, second revised edition. Leipzig, 1924 (first

Foto Marburg, Universität Marburg: figure 27.

published in 1909).

George Eastman House, Rochester, N.Y.: figures 3, 4, 29, 30, 43.

Staatslexikon, ed. Görresgesellschaft. Volume 1. Freiburg, 1957.

Gernsheim Collection, Humanities Research Center, University of Texas,

Stadt und Land.

Photographien von August Sander. Exhibition catalog. Mün¬

ster, 1975. K. Steinorth, Photographen der 20er Jahre. Munich, 1979. E

Stenger, “Der Landschaftsphotograph und seine Arbeitsbehelfe zwi¬

schen 1860 und 1880.” In Matschoss, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Technik und

Austin: figure 46. Harvard Social Ethics Collection, Seton Hall, Harvard University, Cam¬ bridge, Mass.: figures 31-34, 44. Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe, Hamburg: figure 10. National Portrait Gallery, London: figure 9.

Industrie, 1930. E. Stenger, Der Daguerreotypist J B. Isenring. Seine Verdienste um die Ein¬ führung und Ausgestaltung der Daguerreotypie 1839-1842. Berlin, 1931. E. Stenger, Die Photographie in Kultur und Technik. Ihre Geschichte während hundert Jahren. Leipzig, 1938. F

Stern, The Politics of Cultural Despair. A Study in the Rise of the German

Ideology. Berkeley, 1961.

62

All Sander photographs (except figure 21): courtesy of G. Sander. Reproductions not listed here: from contemporary publications.

CONTENTS OF THE PORTFOLIOS

Note: The extant collection of photographs does not match Sander’s in¬ tended portfolio scheme perfectly. In the table of contents given below, the portfolios that differ from those listed by Sander (see chapter 4 above) are indicated by asterisks. The principal omissions from the original scheme are portfolios 4, 5, 15a, 15b, 26a, 32a, 34, 37, and 39a-39c.

Plates

Germinal Portfolio I

VI

94-108 109-117 118-134 135-141

Women Men and Women Mothers and Children Children* Families Society Ladies Working Women

IV

13-25 26-36 37-45 46-56 57-73 74-84 85-93

142-154 155-163 164-172 173-179 180-190 191-199

Artists Writers Actors Architects Painters and Sculptors Composers Musicians

Workers Artisans and Craftsmen Manufacturers Workers Technicians

III

V

Farmers Young Farmers Farm Children Farming Families* Country Life Rural Characters* The Small Town Sport

II

1-12

VII

298-302 303-307 308-314 315-327 328-332 333-339

The Big City The Streets The Circus* Itinerants Festivities City Children Servants Itinerant Tradesmen* City Characters Persecuted Jews

340-348 349-355 356-364 365-369 370-380 381-389 390-400 401-409 410-420

The Last People

421-431

Occupations Students Scholars Officials Doctors Lawyers/Judges Soldiers National Socialists Aristocrats Clergy Teachers Businessmen Politicians

200-206 207-213 214-222 223-227 228-234 235-241 242-248 249-253 254-264 265-275 276-288 289-297

6i

Stamm-Mappe Germinal Portfolio Archetypes

84^7^ Archetipi

Hirte. 1913 Shepherd Berger

Pa store

Bauer. Westerwald, 1913 Farmer Paysan cu-

Contaaino

2

Bauer. Westerwald, 1913 Farmer Paysan

a* Contadino

3

Bauer. Westerwald, 1910 Farmer Paysan

4

Bäuerin. Westerwald, 1914 Farmer’s wife Paysanne

Contadina

5

Bauernwitwe. Westerwald, 1912 Peasant widow Payscnne veuve

& Cont

na vedova

6

m r

Bäuerin. Westerwald, ca. 1912 Farmer’s wife Paysanne

Contadina

7

Bäuerin. Westerwald, 1913 Farmer's wife Paysanne

Contadina

8

Bäuerin. Westerwald, ca. 1919/20 Farmer’s wife Paysanne

Contadina

9

Bauernpaar. Westerwald, 1912 Farmer and wife Couple de paysans

ßl£*W Coppia di contadini

10

Bauernpaar. Westerwald, 1912 Farmer and wife Couple de paysans

Coppia di contadini

’•

Bauerngeneration. 1912 Three generations of a farming family Generation de paysans

Tre genera ioni di contadini

12

I Bauern

Farmers Paysans

UK Contadini

1.1 Jungbauern Young Farmers Jeunes paysans

Giovani contadini

Jungbauern. Westerwald, ca. 1914 Young farmers Jeunes paysans

Giovani contadini

13

Jungbouern. ca. 1920 Young farmers Jeunes paysans

Giovani contadini

14

Jungbauern. Westerwald, ca. 1912 Young farmers Jeunes paysans

Giovani contadini

15

Jungbauern, ca. 1920 Young armers Jeunes paysans

Giovani c ntadini

16

Jungbauern, ca. 1927 Young farmers Jeunes paysans

Giovani contadini

Wanderer. Hohenseelbachskopf/Siegerland, 1892 Hike* Itinerants

'kh&i f Ambulanti

18

Bauernmädchen, ca. 1928 Farm girls Jeunes filles paysannes

Giovani contadine

19

Bauernmädchen. Westerwald, ca. 1930/31 Farm girl Jeune fille paysanne Giovane contadina

20

Bäuerliches Brautpaar, ca. 1914 Engaged couple Fiances paysans

»««ft Coppia di contadini fidanzati

21

Jungbauer, ca. 1906 Young farmer Jeune paysan

r* >/;uGiovane contadino

22

Konfirmandin. Westerwald, ca. 1911 Girl on confirmation day Catechumene

Cresimanda

23

Bäuerliches Geschwisterpaar. ca. 1927/28 Brother and sister Frere et soeur

Fratello e sorella

24

Jungbauer, ca. 1911 Young farmer Jeune paysan

fr >r;uGiovane contadino

25

1.2 Bauernkinder Farm Children Enfants de paysans Figli di contadini

Bauernkinder. Westerwald, ca. 1927/28 Farm children Enfants de paysans

Figli di contadini

26

Bauernkind. Westerwald, ca. 1919/20 Farm child Enfant de paysans

umv Hjt Figlia di contadini

27

Bauernkind. ca. 1927 Farm child Enfant de paysans

Figlia di contadini

28

Bauernkinder. Westerwald, ca. 1913 Farm children Enfants de paysans

H Figli di contadini

29

Bauernkinder. 1927 Farm children Enfants de paysans

Figli di contadini

3(

Bauernkinder. Westerwald, ca. 1927/28 Farm children Enfants de paysans

ß‘4fc> Figli di contadini

31

Bäuerin mit ihren Kindern, ca. 1920 Farm woman with children Paysanne et ses enfants

Contadina con figli

Konfirmand, ca. 1921/22 Confirmand Catechumene

Crssimando

33

Mutter und Sohn. ca. 1919 Mother and son Mere et fils

amt» Madre e figlio

Mutter und Tochter. Bäuerin und Bergmannsfrau. 1912 Mother and daughter Mere et filie

it) Madre e figiia

35

Großmutter und Enkel, ca. 1914 Grandmother and grandchild Grand’mere et petit-enfant

Nonna e nipote

36

1.3 Bauernfamilie Farming Families Familie paysanne

mROM SS Famiglie di contadini

Bauernfamilie. Eifel, ca. 1931/32 Farming family Familie de paysans

Famiglia di contadini

Bauernfarmiie. Hunsrück, ca. 1919 Farming family Familie de paysans

Famiglia di contadini

38

Bauernfamilie, ca. 1914 Farming family Familie de paysans

Famiglia di contadini

3

Bauernfamilie. Siegtal, ca. 1913 Farming family Familie d

paysans

Famiglia d contadini

40

Bauernfamilie, ca. 1913 Farming family Familie de paysans

Famiglia di contadini

Bauernfamilie, ca. 1913 Farming family Familie de paysans

Famiglia di contadini

42

Bauernfamilie, ca. 1910 Farming family Familie de paysans Famiglia di contadini

Bauernfamilie, ca. 1913 Farming famii Familie de pay

Famiglia di cont«

s

-ii

44

Familienfest. Gratulanten zur Silberhochzeit, ca. 1930 Silver-wedding congratulations Felicitations pour les noces d’argent

Festa di famiglia. Le nozze d'argento

1.4 Bauernäeben Country Life Vie rustique

RBO&S Vita contadina

mm

Bauer bei der Feldarbeit, ca. 1928 Farmer at work Paysan au travail des champs

Contadino al lavoro nei campi

46

Nachmittagspuuse. ca. 1928 Afternoon bre ' Au gouter

Pausa pomeridiana

47

Mittagspause im Hauberg. Westerwald, ca. 1930 Lunchtime Au repas

Colazione nel querceto

Bauernmagd. Hessen/Nassau, ca. 1914 Farm maid Servante

amiv'ix Serva di contadini

Bauer mit Pferden, ca. 1930 Farmer with horses Paysan avec des chevaux

Contadino con cavalli

Bauer beim Säen. ca. 1940 Farmer sowing Semeur

semina

51

Bauernpaar. ca. 1928 Peasant couple Couple de paysans

Coppia di contadini

Bauernkapeiie. ca. 1913 Small country band Musique campagnarde

Orchestrina di campagna

53

i \

Preisträger eines ländlichen Gesangsvereins, ca. 1927 Prize-winning singers Laureats des chanteurs

Coristi premiati

Bauernfamiiie. Westfalen, 1912 Farming family Familie de paysans

Famiglia di *

tadini

55

Bauern beim Kartenspiel, ca. 1919/20 Farmers playing cards Paysans jouant aux cartes

Contadini che giocano a carte

1.5 Bauerntypen Rural Characters Caracteres ruraux

ssgdssi Personaggi di campagna

iniMiWiniiiriiiiiir

Bäuerin. Eifel, ca. 1932 Farm woman Paysanne

ÜÜ Contadina

57

Alt-Bäuerin, ca. 1932 Old farm woman Vieille pa\ anne

mm Vecchia contadina

58

Alt-Bäuerin, ca. 1913 Old farm woman Vieille paysanne

mu Vecchia contadina

59

Bäuerliche Braut, ca. 1921/22 Rural bride Jeune fiancee paysanne

iim^m Sposa contadina

60

Jung-Bäuerin. Westerwald, ca. 1930 Young farm woman Jeune paysanne

fa HBW Giovane contadina

61

Alt-Bäuerin, ca. 1930 Old farm woman Vieille paysanne

Vecchia contadina

62

Rheinischer Bauer, ca. 1930/31 Rhenish farmer Paysan rhenan

Contadino renano

Bauer. Westerwald, ca. 1930/31 Farmer Paysan

s* Contadino

64

Bauer. Eifel, ca. 1931/32 Farmer Paysan

St* Contadino

65

Bauernknecht. 1951 Farm worker Valet Bracciante

66

Bauer. Westerwald, ca. 1932 Farmer Paysan

El* Contadino

Bauer. Westerwald, ca. 1931/32 Farmer Paysan /iu-

Contadino

68

Jungbauer, ca. 1930 Young farmer Jeune paysan

Giovane contadino

Bauernpaar. ca. 1912 Farmer and wife Couple de paysans

Coppia di contadini

70

Vater und Sohn. Westerwald, 1931 Father and son Pere et fils M i & f‘ Padre e figlio

Bauernpaar. Westerwald, ca. 1932 Farmer and wife Couple de paysans

Coppia di contadini

72

Gutsherren-Ehepaar. Kriel bei Köln, ca. 1928 The lord of the manor and his wife Couple de proprietaires

Coppia di proprietari terrieri

73

1.6 Kleinstadt The Small Town Bourgade Cittä di provincia

Kleinstädterin, ca. 1928 Small town girl Habitante d’une bourgade

Ragazza di provincia

74

Kleinstadtehepaar. Herdorf, ca. 1906 Provincial couple Couple d’une bourgade

Coppic di provi

a

75

Kleinstadtehepaar. Eifel, ca. 1926/27 Provincial couple Couple d’une bourgade

Coppia di provincia

Kleinstädterinnen. Herdorf, ca. 1913 Small town women Habitantes d’une bourgade

Donne di provincia

77

Kleinstadtehepaar. Neunkirchen, ca. 1913 Provincial couple Couple d’une bourgade

Coppia di provincia

Kleinstadtfamilie. Herdorf, ca. 1911 Provincial family Familie d’une bourgade 'J'föllfö'Ä Famiglia ds

rovincia

79

Kleinstadtfamilie. Herdorf, ca. 1914 Provincial family Familie d’une bourgade

Famiglia di provincia

80

Kleinstadtehepaar. Monschau, ca. 1925/26 Provincial couple Couple d’une bourgade

Coppia di provincia

81

Kleinstädterin, ca. 1927/28 Small town woman Habitante d’une bourgade

Donna di provincia

82

Kleinstädter. Herdorf, ca. 1906 Small town citizen Habitant d’une bourgade

Uomo di provincia

83

HHH Kleinstädter. Herdorf, ca. 1906 Small town citizen Habitant d’une bourgade

Uomo di provincia

84

1.7 Sport Sport Sport

M-"J Sport

•5

■#

Boxer. Paul Röderstein und Hein Heese. Köln, ca. 1928 Boxers Boxeurs

Pugili

Boxer. Hein Domgörgen. ca. 1927 Boxer Boxeur

mm Pugile

86

Jockey. Wien, 1930 Jockey Jockey

mFantino

87

Sportflieger. Köln, ca. 1920 Amateur flyer Pilote de sport

ff± Piiota sportivo

88

Mitglied eines Turnvereins. Herdorf, ca. 1910 Member of a local gymnastic club Membre d’une association sportive Membro di un'associazione ginnica

89

Turnverein Puderbach. ca. 1927/28 Gymnastic club Association sportive

As

riazione ginnica Puderbach

90

Sportverein „Blau-Weiß Lindenthal", ca. 1924 Athletics club Association sportive

Associazione sportiva "Blau-Weiß Lindenthal"

91

Radfahrerverein. Westerwald, ca. 1926 Cycling club Association cycliste

Associazione ciclistica

92

Fußballmannschaft. Puderbach, ca. 1922/23 Soccer club Equipe de football —Z*

Squadra di calcio

93

Arbeiter Workers Travailleurs Lavoratori

11.8 Handwerker Artisans and Craftsmen Metiers Artigiani

Schneidermeister in seiner Werkstatt, ca. 1924 Master tailor in his workshop Maltre tailleur dans son atelier

Sarto nel suo laboratorio

Maurermeister. Köln, ca. 1932 Master mason Maltre macon

mxvws Muratore

95

Töpfermeister. Frechen, ca. 1932 Potter Maltre potier

mwrnn Vasaio

96

Schuhmachermeister. Köln-Lindenthal, ca. 1924 Master cobbler Maltre cordonnier

mo

97

Konditormeister. Köln-Lindenthal, ca. 1928 Pastry cook Mattre pätissier

m-wvw? Pasticciere

98

Tapezierermeister. Berlin, 1928 Master upholsterer Ma'itre tapissier

Tappezziere

99

Sattlermeister, ca. 1932 Master saddler Maltre sellier

Sellaio

Schlossermeister. Köln-Lindenthal, ca. 1924 Master locksmith Maltre serrurier mm?>m Fabbro

101

Müller. 1926 Miller Meunier

Mugnaio

102

Wandernde Zimmerleute. Hamburg, ca. 1928 Travelling carpenters Charpentiers itinerants

Carpentieri ambulanti

103

Wandernder Maurergeselle, ca. 1927/28 Travelling mason Apprenti macon itinerant

Garzone muratore ambulante

Dachdeckermeister. Nürnberg, ca. 1932 Master tiler Maltre couvreur

Posatore di tegole

105

Grobschmied. Westerwald, ca. 1912/13 Blacksmith Forgeron

Fabbro ferraio

106

Malermeister, ca. 1922/23 Master housepainter Maltre peintre

Imbianchn io

107

Metzgergeselle. Nordwalde/Westerwald, ca. 1905/06 Butcher’s assistant Boucher

Garzone macellaio

11.9 Industrielle Manufacturers Industriels

Hi Industrial!

Industrieller. Bonn, ca. 1933 Manufacturer Industriel

Industrial

109

Industrieller. Hilden bei Wuppertal, ca. 1928 Manufacturer Industriel

XM K Industriale

110

Industrieller. Weiden bei Köln, ca. 1919/20 Manufacturer Industriel

Iig£ Industriale

111

Gerbereibesitzer, Vater und Sohn. 1931 Tannery owners, father and son Proprietaire de tannerie et son fils Proprietari di coneeria, padre e figlio

112

Juniorchef. Köln, ca. 1924 Boss’s son Patron junior

mm II figlio del principale

113

Großindustrieller. Köln, 1928 Industrialist Proprietaire de qrande industrie

kmt Capitano d'industria

114

Fabrikant. Herdorf, ca. 1906 Manufacturer Fabricant

m \. Proprietario di fabbrica

115

Generaldirektor. Köln, ca. 1926 General manager Directeur general

Direttore generale

116

Industrieller. Brünn, 1930 Manufacturer Industriel

VMV. Industriale

117

11.10 Arbeiter Workers Travailleurs Operai

Arbeiterrentner. Kuchhausen, ca. 1945 Retired worker Rentier de la classe ouvriere

Operaio in pensione

Schmied, ca. 1925/26 Blacksmith Forgeron

mifitä Fabbro

119

Handlanger. Köln, ca. 1928 Hod-carrier Manoeuvre

Manovale

120

Monteur. Köln, 1929 Fitter Monteur

Montatore

121

Lackierer. Köln, 1932 Painter Vernisseur

Verniciatore

122

Maurerpolier. Köln, 1929 Foreman bricklayer Contremaitre

k'JÜ Capomastro

123

Kohlenträger. Berlin, 1929 Coal carrier Porteur de charbon

Portatore di carbone

124

Arbeiter in einer Spinnerei. Hilden, 1924 Worker in a spinning mill Ouvrier dans une filature

Operaio in una filatura

125

Arbeiter in einer Eisengießerei. Köln, 1934 Worker in an iron foundry Ouvrier dans une fonderie

mm i'Mvfsmri Operaio in una fonderia

126

Landarbeiter. Eifel, 1929 Agricultural laborers Ouvriers agricoles

Lavoratori agricoli

127

Grobschmiede. Wuppertal, 1929 Blacksmiths Forgerons

Fabbri ferrai

Werftarbeiter, ca. 1928 Dockworkers Ouvriers de chantiers navals

Operai di un cantiere navale

129

Straßenarbeiter. Ruhrgebiet, ca. 1928/29 Street workers Cantonniers

>m i Cantonieri

Schauerleute, ca. 1928 Dockworkers Debardeurs

Lavoratori portuali

131

Arbeiterrat. Ruhrgebiet, ca. 1928/29 Workers’ council Conseil ouvrier

Consiglio operaio

132

„Revolutionäre". In der Mitte Erich Mühsam. Berlin, 1928 "Revolutionaries" „Revolutionäres"

'I' 'iil IX—yt "Rivoluzionari"

if— 133

Arbeiterführer. Paul Fröhlich, Parteifunktionär der SAR Frankfurt, ca. 1928/29 Labor leader Leader ouvrier

rm nv')-#Capo operaio

t 134

11.11 Techniker Technicians Techniciens Tecnici

K- •

Ingenieur, ca. 1927/28 Engineer Ingenieur

im Ingegnere

135

Laborant. Lamersdorf/Eifel, ca. 1932/33 Laboratory technician Aide de laboratoire

•jmM TTecnico di laboratorio

136

Technischer Zeichner. Lamersdorf/Eifel, ca. 1932/33 Draftsman Dessinateur technique

nimm Disegnatore tecnico

Betriebsingenieur. Köln, 1933 Production manager Ingenieur industriel

Ingegnere industriale

Betriebsingenieur, ca. 1925/26 Production manager Ingenieur industriel

Ingegnere industriale

139

Erfinder. Der Dadaist Raoul Hausmann. Berlin, 1928 Inventor. The Dadaist Raoul Hausmann Inventeur. Le Dadaiste Raoul Hausmann

Inv

‘•ore. II dadaista Raoul Hausmann

140

Ingenieur, ca. 1928/29 Engineer Ingenieur

■fi'fWi Ingegnere

141

Die Frau Women La femme

WA Donne

111.12 Mann und Frau Men and Women L’Homme et la femme Uomini e donne

ünltfiftf/Maai

Großhandelskaufmann und seine Frau. Köln, 1927 Wholesaler and wife Negociant en gros et sa femme

knmtzvm Grossista con la moglie

142

Industriellen-Ehepaar. Brünn, 1930 Manufacturer and wife Couple d’industriels

OV> V.k f Coppia di

dustriali

143

Industriellen-Ehepaar. Düren, 1932 Manufacturer and wife Couple d’industriels

r.m Coppia di industriali

144

Bürgerliches Ehepaar, ca. 1927/28 Middle class couple Couple bourgeois

'WiWMvk U Coppic Horghese

>

■ ■ , SOIr

1

|L ■ ■ D

V

:

B

»«n^p

'!; VI&AL :

Geschwisterpaar. ca. 1927 Brother and sister Frere et soeur

Fratello e sorella

146

Ehepaar. 1934 Married couple Couple

kk Coppia

147

Dorflehrer-Ehepaar, ca. 1910/11 Village schoolmaster and wife Couple d’instituteurs de village

Insegnante di paese con la moglie

148

Schneidermeister und seine Frau. ca. 1924 Master tailor and wife Maltre tailleur et sa femme fl:

VMvWJ Zog

Sarto con la moglie

149

Künstlerehepaar. Der Maler Otto Dix und seine Frau. Köln, 1928 The painter Otto Dix and his wife Le peintre Otto Dix et son epouse

II pittore Otto Dix con la moglie

150

Künstlerehepaar. Der Maler Anton Räderscheidt und seine Frau. Köln, ca. 1925 The painter Anton Räderscheidt and his wife Le peintre Anton Räderscheidt et son epouse

'Jkftfök

JJ:

II pittore Anton Räderscheidt con la moglie

151

Gastwirtsehepaar. Köln-Lindenthal, ca. 1930 Hotelier and wife Couple d’höteliers

Albergatore con la moglie

152

Künstlerehepaar. Der Maler Ludwig E. Ronig und seine Frau. Köln, ca. 1926/27 The painter Ludwig E. Ronig and his wife Le peintre Ludwig E Ronig et son epouse

II pittore Ludwig E. Rt >ig con la moglie

153

Architektenehepaar. Der Architekt Hans Heinz Lüttgen und seine Frau. Köln, ca. 1927/28 The architect Hans Heinz Lüttgen and his wife L’architecte Hans Heinz Lüttgen et son epouse

L'architetto Hans Heinz Lüttgen con la moglie

154

111.13 Mutter und Kind Mothers and Children Mere et enfant Madri e figli

Arbeitermutter mit Kind. ca. 1930 Working class mother with child Femme ouvriere et enfant

'mxvimtm Donna operaia con bambino

15i

Arbeitermutter mit Kind. ca. 1928 Working class mother with child Femme ouvriere et enfant

'rstonvmmk r-m Donna operaU

con bambino

Bürgerliche Mutter mit Kind. Köln, ca. 1927/28 Middle class mother with child Bourgeoise et enfant

Donna borghese con bambino

157

Bäuerin mit ihren Söhnen, ca. 1919/20 Farm woman with her sons Paysanne avec ses fils Contadina co; figli

158

Mutter mit Zwillingen, ca. 1923/24 Mother of twins Mere et ses jumeau

imtM? Madre e gemelli

159

Mutter und Tochter. Die Frau des Malers Otto Dix. Köln, ca. 1927/28 The wife of the painter Otto Dix with her daughter La femme du peintre Otto Dix et sa fille —■f'l/x/) Madre e figlic

La moglie del pittore Otto Dix

160

Mutter und Tochter. Köln, 1931 Mother and daughter Mere et fille

Madre e figlia

161

Mutter und Tochter. Die Frau des Malers Peter Abelen. Köln, ca. 1927/28 The wife of the painter Peter Abelen with her daughter La femme du peintre Peter Abelen et sa fille ’7-'»UXQ £

Madre e figlia. la moglie del pittore Peter Abelen

162

Mutter und Sohn. Lu Strauss-Ernst, damals verheiratet mit dem Maler Max Ernst. Frankreich, 1928 Lu Strauss-Ernst, at this time married to the painter Max Ernst, and her son Lu Strauss-Ernst, l'ex-epouse du peintre Max Ernst et son fils

Madre e figlio. Lu Strauss-Ernst, all'epoca sposata con il pittore Max Ernst

111.14 Kinder Children Les enfants

mtt Bambini

Landproletarierkinder, ca. 1911/12 Children of the rural proletariat Enfants du proletariat rural

Bambini del proletariate rurale

Bürgerkind. ca. 1930 Middle class child Enfant de bourgeoisie

'Wmmv f-fjt Bambina borghese

165

Schwestern, ca. 1930 Sisters Soeurs fctiMc Sorelle

166

Geschwister, ca. 1905/06 Two sisters with brother Frere et soeurs

Fratello e so ?lle

167

I» Brüder, ca. 1925/26 Brothers Freres

ft# Fratelli

168

Bauernmädchen, ca. 1913 Country girl Fille de paysans

Figlia di rontadini

169

Geschwister, ca. 1921/22 Two sisters with brother Frere et soeurs

Fratello e sorelle

Bürgerkind. ca. 1927 Middle class child Enfant de bourgeoisie >i

(

fit-

Bambina borghese

171

Zwillinge. Köln, ca. 1925/26 Twins Jumeau

m Gemelli

172

111.15 Familie Families Families

m

Famiglie

Künstlerfamilie. Der Maler Leopold Korensky mit Frau und Kindern. Linz/Donau, ca. 1912 The painter Leopold Korensky with family Le peintre Leopold Korensky et sa famille

Famiglia d'artista. II pittore Leopold Korensky con la moglie e i figli

173

Arbeiterfamilie. Leuscheid, ca. 1905 Working class family Familie ouvriere

7/m xvm Famiglia operaia

174

Bürgerfamilie, ca. 1911 Middle class family Familie bourgeoise

Famiglia borghese

Försterfamilie. Westerwald, ca. 1927/28 Forester’s family Familie du forestier

Guardia forestale con la famiglia

176

Bürgerfamilie, ca. 1905 Middle class family Familie bourgeoise

mvmm Famiglia borghese

177

Bürgerfamilie, ca. 1923 Middle class family Familie bourgeoise

i\'mmvim Famiglia borghese

178

Witwer mit seinen Söhnen, ca. 1906/07 Widower with sons Veuf et ses fils

Vedovo con i figli

179

111.16 Elegante Frau Society Ladies Femmes elegantes

lUtfVNMSA Donne eleganti

Frau Anna Sander, die Frau des Photographen. Linz/Donau, ca. 1902 Mrs. Anna Sander, the wife of the photographer Madame Anna Sander, la femme du photographe T> i-•-?>?— M La signora Anna Sander, moglie del fotografo

180

Großstädterin, ca. 1912 City lady Citadine

Signora di cittö

181

Kleinstädterin. Herdorf, ca. 1906 Small town lady Femme, habitant la province

'J'MWA Signora di provincia

Frau eines Industriellen. Düren, 1931 Wife of a manufacturer Femme d’un industriel

Moglie di un industriale

183

Frau eines Architekten. Verheiratet mit Wilhelm Riphahn. Köln, 1931 The wife of the architect Wilhelm Riphahn Femme d’architecte. L’epouse de Wilhelm Riphahn fc-

La

moglie dell'architetto Wilhelm Riphahn

184

Junges Mädchen. Düren, 1931 Young woman Jeune fille

¥

i"'*

Giovane donna

185

Dame der Gesellschaft. Köln, 1932 Society lady Dame de la societe

Signora dell'alta societä

Tänzerin. Yvonne Estelle, ca. 1935 Dancer Danseuse

mnwz Ballerina

187

Frau eines Malers. Verheiratet mit Peter Abelen. Köln, ca. 1927/28 The wife of the painter Peter Abelen Femme du peintre. L’epouse de Peter Abelen —7->C0 g La moglie del pittore Peter Abelen

188

Junges Mädchen, ca. 1932 Young girl Jeune fille

Giovane donna

189

Frau eines Architekten. Verheiratet mit Hans Heinz Lüttgen. Köln, ca. 1928 The wife of the architect Hans Heinz Lüttgen Femme d’architecte. Epouse de Hans Heinz Lüttgen

La moglie dell'architetto Hans Heinz Lüttgen

190

111.17 Berufstätige Frau Working Women Femmes et activites professionnelles

eisiA

Donne e attivitä professionali

Rundfunksekretärin. Köln, 1931 Secretary at a radio station Secretaire de station de radio

Segretaria di stazione radio

191

Stenotypistin in einer Sparkasse. Köln, 1928 Shorthand-typist at a savings bank Stenodactyla ä la caisse d’epargne

Stenodattilografa di una Cassa di risparmio

192

Hausfrau, ca. 1923 Housewife Mattresse de maison

MW Casalinga

193

Tan» lehrerin. Köln, 1932 Dancing teacher Professeur de danse

mwm Maestro di ballo

194

Bildhauerin. Ingeborg vom Rath. 1929 Sculptress Sculpteur

taamwa Scultrice

195

Mäklerin. Köln-Lindenthal, ca. 1928 Real estate dealer Agent immobilier

fxmmk Sensale

196

Gemeindeschwestern, ca. 1920 Nurses Assistantes sociales

Assistenti sociali

Modistin. Trier, 1932 Milliner Modiste

MAFtorWModis

198

Rotkreuzschwester. Köln, ca. 1924 Red Cross nurse Infirmiere

Crocerossina

199

IV. Stände Occupations Etats

swam Occupazioni

IV.18 Studenten Students Etudiants

#4 Studenti

Werkstudenten. Köln, ca. 1926 Part-time students Etudiants-ouvriers

Studenti lavoratori

200

Werkstudent. Erich Sander. Köln, ca. 1926 Part-time student Etudiant-ouvrier

Studente iavoratore

201

Corpsstudent aus Nürnberg. Köln, ca. 1928 Member of a Nuremberg student corps Etudiant de corporation de Nuremberg

Membro di un'associazione studentesca di Norimberga

202

Corpsstudenten. Köln, ca. 1922/23 Corps students Etudiants de corporation

Memb

:'i un'associarione studentesca

203

Corpsstudenten. Köln, ca. 1928 Corps students Etudiants de corporation

Membri di un'associazione studentesca

204

Musikstudentin. 1913 Music student Etudiante en musique

ft-** '7-XJx i-'P I-: Studentes a di musica

205

Werkstudentin. Oberhausen, ca. 1926/27 Part-time student Etudiante-ouvriere

Studentessa lavoratrice

2D6

IV.19 Gelehrte Scholars Savants

$# Studiosi

Kunsthistoriker. Professor Dr. Wilhelm Schäfer. Köln, ca. 1927 Art historian Historien d’art

Storico d'arte

207

Mediziner und Theologe. Professor Dr. Karl Barth. Köln, 1929 Physician and theologian Medecin et theologien

iv? ru Medico e teologo

m± 208

Philosoph. Professor Max Scheler. ca. 1925 Philosopher Philosophe

vnFilosofo

209

Gelehrter. Dr. Reismann-Grohne. 1929 Scholar Savant

rn Studioso

210

Gelehrter. Professor Dr. Otto Mente. Berlin, 1929 Scholar Savant

rn Studioso

211

Islandforscher und Universitäts-Bibliothekar. Heinrich Erkes. Köln, 1913 Scholar of Iceland and university librarian Explorateur d’lslande et bibliothecaire d’universite

7^ Studi

i k'm .'rfiifU dell'lslanda e bibliotecario di universitä

212

Kunstgelehrter. Dr. Karl With. Köln, 1932 Art scholar Connaisseur des arts

mnn Studioso d'arte

213

IV.20 Beamte Officials Fonctionnaires Funzionari

Zollbeamte. Hamburg, 1929 Customs officials Douaniers

Doganieri

Polizeibeamter. 1925 Police officer Agent de police

Poliziotto

215

Bahnbeamter. Westerwald, 1911 Railway official Cheminot

|R|«U Funzionario delle ferrovie

216

Geldbriefträger. Köln, 1928 Registered letter postman Facteur de mandats

Portaletteu delle assicurate

217

Forstbeamter, ca. 1912/13 Forestry officer Employe forestier

Impiegato forestale

Bankbeamter. 1932 Bank employee Employ

de banque

mm Impiegato di banca

219

Prokurist. 1932 Confidential clerk Gerant

Procuratore

220

Kassierer in einer Sparkasse. Köln, 1928 Savings bank cashier Caissier de caisse d’epargne

Cassiere di Cassa di risparmio

221

Bankbeamter. Köln, 1932 Bank officer Employe de banque

mm Impiegato di banca

222

IV.21 Ärzte Doctors Medecins

Medici

Chefarzt. Berlin, ca. 1928 Head physician Medecin en chef

Primario

Arzt. ca. 1929/30 Physician Medecin

friß® Medico

224

Apotheker. Linz/Donau, 1931 Pharmacist Pharmacien

«ftii Farmacista

225

Heilkräuterkundiger. Köln, ca. 1928 Herbal doctor Herboriste

Erborista

226

Zahnärztin, ca. 1912 Dentist Dentiste

mmm Dentista

227

IV.22 Juristen/Richter Lawyers/Judges Gens de robe/Juges

i mm Giudici e uomini di legge

Notar. Köln, 1924 Notary Notaire

Notaio

228

Rechtsanwalt. Köln, 1931 Lawyer Av

cat

Awocato

229

Rechtsanwalt, ca. 1927/28 Lawyer Avocat

fll: Awocato

230

Winkeladvokat. Kuchhausen/Westerwald, 1945 Unqualified lawyer Avocat marron

1: Avvocato di bassa lega

231

Rechtsanwalt. 1931 Lawyer Avocat

tflU: Awocato

Gerichtsvollzieher. Köln, 1931 Court bailiff Huissier exploitant VU

Hi

' iciole giudiziario

233

Rechtsanwalt. Köln, 1931 Lawyer Avocat

Avvocato

234

IV.23 Soldaten Soldiers Soldats Soldati

Rekruten, ca. 1910 Recruits Recruts

M'rrcReclute

235

Oberst. Belgien, ca. 1916 Colonel Colonel

MT'KWV: Colonnello

236

Hauptmann der Reserve. Elsaß-Lothringen, ca. 1916 Captain in the reserves Capitaine de reserve

Capitano della riserva

237

Leutnant, ca. 1912 Lieutenant Lieutenant

m\i^m Luogotenente

238

Fahnenjunker, ca. 1940 Officer cadet Aspirant

ii'mwk Allievo ufficiale

239

Soldat der Luftwaffe. Köln, 1941 Airman Aviateur militaire

'tt'Kft I: Soldato della Luftwaffe

240

Junger Soldat. Westerwald, ca. 1945 Young soldier Jeune soldat

Giovane soldato

241

IV.24 Nationalsozialisten National Socialists National-socialistes

BKtääKS Nazionalsocialisti

Angehöriger der HJ. Kuchhausen/Westerwald, ca. 1941 Member of the Hitler Youth Membre du groupement des jeunes „Hitlerjugend"

tb7— Membro della "Hitlerjugend"

242

Nationalsozialist, ca. 1937/38 National-Socialist National-socialiste

mx Nazionalsocialista

243

Junger Nationalsozialist. Köln, 1936 Young National-Socialist Jeune National-socialiste

Giovane nazionalsocialista

244

Angehöriger der „Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler". Köln, 1938 Member of the "Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler" Membre de „Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler"

Membro della "Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler"

245

Angehöriger der HJ. 1938 Member of the Hitler Youth Membre du groupement des jeunes „Hitlerjugend"

Membro della "Hitlerjugend"

246

Nationalsozialist. 1938 National-Socialist National-socialiste

Nazionalsocialista

247

Nazifunktionär. Kulturdezernent der Stadt Köln. 1938 Nazi official. Head of Cologne’s cultural department Fonctionnaire nazi. Chef du service culturel de Cologne

Funzionario nazista. Capo del servizio culturale di Colonia

248

IV.25 Aristokraten Aristocrats Aristocrates

ft IS Aristocratici

Großherzog von Hessen-Nassau. Darmstadt, 1928 The Grand Duke of Hesse-Nassau Le Grand-duc de Hesse-Nassau

II granduca d'Assia-Nassau

249

■

Graf Hardenberg. Darmstadt, 1928 Count Hardenberg Le Comte de Hardenberg

yvwrV'v^fflß} II conte di Hardenberg

250

Freiherr von Maltitz. Darmstadt, 1928 Baron von Maltitz Le Baron de Maltitz

II barone di Maltitz

251

Baron von Forbath. ca. 1922 Baron von Forbath Le Baron de Forbath

II barone di Forbath

252

Aristokratenkinder, ca. 1919/20 Children of an aristocratic family Enfants de famille aristocrate

nmv Bambini di famiglia aristocratica

IV.26 Geistliche Clergy Le clerge

mm' Clero

Katholischer Geistlicher. Köln, ca. 1925/26 Catholic priest Pretre

Prete cattolico

254

Katholischer Geistlicher, ca. 1926 Catholic priest Pretre

Prete cattolico

255

Evangelischer Geistlicher mit Konfirmanden. Köln, 1925 Protestant minister with confirmands Ecclesiastique Protestant avec catechumenes

Pastore evangelico con discepoli

256

Abt von St. Paul bei Rom. 1927 The abbot of St Paul of Rome L’abbe de S. Paul d Rome d—-T-wy.t.—^

.VrP/'cÜ

Abate di San Paolo a Roma

257

Nonne. Westerwald, 1921 Nun Religieuse

Suora

258

'

Stadtmissionar. Köln, 1931 Urban missionary Missionaire urbain

Missionario di cittä

259

t

Missionare der Evangelischen Kirche Köln. 1931 Protestant missionaries Missionnaires de l’eglise protestante

Missionari della chiesa evangelica

z60

Pastoren-Ehepaar. ca. 1929/30 Clergyman and wife Le pasteur et sa femme

Pastore con la moglie

261

Pastor. Herdorf, ca. 1906 Clergyman Pasteur

ÜJK3 Pastore

262

Pastorenfrau. 1928 Wife of a clergyman La femme du pasteur

Moglie di pastore

263

Gemeindeschwester, ca. 1929 Nurse Assistante sociale

BllxvLVJii Diaconessa

264

IV.27 Lehrer Teachers Professeurs

m Insegnanti

Volksschullehrer. Herdorf, ca. 1912 Elementary school teacher Instituteur d’ecole communale

Maestro di scuola elementare

265

Lehrer, ca. 1912 Schoolmaster Instituteur

lifts Insegnante

266

Volksschullehrerinnen, ca. 1919/20 Elementary school teachers Institutrices d’ecole communale

Maestre di scuola elementare

267

Oberstudienrat. Köln, ca. 1932 Deputy headmaster Professeur vmm\

Insegnante di scuola superiore

268

Schulrektor. 1911 Headmaster Directeur Direttore di scuola

269

Volksschullehrerin. Linz/Donau, ca. 1904 Elementary school teacher Institutrice d’ecole communale

'b'mx&u Maestra di scuola elementare

270

Junglehrer. Westerwald, ca. 1927/28 Student teacher Instituteur debutant

Giovane insegnante

271

Dorfschullehrer. 1913 Village schoolmaster Instituteur de village

Hwmm Maestro di paese

272

Dorfschullehrer. Westerwald, ca. 1921 Village schoolmaster Instituteur de village

Hv' Maestro di paese

273

Klassenausflug, ca. 1914 Class excursion Excursion scolaire

Gita set

istica

274

Klassenausflug, ca. 1929 Class excursion Excursion scolaire

Gita scolastica

275

IV.28 Kaufmann Businessmen Commercants

SA Uomini d'affari

Kaufmann, ca. 1912 Businessman Commercant

iföA Commerciante

276

Bankier. Köln, ca. 1932 Banker Banquier

Ban

iere

277

Firmenmanager. Bonn, ca. 1932 Business manager Directeur de commerce

mt Direttore d'azienda

278

MMMHMi

Bankier. Köln, ca. 1927 Banker Banquier

Banchiere

279

Verleger, ca. 1923/24 Publisher Editeur

him Editore

280

Jungkaufmann, vor 1929 Young businessman Jeune commercant

AN *$)A Giovane commerciante

281

Verleger. 1928 Publisher Editeur

Hi®# Editore

Kunsthändler. Köln, 1927 Art dealer Commercant d’objets d'art

Xiffrlft Commerciante d'arte

283

Kino-Direktor. 1934 Manager of a cinema Gerant d’un cinema

Direttore di cinematografo

Kaufmann. Linz/Rhein, 1930 Businessman Commercant

iffjA Commerciante

285

Hotelier. Köln-Lindenthal, ca. 1931 Hotelier Hotelier

Albergatore

286

Fellhändler, ca. 1914 Dealer in skins Paussier

Commerciante di pellami

287

Kolonialwarenhändler. Köln, ca. 1929 Grocer Epicier

Droghiere

288

IV.29 Politiker Politicians Politiciens

R£K Politici

Bürgerlicher Politiker, ca. 1930 Bourgeois politician Politicien bourgeois

Politico della borghesia

Mitglied der KPD. ca. 1926 Member of the German Communist Party Membre du parti communiste KPD

RyJtifc :'KPD)%U Membro d

Partito Comunista Tedesco

290

KPD-Funktionäre. Erich Mühsam und ein Genosse. 1928 The German Communist Party official Erich Mühsam with a comrade L’appointe permanent du parti communiste KPD, Erich Mühsam, compagnon

Funzionari del Partito Comunista Tedesco. Erich Mühsam e un compagno

291

Begründer der Splitterpartei „Bund der geistigen Erneuerer". Köln, ca. 1929/30 The founder of the splinter party "League of Spiritual Renewal" Fondateur du parti „Bund der geistigen Erneuerer"

M Mi Fondatore della "Lega per il rinnovamento spirituale"

292

Politikerin. Rosa Wolfstein-Fröhlich. Frankfurt, ca. 1928 The politician Rosa Wolfstein-Fröhlich Politicienne. Rosa Wolfstein-Fröhlich 'Jt Militante politico. Rosa Wolfstein-Fröhlich

293

Mitglied der Splitterpartei „Bund der geistigen Erneuerer", ca. 1928 Member of the party "League of Spiritual Renewal" Membre du parti „Bund der geistigen Erneuerer"

Mt mbro della "Lega per il rinnovamento spirituale"

294

Mitbegründer der Sozialistischen Arbeiterpartei SAP. ca. 1928 Co-founder of the Socialist Workers Party Co-fondateur du parti socialiste ouvrier

ft'&sAPvmm 6 ^^A. 7VJ Ebreo perseguitato. Dr. Philipp

416

Verfolgte Jüdin, ca. 1938 Persecuted Jewess Juive persecutee

iäftänrCv, 'U-'S-Ykk'ft Ebrea perseguitata

417

ffV ff ■iäslSf

m

m m

■

§1

M,

.

|&W;v sf;

«

>v-A\ v

tv-s- fc'g*.-:

agjsas

PÜ? IS

^jg

11

Ilf®

&

-

wesiM

Verfolgter Jude. Herr Katz. ca. 1938 Persecuted Jew, Mr. Katz Juif persecute. Herr Katz

W^hX^

.ijryBc

Ebreo perseguitato. Signor Katz

418

Verfolgte Jüdin. Frau Marcus, ca. 1938 Persecuted Jewess, Mrs. Marcus Juive persecutee. Frau Marcus

F:

’•seguitata. Signora Marcus

Verfolgter Jude. Herr Dr. Kahn. ca. 1938 Persecuted Jew, Dr. Kahn Juif persecute. Herr Dr. Kahn t# Ebreo perseguitato. Dr. Kahn

t 420

VII.45 Letzte Menschen The Last People Mutilation et mort ■&0AVt Gli ultimi

Blinde Kinder im Blindenheim Düren, ca. 1930/31 Children of Düren Home for the Blind Enfants aveugles ä l’asyle de Düren

fa-1/>ffA-+>—/»‘/»I Bambini ciechi all'ospizio di Düren

421

Blinde Kinder. Düren, ca. 1930/31 Blind children Enfants aveugles

Bambine cieche

422

Blinde Kinder. Düren, ca. 1930/31 Blind children Enfants aveugles

Bambini ciechi

423

Blinde Kinder. Düren, ca. 1930/31 Blind children Enfants aveugies

Ragazze c

,:h

Blinde Kinder. Düren, ca. 1930/31 Blind children Enfants aveugles

I W&zfjs > Ragazze cieche

425

Blinde. Düren, ca. 1930/31 Blind men Aveugles

f Ciechi

‘A&t 426

Blinde. Düren, ca. 1930/31 Blind men Aveugles

I Ciechi

'A(Ab 427

Zwergwüchsige, ca. 1906 Midgets Nains

'j'A&Atit Nani

428

Explosionsopfer, ca. 1930 Victim of an explosion Victime d’une explosion

mmwim Vittima di un'esplosione

429

Gebrechlicher Alter. Westerwald, ca. 1930 Frail old man Vieux mutile

Vecchio decrepito

430

*0ßf***

Tote. ca. 1927 Death Morte

JE Morta

DATE DUE DATE DE RETOUR

TRE XT UN VERS TY

0

164 0470785 7