Being photographed, 1870

Figure 1 - The reception room at Sarony's studio. c1870 and in the public domain by virtue of its age.

Figure 1 – The reception room at Sarony’s studio. c1870 and in the public domain by virtue of its age.

Last Sunday, I blogged about the great nineteenth century portraitist Napoleon Sarony. I have been doing more research on this colorful figure and I came across the fuzzy and pretty inferior image reproduced here as Figure 1, which shows the reception room of Sarony’s studio. At first, I thought that it was a mistake. The image appears to be that of a Wunderkammern, a cabinet of curiosities – or more literally a wonder room. The alligator hanging from the ceiling is oh so typical. Wunderkammern were the precursors of the modern museums. I have a friend, Keith Funston, who is an expert on Wunderkammern, and my first thought was that he would be interested in this photograph. As it turns out there is an extensive set of images of nineteenth century photographic studios on the Luminous Lint website.

I started looking for a sharper version of this photograph, and there the story got interesting because it took me to descriptions of what it was like to enter the world of Sarony’s studio, to step off of nineteenth century Broadway, NYC and have your portrait taken by the master. The moments of people’s lives that have been handed down to us come in two varieties: the “candid” or captured in their daily lives portraits and the formal studio portraits. In the case of the latter, this was, as Figure 1 attests, the taking was very different from what we experience today. It was truly a “gilded age” experience.
I was very struck by a description of a trip to Sarony’s studio written by Richard Grant White (1822-1885) in the March 1870 issue of the magazine, “The Galaxy.” We may reflect on this as we slowly watch the “magazine” as a media form shift from paper to electronic. There was a time when these were the most dominant form of information transfer. White was one of the leading music and literary critics of the day. Figure 2 is a portrait of White taken by another great nineteenth century photographic portraitist Mathew Brady (1822-1896). What struck my most vividly about the article was the quality of White’s writing. Now that is a largely lost art, but what we might expect from someone remembered today, albeit dimly, as a leading Shakespeare expert and English language defender.

I have decided, for those of you interested in reading it, (which I do recommend) to reproduce this article in its entirety here. It deals with photography as an art form and gets right to the pith, I think much better than Susan Sontag in her classic “On Photography.” There is, perhaps, a hint of sexism in his voice. I have avoided the use of the term misogynist. I do not think that these men hated women. It is perhaps to the contrary. But they did express the prejudices of the day and his description of an encounter with a coquette, so full of herself, is in a sense insightful. The man described was just a vain. To understand portraiture as an art is as much to comprehend the foibles of human vanity as it is to understand the technique.

You may recall, that I came to Napoleon Sarony from a portrait that he took of “The World’s First Supermodel, Evelyn Nesbit.” You may also recall that in “the crime of the century” Nesbit’s multi-millionaire husband, Harry Kendall Thaw, shot and murdered her lover, reknowned architect, Stanford White, on the rooftop theatre of Madison Square Garden on June 25, 1906.  In a sense, we have come full circle. Richard Grant White was Stanford White’s father.

The vagaries of what and whom we remember is the irony of history. Richard Grant White, Harry Thaw, and Evelyn Nesbit are, perhaps, distant historical memories, footnotes as it were. Time has dealt with Stanford White differently. He is remembered for what he left behind – the buildings and monuments. It will soon be October, and I can tell you that in the crisp autumn air there will be no better place to wander with your camera than New York’s Washington Square Park. Look up. That wonderful arch, that is Stanford White.

Figure 2 - Richard Grant White by Mathew Brady, from the Wikipedia, original in the United States LOC Brady-Handy Collectyion, and in the public domain because of its age.

Figure 2 – Richard Grant White by Mathew Brady, c 1860-1865 from the Wikipedia, original in the United States LOC Brady-Handy Collectyion, and in the public domain because of its age.

Richard Grant White, March 1870, “A Morning at Sarony’s”, from “The Galaxy, vol. 9, pp. 408-411.

A MORNING AT SARONY’S

“When Oliver Cromwell asked that his portrait should represent his face just as it was, wart and all, he not only showed a trait of his character and an habitual mood of his mind, but he took his stand on the side of a certain school of art, the realistic. When Queen Elizabeth insisted that hers should be painted without that ugly dark spot (the shadow) under the nose, she also not only displayed the personal vanity which was the swaying element of her nature, but she, too, threw the weight of her royal influence, though ignorantly, on the side of the other school of art, the idealistic. Cromwell wished to be painted as he was; Elizabeth as she seemed, or as she thought she seemed. It may by no means be safely assumed that Cromwell was absolutely right and Elizabeth absolutely wrong; for art should represent objects rather as they seem than as they are; if, indeed, representing them as they are does not show them as they seem. Of what value is a portrait, for example, which, although it represents exactly every line and tint of a face does not produce on the beholder the effect which the face itself produces? lt fails in attaining the highest and most essential point of faithfulness. Now there are such portraits—portraits correct in form and color, which are yet without individuality; a truthfulness which may appear in a sketch that is not Only unfinished but incomplete, a mere hint or memorandum for the painter.

Of such portraits photography produces hundreds of thousands yearly. When Daguerre discovered this method of using the chemical qualities of sunlight, it was supposed that one of the benefits to be conferred by it was perfect p0rtraiture of the human face and figure. And in truth it has made such portraiture attainable. But the experience of twenty-five years has proved that the attainment of such perfection is no mere result of delicate manipulation in applied chemistry. Photography, scouted at first by the painter—and with some reason—as a merely mechanical process, having only a certain utilitarian value, has been gradually rising until now it stands on the grade of a mixed art. lt is in a certain sense mechanical; the perfection of its results does in a measure depend upon the nicety of mechanical appliances and chemical manipulations; but to the attainment of its best effects in portraiture, and in even landscape, there goes something which is supplied by the sensitive organization and aesthetic culture of the operator. Otherwise, with good light and good chemical preparation, any person well taught and practised in the processes of photography could produce good portraits; and all persons so taught and practised would produce portraits equally correct and valuable. But the fact is, and it is now well known, that different operators produce different effects. Three photographers will produce three portraits of the same individual which are strikingly unlike, in spite of a certain likeness to their subject. And yet more, the same operator shall take three portraits of the same person within one quarter of an hour which shall be so unlike as hardly to be recognized as representations of the same individual. In a word, the photographer has become an artist. The eminent professors of the art have each his style, his individual manner, which is recognizable by an.acute and practised eye almost as easily as the manner of different painters. It is this style that gives their work its peculiar value and insures reputation, profit, success.

Do you suppose that mere chance, or command of resources, has enabled Brady to produce that superb array of the most distinguished men in the country? or that society decided blindly when Kurtz became the fashion ? or that Sarony’s reputation as the picturesque photographer is the consequence of his having happened to take good likenesses ofa few celebrated actors? Such things never merely happen; they are the results of natural gifts and hard study. Sarony’s portrait of Ristori as Marie Antoinette is a work of which Delaroche need not have been ashamed. True, it is the product of three factors. The skilful use of the chemical qualities of light, and the marvellous power of the actress herself in summoning into her face and attitude an expression of the emotions of the scene, are two; the third is the ability, the artistic ability, of the operator. He has succeeded in selecting, and then in fixing by a process almost instantaneous, the position and expression that will transmit Ristori’s grandest moment to posterity. The product is noble as a mere work of art. The portraiture aside, it is valuable for itself. There is mental anguish in every line of that face; there is tragedy in the very sweep of that drapery. Here is Bryant, most difficult of subjects, of whom the photographic and even the painted portraits are almost innumerable; but until these heads appeared nothing was quite satisfactory. This is the man: strong, simple, serene, benign, venerable. Here is not only the feature but the spirit. And in these portraits of Henry Ward Beecher, see the boldness, the subtlety, the flexibility, the intellectual and magnetic force, and also the humor, of the Plymouth Church ~preacher for the first time all embodied. A skilful artist with the pencil, Sarony has made the pictorial capacity of the camera a study. He can do with it almost anything within the range of the draughtsman‘s art—glorify or caricature at his will. Discarding those few formal poses so familiar and so oppressive in photographs, he is able to make true and characteristic portraits in positions so various and so free that they rival not only those of the portrait painters, but those in which figures are represented in genre or historical paintings. He is a master of light and shade, and produces heads which repeat the startling effects of Rembrandt’s etchings with a truthfulness to the facts of nature that Rembrandt in the attainment of his effect sometimes disregarded. See this head of a well-known and beautiful actress. The whole of the face is in shadow, except the high outlines of the features, and these are defined, not by shadows, but by brilliant lines of light. And there is a woman whom, having a beautiful profile and beautiful shoulders, Sarony boldly photographed with her back toward us, its fine undulations revealed in a broad mass of softened light, and her head turned so that we catch its finest outlines. Even if you have never seen the original, you covet this photograph as a fine picture.

These observations we make in the exhibition room, where Mr. Sarony’s business partner, Mr. Campbell, presides, as he does in every other part of the establishment except the operating room, where Sarony himself is absolute. For a great photographic establishment is a complicated affair, with many assistants mechanical and artistic, and must be directed with system and administrative ability. Mr. Sarony could not do so much work, or do it so well, were it not that he is relieved of this detail, and that another band runs the machine for which he supplies the steam. But Mr. Campbell intimates to a mild-eyed young lady that she can give us a pass to the operating room, and thus provided we ascend.

Glare, bareness, screens, iron instruments of torture, and a smell as of a drug and chemical warehouse on fire in the distance. A photographer’s operating room is always something between a barn, at green-room, and a laboratory. Here we find a few others like ourselves waiting their turns like the cripples at the pool of Bethesda. Sarony himself, no taller than his namesake Napoleon, and quite as peremptory, is listening to the complaints of a man who is dissatisfied with the proofs of his sitting. A hard-featured, money-making, Western pork-packer, who is fifty-five years old and looks every hour of it, in the hard lines of whose leathern face devotion to the one great object of life may be traced, it might naturally be supposed that he would be quite indifferent to the degree of youth and comeliness that appears in his portrait. Vain expectation! There are many astonishing revelations of human nature in the photographer’s rooms. Sarony and the sun have dealt kindly with this man, and have taken off at least five years from the record of time upon his face. But he is dissatisfied and ungrateful. He points out faults here and there, and Sarony with a crayon now softens an outline and now tempers an expression. But still the man, seeing himself as others see him, grumbles. At last the artist turns to him somewhat sharply, and yet with good nature, saying, “How young would you like to be made, sir? I could make you twenty-five, but my reputation could not bear that. Thirty-five is as low as 1 can go.” “Oh no,” is the reply, with a sudden manifestation of modesty, “make me look full forty-three,” drawing a fine line between forty and forty-five. “I’ll try to satisfy you, sir; ” and Adonis departs. How can he look himself in the face when he shaves those mahogany jaws tomorrow?

And now a lady steps forward for her sitting, an acquaintance with whom admits us with her behind the screen, but not quite to the artist’s satisfaction. For the photographer does not like to have the sitter’s attention diverted by even the consciousness of the presence of a third party. She begins to talk to him and he to watch her. He sees that she is pretty, but with that kind of prettiness which consists of expression, vivacity, and brightness of eye, more than regularity of feature. These are the most difficult faces to photograph satisfactorily to the friends of the sitter. He places her, makes her take two or three positions, tempers the shadows as many times by the adjustment of screens and curtains, and at last says suddenly, “There, so, if you please,” and sweeps his hand down the skirt and settles it with a look of satisfaction. The movement attracts her attention; and more concerned about her dress than herself, she turns her head quickly and gives her gown one of those pulls a little behind and below the waist that seem necessary to the perfect tranquillity of the female mind, and— an exclamation breaks from Mr. Sarony: “Ah, why could you not stand still as I placed you?” “But, my dress, sir!” “But me, madam!” with a tragicomic air, yet not without serious meaning. “Do I count for absolutely nothing in this matter?” Then turning to us: “it’s gone, hopelessly. One cannot do that twice immediately in succession.” The best is done that can be done, however, and the lady descends to give place to another.

The new-comer is a radiant beauty, who is accompanied by a gentleman whose admiration she accepts with the air of a queen receiving tribute. If she but knew how much more admirable a little graciousness would make her! He complains that of several photographers not one has done this lady justice, and exhibits half a dozen different cards. Mr. Sarony silently passes them to us, who boldly remain and assume the part of an assistant. The complaint is reasonable. Of all the portraits even the best degrades, vulgarizes, and grossens that lovely face, and two or three of them are so hideously unlike that they could not be recognized by either superficial or close examination. Strange, too; for the lady pr0ves to be a most docile sitter, and one of those who take position with grace and retain it with ease. Delighted with his subject, Sarony takes her in half a dozen different attitudes. She then asks to be allowed to make a slight change in her costume, and disappearing, returns in a few moments with her head-dress entirely changed, much simplified and diminished. Two more sittings in this state, and then the gentleman approaches her and asks a question. She plainly refuses a request. He evidently asks again, and she again says No. He presses his suit and becomes solicitous. Her cheek flushes, her docility vanishes, and the conversation becomes audible. “What! with no chignon at all, and my hair just dragged behind my ears! I never heard of such a thing; it’s perfectly preposterous.” “But you said you would; and that one will be worth all the rest.” “Well, I’m sure I’ve had two taken in braids, and nothing can be prettier than braids.” “Braids are very pretty, but there is one thing much prettier.” “What?” The question is asked not in words, but with a quick turn of the face and a look of inquiry. “Your head.” “Bother!” for she is beyond the mollifying effect of compliment. And, indeed, what woman is there who could be flattered into being photographed, or seen at a reception, without a head-dress or in a two-year-old bonnet, by being told that she would look as superb as Juno, as wise as Minerva, and as beautiful as Venus? So she says, “Bother! why do you want me to make a fright of myself?” His countenance falls, and she sees that he is sadly disappointed and even displeased. Her cheeks flush deeper, and her eyes glisten. “Well. if I must, I must ; ” and she begins to tear down her head-dress with reckless hands. “ You’re very unkind to make me do this just for your selfish pleasure ; ” and she bursts into tears of mingled grief and vexation; whereupon he evidently falls prostrate, and—as we can see by dumb show, for his voice is inaudible—entreats her not to do that to which she is so unwilling. But she has the bit between her teeth; and now she will do, despite his entreaties, what before she was so reluctant to do in compliance with them. Nothing so fell of purpose as a woman determined to be a martyr; and what martyrdom. what stake, what rack, what gibbet is equal to being pilloried without a fashionable head-dress that in five years will be ridiculous ! Disdaining the artifices of the toilet as unbecoming the solemnity of the occasion, with a turn of her hand she sweeps her hair behind her head and ascends the platform as if it were a scaffold. Her companion ventures to put out a finger to make some change in the position of the hair which is the cause of all this woe. Ignorant, presuming creature! She withers him with a glance, and draws herself away with a look that says, “Touch me not with unholy hands, for lam consecrated to sacrifice.” To Sarony, in his mingled office of high priest and executioner, she submits with a mien of offended dignity and edifying meekness. The portrait is taken; but what will come of that strange sitting probably only he and she, and her now utterly abject and humiliated companion, will ever know. G.”

The fire-escape

Figure 1- The fire-escape, Boston's South End, IPhone photograph. (c) DE Wolf 2015.

Figure 1- The fire-escape, Boston’s South End, IPhone photograph. (c) DE Wolf 2015.

OK, I’ll put in a plug for the Coppa Restaurant in Boston’s South End. I went there for brunch on Sunday with my family. And as a truly sluggard photographer, I took the image of Figure 1 without getting up from my seat. I keep experimenting with the camera on my IPhone 6 for art photographs and continue to be pleased with the results. It has its limitations: only takes 8 bit jpg, no optical zoom, and then there’s the annoying need to be able to see the back of the phone to frame the image.  But on the other hand, it does the rest of the job for you and also enables HDR and panoramas.

This picture is a black and white of the fire-escape acoss the street and its shadows against the brick. I even refrained from toning. I almost got the perspective: horizontal, vertical, and tilt just right.  The picture also required just a touch of digital zoom in.

Can you imagine Ansel Adams standing on the side of the road with his IPhone in Hernandez, NM? If you could have gotten him to stop taking pictures long enough, he would have been the first to point out that it’s about the photographer not the equipment.

A break in the clouds in the style of Maxfield Parrish

Figure 1 - A break in the clouds in the style of Maxfield Parrish. (c) DE Wolf 2015.

Figure 1 – A break in the clouds in the style of Maxfield Parrish. IPhone photograph. (c) DE Wolf 2015.

I was driving home from work on Tuesday and stopped at the local farm-stand. When I returned to my car I heard the distant peel of thunder and looked up into a dense atmospheric cloud cover. I headed down the road towards home traversing the marshlands of the Assabet River. As the horizon came into view I was greeted by the scene of Figure 1. This is the reason one should always carry a camera. In the case of this picture, it was my IPhone.

The IPhone actually works better for me than my Canon when it comes to photographing clouds because of the marvelous wide angle field of view. With my Canon I seldom have a wide angle enough lens with me. I took this picture twice: one straight and the other with HDR on. As it turned out the dynamic range did not require the HDR setting. On the other hand IPhone pictures always suffer in that they are only eight bit. You can see the discreteness as your set the histogram.

As for the image itself, it is a break in the clouds. I think of it as a notch which seems to separate the Earth from the heavens, in such a way that the different planes are ambiguous. The ambiguity is part of the appeal of the light. But beyond that, these are clouds in the style of the artist Maxfield Parrish (1870-1966). I have always admired in this painting the power of the blues and how he captured the luminance of the light.

The three year anniversary of Hati and Skoll Gallery

Figure 1 - The dog walker in August, (c) DE Wolf 2015.

Figure 1 – The dog walker in August, (c) DE Wolf 2015.

These are indeed the most sultry days of summer.  We are experiencing our first “heat wave” in two years in Boston. A heat wave is defined by three consecutive days in a row of temperatures in the nineties Fahrenheit.  I know that this truly pales in comparison with the locales of many Hati and Skoll readers, but it is what it is, and it is enough to keep yours truly from his daily walk at Fresh Pond.  And speaking of Fresh Pond, it has been a rather quiet place. Many of the dogs are on vacation, and the dog walkers are herding diminished groups. Indeed, many of the dog walkers are themselves on vacation. And the birds when it gets really hot tend to be silent. Hmm!

I am including here as Figure 1 and image of one of these more intrepid dog walkers. As I believe that this indicates I am experimenting with changed controls to great a more pastel color palette in an image. I admire photographers who can easily reproduce in this way the glorious visual quality of now long lost Kodachrome.

In addition, it is time to celebrate the third anniversary of the Hati and Skoll Gallery, and I really want to thank my many readers for their continued interest in my persistent ramblings – both actual and verbal. I really appreciate all of your comments that come to me in many different ways: on the blog, personally, and on Facebook. I have learned a lot from you all.

As we head into year four of the Gallery, I just wanted to point out that I recently updated many of the photogalleries. Yes, more of those insidious bird photographs! In addition, the “New Gallery” now contains photographs from Southern Maine: Kennebunkport, Cape Porpoise, and Freeport taken in 2014 and 2015. I am looking forward to soon replacing these with an updated Halloween Series (my personal favorite holiday) around October First.

I am tempted to say that the coming of autumn marks a particular glory time for New England photographers. But in truth, it is the seasons themselves that define New England, and all seasons have their own marvelous lights.

Thanks again to all of you for your interest and support.

David

Canon T2i with EF70-200mm f/4L USM lens at 70 mm, ISO 1600, Aperture Priority AE mode, 1/500th sec at f/7.1 with no exposure compensation.

 

Napoleon Sarony – Young Couple c1870

Figure 1 - Napolean Sarong "Yound Couple c1870" gentleman. In the public domain by virtue of its age.

Figure 1 – Napolean Sarong “Yound Couple c1870” gentleman. In the public domain by virtue of its age.

In researching Sunday’s blog about Napoleon Sarony I came across this beautiful set of “Imperial” photographs that he took around 1870. c1870 is my conclusion both because of the photographer’s Broadway address and because of the lady’s dress – somewhere between 1870 and 1877. The hoop in the rear with bundles of fabric was characteristic. To me the appeal of these unknown, to us, individuals exceeds in a way similar images of celebrities of the day.

What is so wonderful to my mind is Sarony’s skill at drawing out his subjects. He worked with an assistant who controlled the bulb and would sing, dance, hoot, and make animal noises to get the subject to give him an appealing pose.  Then he would signal the assistant to take the image.

What I see in the faces of this couple (I would venture that they were married at the time because if you take a magnifying loop to the original you see just a glimpse of a gold band on the ring finger of the lady’s left hand. You can in fact see this in the scanned image.) is what is referred to today, as a deep sense of American exceptionalism.  This couple is out to conquer the world. They are young. They are Americans at a point in history when everything was possible. The man stands in a forceful commanding posture his gloved hands slightly clinched as if he is prepared to take us on. And the lady, with her elegant earrings and appealing eyes, has the most magnificent “Mona Lisa” smile. These images are Sarony at his best, at the height of the portraitist’s art.

* I have scanned these images from the original and with the exception of removing some of the scanning artifacts have left them un-retouched.

Figure 1 - Napolean Sarong "Yound Couple c1870" lady. In the public domain by virtue of its age.

Figure 1 – Napolean Sarong “Yound Couple c1870” lady. In the public domain by virtue of its age.

Seeing and hearing Oscar Wilde

I’d like for fun today to follow-up on the theme of Oscar Wilde. We have the crisp expressive photograph, indeed photographs, by Napoleon Sarony taken in 1882. Eighteen years later, and just before his premature death at forty-five Wilde visited the 1900 Paris Exposition. Indeed, he stopped at the exhibit of Thomas Edison inventions and was asked to speak into the cylinder phonograph. The result is this rather scratchy and indistinct recording of the “Ballad of Reading Gaol.” There is, of course, the question whether Wilde was captured on any of the Edison film of the Expo. The answer is unclear, but provocative. A short and very inconclusive video has emerged.

We may, I think, reflect on three points. First, is how inferior video record was at its birth compared to its cousin still photography. Second, how rapidly both voice and video recoding has improved in just a hundred years. And third is how much we desire to take those captured moments of the past to suddenly evolve into moving images. We wish to give them life.

Napoleon Sarony

Figure 1 - Portrait of Oscar Wilde by Napoleon Sarony , 1882. From the Wikipedia, scan of an original in the Metropolitan Museon of Art, NYC, and in the public domain because of its age.

Figure 1 – Portrait of Oscar Wilde by Napoleon Sarony , 1882. From the Wikipedia, scan of an original in the Metropolitan Museon of Art, NYC, and in the public domain because of its age.

Last month I blogged about Evelyn Nesbit, “The World’s First Supermodel.” The beautiful portrait that I posted was by “Sarony’, and this got me interested in exactly who Sarony was.  The picture in question was most probably by Otto Sarony ((1850-1903)). Otto was one of three famous Sarony portrait artists. Such artists were the people that have given us those marvelously fleeting moments of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. These are the people who ultimately preserved for posterity those faces. And it is, perhaps, difficult to project back to a time when to get an enduring picture of yourself or a loved one. You couldn’t just raise a cell phone in front of your face.  You couldn’t even use a Kodak Brownie or 35 mm camera. You had to deliberately and quite consciously go into a photographer’s parlor. Many of these portraitists were mere technicins. Others had a gift for their craft that endures the ages. And we may begin with one of the true greats, Napoleon Sarony (1821-1896), who was Otto’s father.

Napoleon Sarony was born in Quebec in 1821 and moved to New York City sometime around 1836. Early in his career, he was an illustrator for Currier and Ives and subsequently partnered with James Major to form their own lithography business, Sarony & Major, in 1843. Napoleon left this successful business in 1867. He established a photography studio at a point when celebrity photographs were a major fad. Photographers paid these celebrities to sit for them and then retained full rights on the images which they sold to a star hungry public. As an example, Sarony is reported to have paid the popular stage actress Sarah Bernhardt $1,500 to pose for his camera. This is equivalent to about $20,000 today.

Napoleon Sarony was extremely well connected. Along with Mark Twain, he was involved in the founding of the Salmagundi Club, an association of artists, and was also a member of the Tile Club whose members included well-known authors and journalists. Thousand of people came to sit for him including many important figures of the day such as: William Tecumseh Sherman, Mark Twain, and Oscar Wilde.

Figure 1 is one of the portraits that Napoleon Sarony took of Oscar Wilde. It is significant for two reasons. First, it shows Sarony’s marvelous ability to capture a person’s spirit and individuality. The shoes and stockings are wonderful and then there is the dreamy background figures, which perhaps denote symbolically the vision of the poet. Second, it is the photograph that extended copyright protection to photographs. The Burrow-Giles lithographic Company used unauthorized lithographs of this image in an advertisement. Sarony sued in a case that ultimately reached the United States Supreme Court, which affirmed a lower court ruling. Sarony won a judgment of $600 in 1884, but American photographers won the right to copyright protect their work.

The tyranny of 41,750

Figure 1 - The chains of human bondage. Kennebunkport, Maine. (c) DE Wolf 2015.

Figure 1 – The chains of human bondage. Kennebunkport, Maine. (c) DE Wolf 2015.

I went this morning to post my blog.  Indeed, I was anxious to get it out since it had been a few days since my last post.  So I turned on my computer and guess what, Windows had forty-one thousand seven hundred and fifty updates to the operating system to install and perform. This is cyber-tyranny. Was I given any choice?  Was there any thought given to the fact that I might have something better to do with my time then wait for my computer to reboot. How many hours, both business and personal, are stolen in this way.

Well, stolen might be a strong word because I am pretty sure that when you install your operating system and are asked whether you accept the terms and conditions that buried somewhere in there is a statement where you relinquish all rights to ultimate control of your own cyber-life.  But I do reserve the right to object and moan about it.  Isn’t there a better and more gentle way. On day one your computer asks you to perform the update. On days two, three, and four it nags you, sounding increasingly like your mother. On day five it begs you to do the right thing, stressing the importance of the update, the impending danger if your don’t, and the compelling social correctness of the act. And finally on day six, again like a good mother, it finally guilts you into submission. You and your father are going to C-drive me to an early grave if you don’t install the updates.

You see there are better ways. I know that someone is going to suggest that I spend significantly more $ for a gray case with and apple on it. The significantly more money part is the tyranny of branding. This, in the end, is an entirely different story with shades of Orwellian mind control.

I am frustrated, but back on line now. I try to find contentment in the fact that the cyber world is a lot better than it was say ten years ago, when it was insanely difficult to do anything, especially to connect your computer with the internet, and when the blue screen of cyber death was oh so much more prevalent.  But, friends, I want to emphasize that 41,750 is a very large number. How did we get into this tyrannical mess in the first place. How did my computer, which I nurture daily, become so outdated that it needs so much updating. Protest! Computer users of the world unite! We have nothing to lose but our chains.

“We need a bigger boat!”

Figure 1 - "Megalodon shark jaws museum of natural history 068" by Original uploader was Spotty11222 at en.wikipedia - Transferred from en.wikipedia; transferred to Commons by User:FunkMonk using CommonsHelper.. Licensed under Public Domain via Wikimedia.

Figure 1 – “Megalodon shark jaws museum of natural history 068” by Original uploader was Spotty11222 at en.wikipedia – Transferred from en.wikipedia; transferred to Commons by User:FunkMonk using CommonsHelper.. Licensed under Public Domain via Wikimedia.

Increasingly summers on the East Coast of the United States have become shark fests. There are an impressive number of great whites this year off the coast of Chatham, Massachusetts on Cape Cod.  These have followed the harbor seals and the warm waters to our beaches. At the same time the news media has fairly regularly taken a break from following the antics of showman and bully-in-chief Donald Trump and his run for the White House with shark stories. But this morning I just could not resist passing one on. The video was filmed last year during the shooting of a Discovery Channel documentary. It shows an encounter with “Deep Blue” one of the largest great whites ever recorded. While these fish average about 15 feet in length, Deep Blue approaches twenty-two feet. In the startling video the shark approaches a shark cage off Guadalupe Island, which is off Mexico’s Baja Peninsula. Researcher Mauricio Hoyos Padilla can be seen exiting the cage and pushing the shark away.

Anyone who has seen the movie Deep Blue Sea will be sobered by the sight of Deep Blue. However, this is nothing compared to Carcharocles megalodon which was 14 to 20 meters in length and ruled the Earth’s seas 15.9 to 2.6 Myrs ago. As a child I spent many happy hours at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City with my father and sister. One of my favorite specimens there is shown in Figure 1, a fossilized jaw of C. Megalodon and big enough for a man to sit in. Stay out of the water, people!