What is TintypePop?

The expanded definition for TintypePop is influenced by Stuart Ewen’s thesis as set forth in his book, All Consuming Images. He argues that previous to the invention of photography, images were seen as a demonstration of wealth and power. Previous to this invention if you wanted to have an image, say a portrait of your family, you had to commission an artist. To commission an artist, you needed disposable income. In the time of Feudalism, peasants did not have such disposable income at hand, therefore paintings and other imagery were the reserved right for wealthy land owners.

When guests arrived to their stately manors, having oil portraits and other imagery on display impressed upon their guests the amassed wealth and power. Even more powerful, a collection of work served as a testament to the legacy of their family’s inherited wealth, and materially established for their guests the power of their family name over generations of time.

With the invention of photography, all this changed

Ewen argues that post photography, imagery now could be created quickly, easily, and for a considerably reduced price point. Families could now have their portrait shot within minutes at a local fair. Imagery was now accessible to all, and therefore, the currency of imagery as a demonstration of family wealth was negligible, and arguably, obsolete.

And here we find an interesting shift occurring. One may conclude that with imagery's loss of grandeur, it was now valueless. But in fact the value of imagery was not depreciated. Rather what we find is that the very opposite occurred in large part because some envisioned imagery as a disarming, and potentially, powerful tool.

Before photography, imagery through paintings had dimension and form with their textures, oils, canvas; and statues presented to us an image that had infinite variations as the viewer changed their perspective in 3D space. Ewen declares that now, imagery through photography is stripped of its form, and therefore, is stripped of it’s contextual meaning.

At the same time, accelerating the use of imagery without context is the Industrial Revolution. Previously, masterfully designed architecture and intricately crafted household items were reserved for the wealthy, created by families of craftsmen and artisans. Now? Now these items could be poured and stamped out by mass production in a factory, selected in a catalog, and picked up at a store for mass consumption for the developing middle class. Sure, the quality of materials were sub-par, and your neighbor likely had the same item, but it was designed nonetheless and served as evidence to your rise to the middle class, perhaps even the nouveau riche. But these items were nothing more than faux status symbols, out of context and consumable.

The Middle Class and imagery

Whereas before photography and the industrial revolution, art and craft items served as evidence to demonstrate wealth, now imagery was no more than fabricated facades used by the middle class, put on display for others to argue of their importance. It was as real as a Hollywood movie set. With everyone purchasing the same mass produced trinkets, the shift of power moved from the owners of imagery to the designers of imagery.

A notable milestone in the transformation of formless imagery as a tool for persuasion occurred when companies realized the power of design, and reacted by branding their identities to provide a cohesive image for public consumption. In the early 1900’s, Germany’s AEG commissioned architect Peter Behrens to design AEG a corporate identity. Behrens’ hand of design encompassed, not only their building headquarters, but included AEG’s product line, extending even to their corporate trademark and typeface.

The Dangers of Imagery Sans Context

Here we see the groundwork for what Marshall McLuhan observes as The Medium is the Massage. Our spending habits and viewpoints are no longer based on the information we observe, rather, we are influenced by the delivery of information. Our response to information is consciously manipulated through a designed system of delivery, a delivery based on imagery stripped of context and form.

And here we see the monumental responsibility today for those who disseminate information. As a high-tech society, we are immersed in an environment where the publishing of information is incessant, and frequently, without context and form. Sound bites. Snapshots. Quotes. Pop culture too frequently manipulates these tools to wield power over our decision making process. Limit the context and form of imagery, focusing the viewer, the participant, on a singular desired outcome. Oversimplify viewpoints as binary scenarios framed within Straw Man arguments, so the active viewer is left with no choice but to agree or be ostracized.

Our responsibility

As viewers and generators of information, you and I have a responsibility to be aware of these tools, and to be aware of our innate tendencies as pliable humans. This is my explanation of TintypePop. To be socially aware of imagery and information, and to digest and use it in an authentic and transparent fashion. To invite open discussions. To go out and research untested theories. To seek solutions from the edge, outside of our areas of familiarity. To view life with a child’s mind, with fresh eyes. A willingness to be wrong and a desire to accept that our current base of knowledge is not all there is to know.

We live in an exciting time of change and growth for the accessibility of information. The questions are: “Will we meet the challenge by delivering pure content in an authentic and transparent fashion? Can we view information with a child’s mind, and digest it with sound judgement and common sense?

~ gabriel

Tags: image, information