WHAT IS THE VALUE OF A PHOTO IF IT IS HUNGARIAN?

Which one? And for whom? Financially or morally? And what makes a photo Hungarian?… When I started editing and compiling this book, I had to ask myself this question that generated several others. In order to aim at giving impartial and objective answers, it is just sensible to have a look at the factors that create value influencing the intellectual, historic, market or any other value of a photograph. And we should only touch upon the problem ”what makes it Hungarian” lastly. Well, the first factor is value. Naturally, it does not mean an exchange rate financially depictable but something more universal. Let us state at the very beginning: there exist as many values as many people make the judgement, and of course in the majority of cases, it also means differing opinions. And I will not mention local interests. I accept that anything can be valuable for anybody. First of all, because it is theirs and not anybody else’s. Secondly, because they try to emphasise their special aspects, and then they generalise, overstate and put these special and typical aspects, characteristic of them or their collections, to a pedestal. Let me give an example: if somebody collects airship photos and finds one that he has not had before, that photo is more valuable for him than for anybody else. So far so good, but there should be some measures. But there is some trouble with the third one. A picture can be valuable for someone because nothing helps and forces him to look beyond the limits of his knowledge and realise: beyond particular values there are some others that are more general and comprehensive. Well, if you want, I can even accept their reasoning as well. However, this book is made for those who think it makes no harm to look beyond our own, restricted limits and we must be ready to have our values compared to the European or more general ones and take on all the consequences. Some authors, some pictures soar into heavens, and others happen to be judged mediocre. There are too many photos. It can be surprising to be written down by a curator, but this is a fact. Each day millions of photos are taken and most are developed and kept. Choices must be done in each minute, all the time and we must evaluate our choices and, if necessary, revise them. To enhance this, I will try to outline what kind of structure could be desirable for the evaluation of photos, especially, for Hungarian photos. We should accept, and it is me who says it, that a significant portion of existing pictures has no elements of value. These merely exist, have been taken, nobody uses them for anything, but nobody either takes the responsibility or nuisance to get rid of them. Of course, the decision means responsibility and cannot be done without certain knowledge and taste. And then there are photos -a great number of them -that have local value due to their topics, delineation, and the person who has taken them or for any other special reasons. These photos have their value in their own place but if they are taken away from there, they get devalued. As the majority of Hungarian photographic collections is organised by some special aspects, this local system of values covers everything else. If someone is looking for some more general values, he must note and accept the local rules of the game. And if he does so and works his way through, his persistence is crowned with success -as in genuine tales -and he will find the photos that do have national value among the specially grouped photos. I would include here the ones that play outstanding role in a nation’s intellectual self-assessment, conscience and culture. Those pictures also belong here which are decisive pieces in the development of photography’s development in Hungary or represent a certain trend. The works of significant authors also have place here together with the Hungarian related photos of significant foreign artists. The experimental works enhancing the development of photographic technology and its development cannot be neglected either. The selection of this book contains mainly photos bearing national value. And now we have reached the top of the pyramid. Among the photos with national value you can find a relatively small number with universal value. These ones do belong to the universal history of photography, no matter what the points of evaluation are. They are registered in the universal history of photography and they qualify the photography of a certain nation retrospectively as well. These photos appear on international auctions and it is of rank to possess one in your collection. Universal photography has got anointed emperors (a few), aristocrats (a bit more), ambitious citizens (quite a lot) and anonymous commons (a huge number). These castes are rigidly separated and it is quite difficult to enter a higher one. Commons might struggle themselves with one or two of their pictures (but not their oeuvre)from the national level to the universal category. An ambitious citizen, if they manage to call attention to an especially successful album or exhibition of theirs might enter the caste where the author is present not only with a single picture, but his name is a factor generating value. This way, his less good pictures can also become important. Almost all the pictures of higher castes have exceptional value. However, we must not forget that value categories keep changing, thus, some names or trends might be neglected for a while to give place for the next one. And there a few, really few, the classics of photography, who have their names recorded in the Great Book of photography forever. Let us see Hungarian photographers: who are ranked and how they are ranked on this imaginary ladder that does exist and work. Let us state, that due to the unlucky conditions of Hungary’s history, 90 per cent of the authors of 20th century could only gain recognition abroad. The reasons do not require a photographic evaluation analysis. Anyway, today (June 2004)there are maximum 4-5 Hungarian born photographers belonging to the highest caste of photography: Robert Capa, László Moholy-Nagy, André Kertész, Márton Munkácsi and Brassai. Among the aristocrats of photography we can find Cornell Capa, György Kepes, Stefan Lorant, Lucien Hervé, Éva Besnyő, Sylvia Plachy and some others. The rest is mentioned in detailed international photo-historic books only due to a single picture or album of theirs. And what about those who have worked in Hungary? Rudolf Balogh, Jenő Dulovits, Ernő Vadas, Nándor Bárány, Zoltán Zajky, József Pécsi, Angelo, Ferenc Veress, Károly Escher, Imre Kinszki and the others, the prides of our national photographic history do not frequently occur in the course materials on universal photographic history. First of all, not because we have not appreciated them as national values and do not manage them well on the international market of photography. I am trying to avoid it but cannot escape defining what makes a photo Hungarian. According to our present knowledge, there are two factors: if it was created by a person born in Hungary, or its topic is Hungarian, or… Does anyone know a third reason? But it is even more important to face the question, who it is important for? The fact whether a photo is good or bad, valuable or not, must be an issue for everybody. But who cares if after the name of the photographer there is a Spanish, Dutch, German or Hungarian town’s name? What about the photographic values that cannot be connected to names? They would represent an outstanding value had at least one survived. Such examples are the full or half-size daguerreotypes with landscapes or the 18-piece photo serial of Ádám Góla about István Ferenczy’s statues before they were destroyed. It is a pity that the original photo presented by Daguerre to György Apponyi in 1839 is not exhibited nor included in the book. It is a treasure of another public collection. The early travel photos of János Xantus, Pál Rosti, Lajos Bíró, Károly Szathmári Pap’s photos of the Crimean war also belong to the category of universal value. The early salt paper prints, talbotype negatives and prints also represent real value if they have recorded not only a portrait but a landscape or event as well. And the products of Hungarian brain and mind, the inventions and discoveries that enhanced the development of photography? We will show some of these as well, ranging from Petzval’s objective to the cameras of Hungarian development and production and to the shots made in special ways. We need not be ashamed. And if you asked the person who has made the selection why he did not give a greater emphasis to the collection of technical objects, machines, lenses and others, he would answer perhaps that, when walking in the National Gallery, he is more interested in Csontváry’s picture itself than in the brush or the brand of the paint he had used. This volume is by no means a complete inventory. It is a selection that can help researchers or those interested to get around in the Hungarian Museum of Photography. So that the selection could be more complete and consequent, we should establish a national hierarchy of values taking into consideration all the factors that create value. They would help researchers, museum specialists, collectors and traders to get informed in the photographic much richer treasures of other nations. This system of values should consider the quality of the picture, its unique character, its technical or other speciality, its availability and condition, the installation, the way of its introduction, the legality of copy right and ownership, the author’s fame and the prevailing trend as well that places a period in photographic history before the other ones… Well, if we apply these principles consequently when establishing the Hungarian value hierarchy and use good marketing methods – a lot of exhibitions, publications, essays published in foreign magazines – we can get it acquainted with the world, raise it high so as to be seen from a great distance. For me this is a realistic program, not a Utopia.