In a message dated 12/2/13 10:13:57 AM, [email protected] writes:
> ? I am presently reading Maillet, The Claude Glass and ?I would welcome > any > remarks anyone wanted to make. > Kate Sullivan > I haven't read the book, but I find its sub-title ominous: The Claude Glass: Use and Meaning of the Black Mirror in Western Art Paperback by Arnaud Maillet For me, it's always ominous when someone purports to supply "the meaning of" something. "The use of" is fine if the author's aim is to convey how people did in fact use it, and what they were hoping for. You're probably already aware of this "Goodreads" description on Google. (Most of the Goodreaders comments are very fav orable.) Goodreads: In this first full-length study of a largely forgotten optical device from the eighteenth century, Arnaud Maillet reconfigures our historical understanding of visual experience and meaning in relation to notions of opacity, transparency, and imagination. Many are familiar with the Claude glass as a small black convex mirror used by artists and spectators of landscape to reflect a view and make tonal values and areas of light and shade visible. In a groundbreaking account, Maillet goes well beyond this particular function of the glass and situates it within a richer archaeology of Western thought, exploring the uncertainties and anxieties about mirrors, reflections, and their potential distortions. He takes us from the magical and occult background of the "black mirror," through a full evaluation of its importance in the age of the picturesque, to its persistence in a range of technological and representational practices, including photography, film, and contemporary art. The Claude Glass is a lasting contribution to the history of Western visual culture.
