Boris Friedewald

Born in 1647 into an artistic household, Maria Sibylla Merian was drawn from a young age to the mysterious world of insects, particularly caterpillars and butterflies. Although she was obliged to fulfill a traditional feminine role as a wife and mother, she later in life realized her dream of studying the insects that so filled her with curiosity by traveling to Suriname for several years to study and paint the local flora and fauna.

Listening to a podcast about Maria several years ago is what inspired me to read more about her. This slim book is a quick read and provides a detailed narrative of her life and contributions to both the art world and the furthering of entomology and natural history. Her illustrations are gorgeous and immaculately detailed. It's a shame she isn't a household name.… (més)

I changed my rating on this after several days of thought. My quibbles with the translation should not affect my rating in my opinion, as I think the author did quite a good job of describing the life of Maria Sibylla Merian even if the grammar and wording were a bit off sometimes.

She is like many women of that time..unable to participate in what were considered "men's" fields of study but deeply interested in understanding nature and the world around her and obviously artistically gifted.… (més)

This book, organized alphabetically by photographer, is written in encyclopedia style. A one-page biographical sketch is provided for each author and that is followed by three pages of the author's photographs.

The text is written much like the actor synopses that appear in theater programs. Typically there is a chronology of where and when the photographer lived, a mention of the various luminaries they encountered, and a statement of the various honors they received. Each of these topics are covered in a superficial style. For example, several of these photographers met or worked with Man Ray and others with Henri Cartier-Bresson and Edward Weston. However, we are not told why that is significant. Did the photographers influence (or were they influenced by) these photographers?

The author makes almost no attempt to relate the photographer in the historical zeitgeist within which they worked. On occasion contemporary emphases such as pictoralism, photo-succession, and group f/64 are mentioned but these terms are not explained and—more importantly—the relation of the work of the photographer to these schools is not explained.

Adopting an alternative approach to the organization of this volume might have produced a more meaningful work. Organizing the entries chronologically would have offered an opportunity to place the photographers in the context within which they worked. Creating sections for each historical period and beginning each with a brief one-page description would have allowed the reader to understand the contribution of the photograph in greater depth. Some were working within the contemporary main stream, others were somewhat revolutionary. The reader gains no sense of this in reading the current volume.

Three lists follow the primary text. The first identifies each of the photos included in the book. The second provides a list of 31 works under the heading of "general literature." The final provides a listing of reference works for each of the individual photographers.

The strength of this work is the broad coverage of female photographers. Although somewhat Eurocentric in selection of photographers, this is still one of the best compilations of female photographer in publication. Space is always at a premium in encyclopedic works but I think a slightly different approach could have produced a superior volume.… (més)