Untitled c. 1865

Editor: So, here we have an "Untitled" photograph by Samuel Bourne, created around 1865. It’s a gelatin-silver print landscape featuring majestic mountains. The scale is impressive; it really conveys a sense of the sublime. What do you make of this image? Curator: This work is fascinating when considered within the context of 19th-century colonialism and the romanticization of the "untouched" landscape. Bourne was working in India during British rule, documenting the region. How does the depiction of the land, seemingly devoid of indigenous presence, reinforce power dynamics? Editor: That's a powerful point. I hadn’t considered that absence. I was mostly drawn to the aesthetic, the interplay of light and shadow creating depth... It feels like a very composed scene. Curator: Exactly. Bourne isn’t simply capturing a landscape; he is constructing a particular vision. The emphasis on the grand, awe-inspiring vista serves to almost erase any narrative of the local population who would have understood and navigated this terrain very differently. Can you see how the aesthetic choices, the romantic composition, become part of a larger colonial project? Editor: I think so. The grandeur kind of overwhelms any sense of local history or people, directing the viewer to a specific, almost ‘heroic’ way of seeing. Curator: Precisely. It’s crucial to question whose perspective is privileged. The ‘picturesque’ aesthetic flattens a complex reality. And consider who was consuming these images back in Britain? What fantasies or justifications might these romanticized landscapes have fueled? Editor: I see. So it's not just about the beautiful mountain, but what the mountain *represents* in this context. Thanks! This definitely gives me a new lens to consider landscape photography. Curator: Indeed. It's about constantly questioning whose stories are being told and whose are being silenced. This kind of questioning transforms how we appreciate art, and more importantly, the world.