D O C U M E N T I N T R O D U C T I O N

INTRODUCTION TO JOSÉ OITICICA FILHO’S
“SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHTER”1

alise tifentale

A key fi gure in Brazilian postwar photography, José Oiticica Filho
(1906–64) established a link between Brazilian modernist photography
and the international photo-club culture of the 1950s. Obwohl
his legacy today remains overshadowed by that of his son, artist Hélio
Oiticica (1937–80), scholarship in Brazil acknowledges him as an
important experimental photographer.2 Little, Jedoch, is known about
his work as a statistician. During the 1950s, he compiled extensive
data tables pertaining to the activities of hundreds of photographers
throughout the world. Oiticica Filho laid the foundation for his innova-

The author thanks art historian and curator Marly T. C. Porto for her indispensable help
in locating José Oiticica Filho’s article and for providing access to the issues of Boletim
Foto Cine where it was published. She also thanks Raul Feitosa, secretary to the photo-
club Foto Cine Clube Bandeirante, for his assistance and his kind permission to reprint
der Artikel.
Recent publications include Andreas Valentin, “Light and Form: Brazilian and German
Photography in the 1950s,” Konsthistorisk Tidskrift/Journal of Art History 85, NEIN. 2 (2016):
159–80; Andreas Valentin, “Nas asas da mariposa: A ciência e a fotografi a de José
Oiticica Filho,” ARS 13, NEIN. 25 (2015): 31–49; Carolina Etcheverry, “Geraldo De Barros
e José Oiticica Filho: Experimentação em Fotografi a (1950–1964),” Anais do Museu
Paulista 18, NEIN. 1 (2010): 207–8; Beatriz Scigliano Carneiro, “Uma inconsutil invenção:
A arteciência em José Oiticica Filho,” ponto-e-vírgula 6 (2009): 107–46. The unavailabil-
ity of source materials complicates further research, as many of Oiticica Filho’s prints
and negatives are believed to have perished in a fi re at his brother César Oiticica’s house
in Rio de Janeiro in 2009. See Francisco Alambert, “The Oiticica Fire,” Art Journal 68,
NEIN. 4 (2009): 113–4.

https://doi.org/10.1162/artm_a_00239

105

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

ich
T
.

e
D
u
A
R
T

M
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

F
/

8
2
1
0
5
1
9
8
9
1
0
7
A
R
T

M
_
A
_
0
0
2
3
9
P
D

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

tive statistical work in an article
he wrote, titled “Setting the
Record Straighter,” part of which
is reprinted here. The original
article was published in three
consecutive issues of the maga-
zine Boletim Foto Cine in 1951,
a publication of the São Paulo
photo-club Foto Cine Clube
Bandeirante (FCCB).3 FCCB was
founded in 1939 and played a
central role in the São Paulo
avant-garde art scene during the
1950S, when its members began
to explore semi-abstract or
entirely nonrepresentational
photography. Although based in
Rio de Janeiro, Oiticica Filho was
an active member of FCCB and
among the pioneers of the São
Paulo modernist photography
scene.4 Other notable FCCB mem-
bers include Gertrudes Altschul
(1904–62), Geraldo de Barros (1923–28), Thomaz Farkas (1924–2011),
German Lorca (B. 1922), Ademar Manarini (1920–89), and José Yalenti
(1895–1967). Oiticica Filho was a regular contributor to Boletim, estab-
lished in May 1946 as a newsletter for FCCB. Von 1951, Boletim had
evolved into an illustrated forty-page monthly magazine under the
editorial guidance of Jacob Polacow (1913–66) and the general leader-
ship of Eduardo Salvatore (1914–2006), the club’s founder and presi-
dent. Alongside single-page reproductions of selected works by FCCB
members and detailed chronicling of the club’s social events, Boletim

Cover of February 1951 issue of Boletim Foto Cine, where the first part of

José Oiticica Filho’s article “Setting the Record Straighter” was published.

Image courtesy of Foto Cine Clube Bandeirante.

José Oiticica Filho, “Reforçando os pontos dos ii,” Boletim Foto Cine 5, NEIN. 58 (Februar
1951): 21–25; NEIN. 59 (Marsch 1951): 28–30; and no. 60 (April 1951): 26–28. Scans of
Boletim Foto Cine issues are available online at the FCCB website: http://www.fotoclub
.art.br/acervo/.
For the history of FCCB, see Raul Feitosa, Bandeirante: 70 anos de história na fotografia
(São Paulo: Editora Photo, 2013), and MASP FCCB: Coleção Museu de Arte de São
Paulo Foto Cine Clube Bandeirante (São Paulo: Museu de Arte de São Paulo Assis
Chateaubriand, 2016).

S
N

ich

G
R
A
M
T
R
A

106

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

ich
T
.

e
D
u
A
R
T

M
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

F
/

8
2
1
0
5
1
9
8
9
1
0
7
A
R
T

M
_
A
_
0
0
2
3
9
P
D

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

featured reviews of photography exhibitions and articles on artistic and
technical aspects of the medium.

Photo-clubs had existed as informal organizations in many coun-
tries since the late 19th century, but Oiticica Filho was among the first
to grasp the unprecedented rate at which photo-club culture expanded
on a global level beginning in the late 1940s. The most important clubs
of the 1950s united professional photographers, photojournalists, Und
dedicated artists by providing the principal self-governed institutional
structure for the development and promotion of photography as an
autonomous and creative field. These clubs offered a social structure,
an organizational framework, and exhibition opportunities for a wide
range of photographic practices. As historian Kerry Ross argues, photo-
clubs functioned as “the primary institutional setting for the democra-
tization of the fine arts,” as “venues of aesthetic socializing” and
“politically neutral spaces to exercise liberal ideals.”5 While clubs
across the globe shared similar organizational structures, the lives and
careers of participating photographers, and the kinds of work they pro-
duziert, varied radically from location to location. The photographers’
shared aspiration for respect and prestige, something that photography
lacked in the 1950s, united these diverse groups. The photo-club cul-
ture was therefore instrumental in shaping the recognition of photog-
raphy as an art form, contributing to the gradual professionalization of
photography and the conscious separation of the medium into distinct
functional fields such as photojournalism, fashion photography, por-
traiture, advertising, fine arts photography, und so weiter, distinctions
that are taken for granted today.

The work of most photo-clubs revolved around international juried

exhibitions (also referred to as salons) selected through open calls.
Photo-club salons of the 1950s depended exclusively on the initiative
and unpaid labor of photographers who were their organizers, jurors,
and participants, as well as their primary audience. There was no mar-
ket for the photographic prints circulated in these photo-club salons,
and at the end of each exhibition, all the prints were returned to their
authors. Participants even had to pay a small application fee to help
organizers cover expenses. The word salon, when applied to these jur-
ied photography exhibitions, indicates the photographers’ desire to

Kerry Ross, Photography for Everyone: The Cultural Lives of Cameras and Consumers in
Early Twentieth-Century Japan (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2015), 12,
101, 127.

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

ich
T
.

e
D
u
A
R
T

M
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

F
/

8
2
1
0
5
1
9
8
9
1
0
7
A
R
T

M
_
A
_
0
0
2
3
9
P
D

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

”
R
e
T
H
G

ich

A
R
T
S

D
R
Ö
C
e
R

e
H
T

G
N

ich

T
T
e
S
„

Ö
T

N
Ö

ich

T
C
u
D
Ö
R
T
N

ich

e
l
A
T
N
e
F

ich

107

elevate the medium to the status of art. During the 1950s, photogra-
phers relied on photo-club salons as their primary exhibition venues
because the established systems of art museums and galleries wel-
comed their work only as rare exceptions. In Brasilien, such exceptions
were the solo shows by FCCB members German Lorca and Ademar
Manarini at the Museum of Modern Art in São Paulo in 1952 Und
1954.6 Darüber hinaus, FCCB as a group was invited to participate in the
second São Paulo Biennial in 1953. Club members Geraldo de Barros,
Ademar Manarini, Eduardo Salvatore, and José Yalenti orchestrated
this participation.7 FCCB also showcased their work in subsequent edi-
tions of the biennial. Trotzdem, as Oiticica Filho’s article indicates,
exhibiting in photo-club salons was paramount to the photographers’
debates. Historians of Brazilian photography have coined the term foto-
clubismo, derived from the term foto clube (photo club) in Portuguese, Zu
describe the creative yet competitive culture that prevailed in the 1950s
photo-clubs.8 Oiticica Filho’s writings about fotoclubismo offer detailed
insight into the struggle of a diverse group of photographers for recog-
nition of their work.

Oiticica Filho chose to use scientific methods including statistics
and data analysis, an approach not often used to explain art or art exhi-
bitions, to address the complex and often confusing culture of photo-
club salons and fotoclubismo. Typical of his colleagues in the FCCB,
most of whom had successful careers in the legal, medical, and indus-
trial fields, Oiticica Filho had no formal training in the arts, and in fact,
he came from a family of scholars.9 In 1930, he graduated from the
National School of Civil Engineering in Rio de Janeiro. Between 1928
Und 1962, he lectured in mathematics at several schools in Rio, Und
aus 1943 Zu 1964 he worked as an entomologist at the National

7
8

Helouise Costa, “O Foto Cine Clube Bandeirante no Museu de Arte de São Paulo," In
MASP FCCB, 13.
Costa, “O Foto Cine Clube Bandeirante,” 13.
Oiticica Filho did not use the term fotoclubismo in this article, but it appears in later criti-
cal literature, most notably in Paulo Herkenhoff, “A trajetória: Da fotografia acadêmica
ao projeto construtivo,” in José Oiticica Filho: A ruptura da fotografia nos anos 50 (Rio de
Janeiro: Funarte, 1983), 10–19; and Helouise Costa and Renato Rodrigues, A fotografia
moderna no Brasil (São Paulo: Cosac Naify, 2004). The most recent contribution to the
field is Marly T. C. Porto, Eduardo Salvatore e seu papel como articulador do fotoclubismo
paulista [Eduardo Salvatore and His Role as Articulator of the São Paulo State Photo-Club
Movement] (São Paulo: Grão Editora, 2018).
See the biographies of FCCB members in MASP FCCB. Oiticica Filho’s father, José
Rodrigues Oiticica (1882–1957), was a professor of philology and linguistics, a poet,
and a political activist and anarchist.

S
N

ich

G
R
A
M
T
R
A

108

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

ich
T
.

e
D
u
A
R
T

M
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

F
/

8
2
1
0
5
1
9
8
9
1
0
7
A
R
T

M
_
A
_
0
0
2
3
9
P
D

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

Museum of the University of
Brazil.10 His interest in photog-
raphy began with the detailed
images of insects and flowers
he took as part of his scientific
work in the late 1940s. In 1947
he received a Guggenheim
Foundation grant for research
in organismic biology and
ecology at the Smithsonian
Institution, where he worked
aus 1948 Zu 1950. Während
these two years he and his fam-
ily lived in Washington, DC.11
His background in engineer-
ing and the sciences helped
shape Oiticica Filho’s analytic perception of photographic art as it
emerged from photo-club culture, while his stay in the United States
broadened his perspective on the international scope of this culture.
In the article partially translated here for the first time, Oiticica
Filho illuminates the inner workings of photo-club culture, photogra-
phers’ motivations to participate, and their major concerns about the
salon system. At the core of Oiticica Filho’s “Setting the Record
Straighter” is a debate on participation in salon exhibitions, informed
by the ongoing rivalry between São Paulo–based “Paulista” photogra-
phers and Rio de Janeiro–based “Fluminense” photographers, Und
especially between members of the FCCB, of which Oiticica Filho
was a part, and the Sociedade Fluminense de Fotografia (SFF), based
in the municipality of Niterói in the state of Rio de Janeiro.12 Since the
salons in which these groups participated depended on a jury selection

Image courtesy of Foto Cine Clube Bandeirante.

Opening of the first São Paulo International Salon of Photography,

Oktober 3, 1942. Photo from the Archive of Foto Cine Clube Bandeirante.

“José Oiticica Filho,” Enciclopédia Itaú Cultural de Arte e Cultura Brasileiras, zugegriffen
April 21, 2018, http://enciclopedia.itaucultural.org.br/pessoa10674/jose-oiticica-filho.
“José Oiticica Filho,” Projeto Hélio Oiticica, accessed December 11, 2018, www.heliooiti
cica.org.br/english/biografia/biojof1940.htm. Data about his Guggenheim Foundation
grant can be found at “José Oiticica Filho,” John Simon Guggenheim Memorial
Foundation, accessed December 11, 2018, https://www.gf.org/fellows/all-fellows
/jose-oiticica-filho/.
The rivalry to which photographers attached such significance illustrates the competitive
spirit that thrived among them. The principles of competitive photography in the photo-
club culture of the 1950s are outlined in Alise Tifentale, “Rules of the Photographers’
Universe,” Photoresearcher, NEIN. 27 (2017): 68–77.

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

ich
T
.

e
D
u
A
R
T

M
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

F
/

8
2
1
0
5
1
9
8
9
1
0
7
A
R
T

M
_
A
_
0
0
2
3
9
P
D

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

”
R
e
T
H
G

ich

A
R
T
S

D
R
Ö
C
e
R

e
H
T

G
N

ich

T
T
e
S
„

Ö
T

N
Ö

ich

T
C
u
D
Ö
R
T
N

ich

e
l
A
T
N
e
F

ich

109

process that was highly subjective and often obscure, Oiticica Filho
meticulously accumulated available data to lend a certain clarity, Und
even scientific logic, to a field where participation, and even the num-
ber of prints accepted at different salons, had become crucial indicators
of success. A member of FCCB but also a resident of Rio, Oiticica Filho
emerged as a mediator between the two groups—an impartial scientist
who sought a solution in data, not in clashes between egos.

Oiticica Filho’s theoretical work is based on statistical data collec-
tion and analysis—scientific methods that are closer to sociology than
to art criticism or any other branch of the humanities. His research
anticipates the sociology of art, a field that was to emerge in the 1960s
and 1970s, with a focus on “the structure in which art is discovered,
discussed, defined, purchased, and displayed.”13 Central to the sociol-
ogy of art is the influential research of French cultural sociologist
Pierre Bourdieu during the 1960s. Like Oiticica Filho, Bourdieu
had once been an active photographer: zwischen 1957 Und 1960, Er
produced numerous photographs in Algeria, where he worked as a lec-
turer at the University of Algiers.14 As was the case with Oiticica Filho,
Bourdieu looked to statistics as a main source for his sociological study
of contemporary photographic practices in France. He conducted this
research with colleagues Luc Boltanski, Robert Castel, Jean-Claude
Chamboredon, and Dominique Schnapper between 1961 Und 1964,
and discussed it in the book Photography: A Middle-Brow Art (Un art
moyen; essai sur les usages sociaux de la photographie). The authors iden-
tify four major social functions of photography and, correspondingly,
four types of photographers: occasional family photographers, ama-
teurs, Profis, and photographic artists. Thanks to his choice to
study photography rather than a more prestigious form of art, sociolo-
gists today recognize Bourdieu’s project as a groundbreaking “cultural
attack.” Its revolutionary nature comes to light only when we realize, als
sociologist of art Nathalie Heinich writes, “just how low photography
was at this time in the artistic hierarchy.”15

Richard W. Christopherson, “Making Art with Machines: Photography’s Institutional
Inadequacies,” Urban Life and Culture 3, NEIN. 1 (1974): 13.
See Pierre Bourdieu, Picturing Algeria (New York: Columbia University Press, 2012).
The first edition was Images d’Algérie (Arles: Actes Sud Littérature with Camera Austria,
2003).
Nathalie Heinich, “Bourdieu’s Culture,” in Bourdieu in Question: New Directions in French
Sociology of Art, Hrsg. Jeffrey A. Halley and Daglind E. Sonolet (Leiden: Brill, 2018), 188.

S
N

ich

G
R
A
M
T
R
A

110

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

ich
T
.

e
D
u
A
R
T

M
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

F
/

8
2
1
0
5
1
9
8
9
1
0
7
A
R
T

M
_
A
_
0
0
2
3
9
P
D

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

Bourdieu’s book introduces the idea that practicing photography

as art was, unter anderem, a means of upward social mobility.
His sociological perspective helps to explain the amount of attention
that Oiticica Filho, a distinguished scientist and renowned photogra-
pher, dedicated to the minutiae of salon participation. The photo-club
salons were of cardinal importance to photographers in the 1950s
because they offered an exceptional avenue to accrue individual recog-
Nation. The salons were as significant for photographers as gallery and
museum exhibitions were for artists working in other media.

The impetus for writing “Setting the Record Straighter” can be

found in an earlier article, published in the October 1950 issue of
Boletim, where Oiticica Filho reviewed the Ninth International Salon
of São Paulo. In that article he criticized photographers from Rio de
Janeiro for not participating in the salon and accused them of dimin-
ishing the overall impact of the Brazilian section of the exhibition.16
Rio de Janeiro photographers responded to Oiticica Filho in several
polemic articles in the SFF magazine and in Revista Cine Fotográfica.17
Among these responses was an anonymous article titled “Setting the
Record Straight,” which blamed the São Paulo salon organizers for
being biased against the work of Rio photographers, eventually leading
the latter group to boycott exhibitions organized in São Paulo. To this
article from Revista Cine Fotográfica, Oiticica Filho responded with the
three-part “Setting the Record Straighter,” one part of which is trans-
lated here.

In the first part of “Setting the Record Straighter,” Oiticica Filho
illustrates his statistical and data-analytic methodology by presenting
his own photo-club activity between 1945 Und 1950 in the form of
extensive tables listing the prizes and honorable mentions he received
as a photographer, along with lists of his articles on photography and
reproductions of his works in catalogs and photography magazines.18
After establishing his expertise in the field, the author introduces a
comparative data table showing the numbers of prints by FCCB and
SFF members accepted in juried exhibitions between 1947 Und 1950.
In the article, he claims that he presents these tables “not with the
intention of comparing two Brazilian photography clubs, but to reestab-

José Oiticica Filho, “Os Brasileiros no IX Salão Internacional de São Paulo,” Boletim Foto
Cine 5, NEIN. 54 (Oktober 1950): 20–22.
See Revista Cine Fotográfica 2, NEIN. 17 (1951).

17
18 Oiticica Filho, “Reforçando os pontos dos ii,” 21–25.

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

ich
T
.

e
D
u
A
R
T

M
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

F
/

8
2
1
0
5
1
9
8
9
1
0
7
A
R
T

M
_
A
_
0
0
2
3
9
P
D

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

”
R
e
T
H
G

ich

A
R
T
S

D
R
Ö
C
e
R

e
H
T

G
N

ich

T
T
e
S
„

Ö
T

N
Ö

ich

T
C
u
D
Ö
R
T
N

ich

e
l
A
T
N
e
F

ich

111

lish factual truths deeply misinterpreted by disloyal and irresponsible
propaganda aimed at harming those who work hard and honestly
toward the progress of the art of photography amongst us.”19 Amid all
the subjective judgments that characterized the salons, as well as the
confusion about artistic criteria that resulted from them, Oiticica Filho
calls for objectivity and a scientific approach to evaluating achieve-
ments in the field.

In the second part of the article, which is reprinted here, Oiticica
Filho suggests how statistical methods can be helpful for grasping the
mechanisms of photo-club culture. Most importantly, he makes a dis-
tinction between qualitative and quantitative aspects of fotoclubismo,
which he argues were too often confused in the past, and suggests that
statistical methods and data analysis, if applied correctly, can be useful
for evaluating the quantitative parameters of the field. Zum Beispiel,
analysis of the numbers of participants and accepted works in interna-
tional salons reveals different levels of activity from a variety of individ-
uals, clubs, and even countries. Yet such an approach, as Oiticica Filho
readily admitted, did not help understand the aesthetics and emotional
impact of photographs. He also warns that quantitative factors should
not be conflated with qualitative ones: a higher number of accepted
works does not automatically mean a higher level of artistic achieve-
ment. He further admits that there are limitations to statistical meth-
Odds, and that they cannot explain, Zum Beispiel, the success or failure
of an individual photograph. Judges of the juried exhibitions were typi-
cally well-established photographers whose personal preferences solely
determined the selection of accepted works. These choices, according
to him, cannot be measured scientifically.

The third part of the article uses statistical methods to compare

the achievements of FCCB and SFF members. It begins with the asser-
tion that “the reasons for rejection are varied and impossible to analyze
in simple data tables.”20 Oiticica Filho argues that SFF members
wrongly blamed FCCB for being biased and that their accusation
resulted from an incorrect use of statistical methods. While SFF mem-
bers had compared the numbers of accepted works between the clubs
to prove that their work had been slighted by the jury of the Ninth
International Salon of São Paulo in 1950, Oiticica Filho maintains that

19
20

Ebenda., 24. Translated by Luisa Valle.
José Oiticica Filho, “Reforçando os pontos dos ii. Parte 3,” 26. Translated by Luisa Valle.

S
N

ich

G
R
A
M
T
R
A

112

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

ich
T
.

e
D
u
A
R
T

M
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

F
/

8
2
1
0
5
1
9
8
9
1
0
7
A
R
T

M
_
A
_
0
0
2
3
9
P
D

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

a comparison should be made between the percentage of acceptances
from SFF and the acceptances from all submissions to any given salon,
calculated as a proportion of the accepted prints among all submitted
prints. The acceptance rate of Fluminense works (Zum Beispiel, 30.4
Prozent in 1948 Und 16.6 Prozent in 1949) is then revealed to be close to
the average acceptance rate in the São Paulo salon (36.7 Prozent in 1948
Und 20.7 Prozent in 1949). This discovery, in the author’s view, blunts
any accusation of an existing bias against SFF at the São Paulo salon.
Without other established criteria of evaluation, these numbers
provided evidence of various photographers’ activity and a method of
comparing their successes. These debates, and Oiticica Filho’s recourse
to statistics, also point to photography’s outsider status and the frustra-
tion of its practitioners in the 1950s, in Brazil as elsewhere. Collecting
statistical data about different exhibitions and their participants served
as one way of at least outlining the scope of a field that was, in sociolo-
gist Jean-Claude Chamboredon’s words, “uncertain of its legitimacy,
preoccupied and insecure, perpetually in search of justification.”21

“For me, the most moving aspect of looking at a salon catalog is
seeing the names of Brazilians entangled with names of artists from
other parts of the world,” acknowledges Oiticica Filho.22 He continues
that “this is what patriotism means to me, a type of sane patriotism
expressed in seeing my name and the name of my country among
names of artists from other countries.”23 In his conclusion to the arti-
cle, Oiticica Filho calls for national unity among Brazilian photogra-
phers and reminds his audience that “creating a brotherhood between
the clubs and societies of photography in Brazil” is the goal of a
new organization, the recently established Brazilian Federation of
Photographic Art (Federação Brasileira de Arte Fotográfica).24 Over the

Jean-Claude Chamboredon, “Mechanical Art, Natural Art: Photographic Artists," In
Pierre Bourdieu with Luc Boltanski, Robert Castel, Jean-Claude Chamboredon, Und
Dominique Schnapper, Photography, trans. by Shaun Whiteside (Stanford, CA: Stanford
Universitätsverlag, 1990), 129.

22 Oiticica Filho, “Reforçando os pontos dos ii,” 22. Translated by Luisa Valle.
23
24 Oiticica Filho, “Reforçando os pontos dos ii. Parte 3,” 28. Translated by Luisa Valle.

Ebenda., 22.

Elsewhere, Oiticica Filho wrote on the Federation’s foundational congress, which took
place in 1951, and on the ideals of unification that promised to redeem the destructive
effects of rivalry among the clubs he had analyzed in “Setting the Record Straighter.”
José Oiticica Filho, “Se concreto la primera convención brasilera de arte fotográfico,”
Correo Fotográfica Sudamericano (Buenos Aires) 30, NEIN. 653 (Februar 1951): 38; “First
Brazilian Convention,” PSA Journal (New York) 17, NEIN. 4 (April 1951): 218.

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

ich
T
.

e
D
u
A
R
T

M
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

F
/

8
2
1
0
5
1
9
8
9
1
0
7
A
R
T

M
_
A
_
0
0
2
3
9
P
D

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

”
R
e
T
H
G

ich

A
R
T
S

D
R
Ö
C
e
R

e
H
T

G
N

ich

T
T
e
S
„

Ö
T

N
Ö

ich

T
C
u
D
Ö
R
T
N

ich

e
l
A
T
N
e
F

ich

113

course of the 1950s, the Federation united thirty photo-clubs and a total
von 4,106 photographers throughout Brazil, strengthening the ties
between Brazilian photographers and the world’s photographic art
community.25

Oiticica Filho played a role in championing the international

connectivity of the Federation, which had been established with the
intention of joining the International Federation of Photographic Art
(Fédération Internationale de l’Art Photographique, FIAP), founded in
Switzerland in 1950. FIAP perceived photographers as a distinct social
and professional group whose geographically scattered members could
be united around the idea of the medium’s cultural and social auton-
omy. Embodying postwar humanism and idealism, the founders of
FIAP envisioned the organization as a forum that could offer equal
opportunity for participation from all countries “regardless of their
power or their poverty.”26 Each participating country was represented
in FIAP by a national federation of photography that united photo-
clubs in that country. Over the following decade, FIAP mobilized
photo-clubs in fifty-five countries in Europe, Latin America, Asien, Und
Africa, becoming the first post–World War II organization to provide
photographers with an institutional space that existed outside the
market and that transcended political and ethnic borders.

The founder and president of FIAP, Belgian photographer
Maurice Van de Wyer (1896–1994), visited São Paulo and FCCB on
a regular basis during the 1950s, and while it is not clear whether
Oiticica Filho and Van de Wyer ever met in person, Oiticica Filho
became an active contributor to the work of FIAP, emerging as the
federation’s pioneering record-keeper and data analyst.27 During the
1950S, Oiticica Filho published several statistical reports about inter-
national photography salons in the FIAP yearbooks and the organi-
zation’s magazine, Camera, thus expanding the application of the
statistical tools that he established to analyze photo-club culture in
Brazil to a global level.

Fédération Internationale de l’Art Photographique, untitled, Camera, NEIN. 2 (1964): 41.

25
26 Maurice Van de Wyer, untitled introduction, in FIAP, ICH. Photo-Biennale der FIAP (Bern:

FIAP, 1950), 7.
Zum Beispiel, In 1956, Van de Wyer participated in the celebration of the seventeenth
anniversary of FCCB, documented in detail in the club’s official publication, Boletim Foto
Cine. See an illustrated report on his visit: “O XVII aniversario do FCCB,” Boletim Foto
Cine 9, NEIN. 99 (Mai 1956): 24–26.

S
N

ich

G
R
A
M
T
R
A

114

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

ich
T
.

e
D
u
A
R
T

M
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

F
/

8
2
1
0
5
1
9
8
9
1
0
7
A
R
T

M
_
A
_
0
0
2
3
9
P
D

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

One such report provides statistical insight, based on data Oiticica

Filho collected from exhibition catalogs, into the world’s photo-club
salons that took place during 1956.28 This account reveals the geo-
graphic reach of global fotoclubismo in the mid-1950s, mit 126 exhibi-
tions in thirty-four countries, including Brazil, Kanada, Denmark,
Hongkong, Südafrika, and Yugoslavia. One of the data tables is a
list of the 143 most active exhibition participants, who managed to cir-
culate tens, even hundreds, of prints at one and the same time in vari-
ous exhibitions throughout the world, and it included twenty-four
photographers from Brazil.

Understanding Oiticica Filho’s statistical work is important for
establishing a broader perspective on postwar photo-club culture as an
international phenomenon. Photo-clubs became the major venues for
exhibiting photography as an autonomous art form, not only in Brazil
or Latin America, but also in Europe and Asia. Over the course of the
1950S, FIAP mobilized thousands of photographers from countries all
over the world and of all levels of artistic accomplishment and profes-
sional involvement to become ardent participants in fotoclubismo. Während
Oiticica Filho’s approach does not clarify the contested meanings of
photographic art in the 1950s, it makes a thriving, transnational field
both visible and quantifiable by providing a helpful guide to the other-
wise uncharted field of photo-club culture, while firmly establishing
Brazil as one of its creative centers.

José Oiticica Filho, “The FIAP Official List of Pictorial Photography for the Year 1956,”
In 1958 FIAP Yearbook (Lucerne: C. J. Bucher, 1958), 159–78.

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

ich
T
.

e
D
u
A
R
T

M
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

F
/

8
2
1
0
5
1
9
8
9
1
0
7
A
R
T

M
_
A
_
0
0
2
3
9
P
D

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

”
R
e
T
H
G

ich

A
R
T
S

D
R
Ö
C
e
R

e
H
T

G
N

ich

T
T
e
S
„

Ö
T

N
Ö

ich

T
C
u
D
Ö
R
T
N

ich

e
l
A
T
N
e
F

ich

115 D O C U M E N T I N T R O D U C T I O N image

PDF Herunterladen