Spirit Photography:
The works of William H. Mumler

By Elizabeth Weinberg

The photograph above is ‘Mary Todd Lincoln’ photographed by William H. Mumler c. 1870. As we can see, there appears to be a white ghostly figure standing behind her who bears a resemblance to her deceased husband Abraham Lincoln. There also appears to be another figure on her other side, which was claimed to be her deceased son Willie who died at 11 years old. The supposed ‘spirit’ of Lincoln also appears to be touching her. Is this photographic evidence of contact with the beyond?
Many art historians argue over whether such early images could be considered art as the need for long exposure times and strong lighting resulted in stiffly posed and expressionless subjects. Muybridge’s mechanical shutter had not yet fully developed, making photography an experimental technique. Spirit photography was the very result of this experimentation. None the less, this implies that photography was still being used as a scientific process for visual record.

So what is Spirit Photography? To put this in context, it’s important to understand the history and social culture of the Victorian World, most importantly Spiritualism. Spiritualism was a religious movement around the belief that the spirits of the deceased could communicate with the living. This was done through mediums who performed seances or could ‘hypnotise’ living people, along with novels such as Sherlock Holmes written by Sir Conan Doyle (who was an avid spiritualist after his son and younger brother died in WWII). Photography eventually joined these mediums, being viewed as scientific and concrete proof that spirits existed and could communicate with the living.
Part of the draw to spiritualism came from a rejection of religious doctrine, which threw the souls of past loved ones to eternal damnation. The period surrounding the Civil War in America was one of tragedy and loss, with the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. Mourners found solace in spirit photography, which allowed them to believe that their loved ones were still with them.
Additionally, growing focus on materialism and a desire for spectacle centred on technology was sought after, especially by the wealthier middle and upper classes. This very much goes back to Daguerre’s dioramas - the experience, the spectacle, the magic that came from technology yet was visually pleasing and engaging. Mourning rituals are similarly tied to wealth and status, which can be seen going back to pre-history in grave goods. With an emerging middle class in the Victorian west, ritualised events such as births, marriages, and funerals, became a way to display wealth and status, being describes as a ‘pantomime of the funerary rites of nobility’. Spiritualism paired within the rise of religious ceremony, due to growing wealth, brought together materialism, modern technology and science under the sense of victorian romanticism.

So how can one create a spirit photograph? The key is double exposure. It consists of charging the silver plate on the camera for taking one photo of the supposed ghost, which in reality could be a model, then before that plate is developed, the next photo is taken with the same print. Then when the plate is used to develop the photos, the two images appear as one. The supposed ‘spirits’ in the photos often came out blurry and not clearly defined, allowing the viewer to see what they want to see. Those who had their picture taken wished to capture what they believed to be real spirits of their loved ones, so that they could both confirm and remember their very real presence.
This ‘mechanical illusionism’ was a continuation of Memento Mori in both photography and earlier paintings. One famous example of this is the painted portraits of the Duke and Dutchess of Urbino by Piero della Francesca c. 1467–1472. This piece was painted after the duchess had passed away, yet her image in the painting retained her likeness and her memory. Similarly, high infant mortality rates in the Victorian era lead to the popularity of funerary images of dead children since the earlier creation of photography, where children were often made to look asleep or fully awake, so that their life could be remembered.

Sprit photography was ‘discovered’ by the photographer William H. Mumler in Boston in 1861, when he took a self-portrait in his studio. When developing the photograph, he found that there appeared to be a second figure behind him. This second figure he described to be the spirit of his dead cousin. Mumler's overnight success as a spirit photographer, charging 10 dollars for a dozen photos, led to visits from numerous prominent people such as politicians and other celebrities. By this time, photographers could make numerous prints from single negative. This also meant that these photos could be circulated as they were printed on his ‘carte-de-visite', which contributed largely to Mumler’s success. Such carte-de-visite’s again reiterate the crucial element of materialism and spectacle.
Abraham Lincoln’s wife, Mary, who was sitting next to her husband when he was shot, and additionally lost her 11 year old son to typhoid fever, was an enthusiastic spiritualist, attending seances and meeting with mediums before having her photo taken by Mumler. Like many of the high profile individuals who came to have their portraits taken, Lincoln had been captured in widely disseminated prints, as he was the first politician to recognise the power of the photographic image. However, this gave Mumler the advantage of knowing Lincoln's appearance. In fact, Mumler was one of multiple spirit photographers who placed Lincoln in their images.

Of course, spirit photography was eventually proven to be a hoax. However, to this day, it remains uncertain how Mumler recreated these images and fooled so many people into believing them. That is part of the mystery of spirit photography.
The question we are left with is - Can this be considered art? Many historians focus on the spiritualist belief behind the photos and their 'documentary' action rather than their artistic aspects. Yet the manipulation of the photographs are similar to that of many later photographers who classify their work distinctly as art. Where is the line between art and science, or art and documentary? Is documentary not a genre of art? Does art rely on the actions or knowledge of the subject? Or the actions of the artist?




Bibliography
Fleming, J. & Honour, H. (2009) A World History of Art (London, Laurence King, 2009) pp 659-685.

Kaplan, L. (2003) ‘Where the Paranoid Meets the Paranormal: Speculations on Spirit Photography’ in Art Journal.

’The Met, Of Spooks, Proofs, and Truths: Reflections on the Mumler Spirit Photograph Case’ (2013) Kaplan, L. [YouTube] <YouTube.com/watch?v=ii2O6wz0Zxc>.

Kutz, N.K. (2013) ‘Chief of a Nation of Ghosts: Images of Abraham Lincoln's Spirit in the Immediate Post-Civil War Period’ in The Journal of American Culture, Volume 36, Issue 2 p. 111-123.