Seeing things for the first time

When Galileo published his book the 'Sidereus Nuncius' or 'Starry Messenger', he was also, because he was the first person to have drawn the moon by looking through a telescope, giving us new images, images that were unmediated by other people's experiences and therefore slightly unformed. It was a little like the experience cited in Memo Akten's work on artificial intelligence,  if you haven't seen something before, you tend to take a while to clarify what you are seeing, and use previous experience as a model. In Galileo's case he was drawing something already familiar in the case of the moon, but it had never been seen before in such detail. Over the next few years, the moon seems to slowly come into focus as different people look through telescopes and gradually work out the pattern of forms that we now accept as the moon. The drawings of Claude Mellan in 1635 establishing an artistic norm if not a scientific one. 

Galileo: 1610

Claude Mellan: 1635

Long before both Galileo and Mellan however Jan Van Eyke had painted an image of the moon that was uncannily accurate and which suggested to me at least that he must have been used to using lenses to look at things. 

Van Eyke: crucifixion 

Detail of the moon, on the right edge.

Because Saturn was a lot further away it was harder to get a good image of it and so a greater amount of invention was needed. In Huygen's 'Systema Saturnium' below we see Galileo's original drawings of Saturn as if it had two moons, (top row) followed by various other attempts to clarify what it was observers were seeing. It took a while to work out that Saturn had rings, Galileo, modelling his first idea on what he already knew, Earth with its moon. 

Compilation from Huygen's Systema Saturnium (1659)
showing how Saturn's appearance had changed from
1610 to 1646.

There have been many and various attempts by artists to draw heavenly bodies and because they are so hard to see, it is interesting to look at these in relation to how much invention was put into trying to clarify what was seen. The Astronomical Drawings of Maria Clara Eimmart are particularly interesting because she introduces an almost 'mystical' feel for the heavens, partly due to the colouration she uses. 

Some of the Astronomical Drawings of Maria Clara Eimmart

The 19th century French artist and astronomer Étienne Léopold Trouvelot made over 7000 illustrations of his observations, some of his most imaginative ones are presented below. 

I think his sunspots are particularly revealing, because of their similarity to certain plant forms or jellyfish. His efforts at making us aware of the possibilities of extra terrestrial forms were though to have other unexpected consequences. 

Because of his drawing skills and notoriety as an astronomer, Trouvelot was asked to travel to the USA to present his work and when he did he took with him an idea, one that could be read as a fable for what humans do to the planet Earth. He thought he could make money by developing a new very productive insect species, by interbreeding European gypsy moths with silk worms. So he carried some eggs over to the US with him when he travelled; the gypsy moth larvae of course escaped and finding few natural enemies to keep them in check, they began to ravage the forests of the New World. Ideas have consequences. 

James Nasmyth made plaster landscapes based on his observations of the moon and then photographed them in order to obtain the levels of verisimilitude he wanted. Again the line between invention and observation is very blurred. 

James Nasmyth

If you ever need reminding of how invention is part of seeing the drawing below is probably one of the best examples, this is Robert Hooke's drawing of a printed full stop, (circled A) when viewed for the first time under a microscope. 

Robert Hooke: drawing of a full stop

Hooke was famous for making drawings using the newly invented microscope, his insects in particular were wonderful examples of new images, that fused invention with observation.

Robert Hooke: drawing of an insect's head

Hooke's drawings have an almost hallucinatory intensity and they still mesmerise us because of this. 

It is worth exploring these early drawings in more detail see: 

A history of moon drawings
Trouvelot's drawings

The ideas in this post are a direct response to this earlier post and it would be useful to read the two together. What I'm suggesting is that if you can find a way of looking at something either by using a new tool, such as a telescope, or by looking very closely at something intensely for a long time, you are likely to come up with images made with a very high level of intensity, and they are much more likely to lead to both new knowledge and be visually exciting. 

See also:

The hard won image Looking intensely at things that we think we already know what they look like.

What we think we are seeing now