In view of the importance placed upon the work of Alfred Stieglitz and the Photo-Secession in the history of American pictorial photography, a critical study of the non-Secessionists, those pictorial photographers who worked individually and collectively beyond the Stieglitz sphere of influence, is both desirable and overdue. How does the work of these men and women compare stylistically and qualitatively with that of Secession members? Were these photographers working under the influence of the Photo-Secession or were they finding inspiration elsewhere? Was the Photo-Secession unique as a stylistic movement or merely as an organizational unit? To what extent did Secessionists and non-Secessionists interact? In the April 1904 issue of Camera Work, the critic, Sadakichi Hartmann, makes the following thought-provoking statement: "I am convinced that the better class of photographers also want to be artistic, not quite as much as the Secessionists, but to their best understanding. The whole trouble is that the two parties can't agree on the mediums sic of expression. It is a fight about conception, theory, and temperament." (p. 48). Indeed, the more one examines the Photo-Secession and the rival groups surrounding it, the clearer it becomes that organizational methods, rather than photographic style, separated Secessionists and their foes. A close examination of these opposing groups, a study which has not been previously undertaken in any depth, will serve to place the Photo-Secession into a new perspective. The Salon Club of America has been chosen as the focal point of this study as it was the most highly organized of the non-Secessionist groups. The intent of this thesis, which seeks to examine the origins, organization and output of the Salon Club of America, is to add the work of this group to the ever-broadening perspective of pictorial photography during the first decade of this century, and to arouse the interest of the public in those photographs.
