Photographic archives are cool places. The climate-controlled world of archives prioritises (in archive

speak) the information carrier. In the photographic dimension this means the material that supports the

image, in negative or positive states. While the archive’s facility prioritises the materiality of

photographic artefacts, what drives the most archivists (or so it seems to me) is the image itself and how

it might be reimagined. The archival material at the inception of this body of work is drawn from a little

known collection, the Marshall Collection held in the archives at the British School at Rome. Modest in

scale it comprises approximately 2500 gelatin silver prints and roughly 800 gelatin dry plate negatives,

their principle subject is Greek and Roman sculpture. Marshall (1862-1928) was a scholar, a dealer of

antiquities and from1906-1928 European agent to the MET in NYC.The glass negative reproduced in

the lower margin of this photograph is one of eleven involved in the MET’s 1926 acquisition of the

subject of the central image, a 1st c. CE Roman marble copy of 5th c. BCE Greek bronze original. Seven

of the images (photographed in Marshall’s domestic setting) give us a glimpse into the personal life of

John Marshall. The other four, created in 1926 under controlled studio conditions by Roman

photographer Cesare Faraglia have stylistic and homoerotic connections with later works by R.

Mapplethorpe (1946-1989) and B.Weber (b.1946) - see additional image- The temporal distance

between the source Greek bronze and the Roman marble copy raises questions about the motivation

for making objects and where they are made for. The bronze was created to commemorate the victory

(at games) of a young man and it mostly likely stood outdoors amongst trees in a sanctuary. The

Roman version was made to satisfy an emergent Imperial Roman thirst for decorative objects to be

installed in bath-houses and in the villas of the wealthy. So why did I make this photograph? I made it

for Marshall who, through my ongoing engagement with images that he collected and commissioned, I

feel like I have got to know. We are both gay men (and I suspect we would have got along). He lived at

a time when our sexuality required codification (his archive is an entanglement of that) and although I

don’t agree with his museum politics, I understand and celebrate his desires. Thankfully the sweaty

homoerotic sensuality of this photograph no longer needs disguise.