With the Photographer | ICSE Class 10 English Literature Notes

This note covers Stephen Leacock's With the Photographer, its events, the narrator and photographer, the studio setting, changes to the portrait, themes of identity and self-acceptance, humour, key quotations, difficult words and questions with model answers.

Who is the author, and what kind of text is this?

What is the author's approach?

Stephen Leacock wrote With the Photographer, which appears under Familiar Incidents in his collection Behind the Beyond. He turns a visit to a photographer into a humorous conflict over who has the right to decide what a person's portrait should look like.

The writing uses satire, humour that exposes faults or pretensions. The photographer treats his customer's natural features as defects requiring correction. His confidence in his methods becomes ridiculous because he loses sight of the customer's wish for a recognisable photograph.

A narrator is the voice telling a story. Here, the unnamed customer tells his own experience using the first-person pronoun, “I”. His comments let us follow both the photographer's actions and the feelings those actions provoke.

Why does an ordinary incident matter?

The initial request is simple: the customer wants his photograph taken. Its simplicity makes the eventual disagreement striking. The photographer produces an altered image that pleases him, while the customer feels that his appearance and wishes have been disregarded.

The humour also touches the narrator. His mistaken expectations, dramatic protests and tears make him more than a detached critic. Leacock presents an encounter that is funny in its details but raises a serious question about personal identity, the qualities through which someone recognises themselves.

What happens in the story, section by section?

How does the visit begin?

The narrator asks to have his photograph taken. The photographer receives him without enthusiasm and makes him wait an hour. During this time, he reads the Ladies Companion for 1912, the Girls Magazine for 1902 and the Infants Journal for 1888.

The narrator begins to feel that bringing his face into the photographer's place of work has been an unwarrantable act, meaning an unjustifiable intrusion. This comically reverses their relationship: the customer feels guilty for requesting the very service the photographer provides.

What happens inside the studio?

The photographer calls him into the studio and tells him to sit. Sunlight passes through factory cotton hanging against a frosted skylight, an overhead window with glass that scatters light. The photographer rolls his camera into position and looks at the customer through it.

After a brief look, he comes out and pulls at the cotton and window panes with a hooked stick, apparently frantic for light and air. He then returns beneath a black cloth. The narrator interprets the silence as prayer; the photographer does not confirm this.

The photographer judges the face unsuitable and suggests a three-quarter position, with the face partly turned. The narrator enthusiastically responds as though they are discussing a more generous human outlook. The photographer ceases to listen and physically turns the narrator's head.

How do the instructions lead to protest?

The narrator briefly thinks the photographer means to kiss him and closes his eyes, but admits that he is wrong. The photographer continues arranging his head, mouth, ears, eyes, hands and body. He asks for increasingly awkward adjustments to the pose.

Finally, the narrator protests that the face belongs to him. He has lived with it for forty years, knows its faults and has learned to love it. He also defends his mouth and ears, rejecting the photographer's assumption that he may dismiss them as unsuitable.

As the narrator begins to rise, the photographer pulls a string and takes the picture. He thinks he has caught the features in a moment of animation, meaning liveliness of expression. The narrator's anger has supplied the expression that satisfies him.

What does the narrator discover on Saturday?

The narrator cannot see the photograph immediately. The photographer must develop the negative, the photographic image from which a print is made. He asks the narrator to return on Saturday to view a proof, a preliminary photograph shown before the finished print.

On Saturday, the narrator thinks the photographer seems quieter and graver, and thinks there is a certain pride in his manner. They examine the proof. The narrator questions whether the person shown is himself because the eyes do not look very much like his own.

The photographer has retouched the eyes, meaning altered their appearance in the image. He has removed the eyebrows, explains the Delphide process for putting in new ones, and has changed the hair and brow line. He has also adjusted the mouth.

How does the encounter end?

The ears still provide a likeness, a recognisable resemblance to the original person. When the narrator notices this, the photographer offers to remove them from the final print with a process he calls Sulphide. The narrator interrupts before that proposed change is carried out.

He explains that he wanted a faithful picture for his friends to keep after his death. He mockingly invites further changes and tells the photographer to keep the result. Calling it a worthless bauble, an attractive object without real value, he breaks into tears and leaves.

What do the two main characters reveal about themselves?

How does the narrator change?

The narrator begins as a compliant customer. He waits, enters when summoned and initially accepts criticism of his face. His readiness to agree makes his later resistance more significant: he does not arrive seeking an argument, but gradually reaches the limit of his patience.

He is also eager for human warmth. When he thinks the photographer's suggestion about the face has a broader meaning, he responds enthusiastically. His mistaken thought that the photographer might kiss him similarly reveals how differently he interprets an action intended merely to arrange his pose.

His self-acceptance, an ability to value himself despite acknowledged faults, becomes clear in his first protest. He does not claim that his face is flawless. Instead, its familiarity and personal ownership give it a value the photographer's criticism cannot remove.

He is sensitive as well as forceful. His voice breaks during his defence of his face, and he leaves in tears after seeing the proof. These reactions connect the comic disagreement to wounded feelings. The portrait matters because it should preserve something his friends would recognise.

What characterises the photographer?

The photographer is introduced as a drooping man in a grey suit, with an eye compared to that of a natural scientist. His short commands and lack of enthusiasm establish a severe manner. The customer receives instructions rather than a welcoming conversation.

He is absorbed in his own standards. He judges the head, ears, face and mouth, then alters the image according to his preferences. His repeated statements about what he likes suggest that he considers his judgement more important than the customer's wish for resemblance.

His insensitivity, failure to notice or respond to another person's feelings, appears especially in the discussion of the mouth. The narrator's bitterness is lost on him. He continues explaining his adjustments as though technical improvement settles the disagreement.

Even his pleasure in the lively expression shows a failure to understand the customer. He treats the protest as a useful photographic opportunity. The same pattern returns with the ears: a feature the customer values for its accuracy becomes another thing the photographer proposes to remove.

How do the characters act as contrasts?

The narrator values recognition and memory; the photographer values the changes he believes improve the image. Their disagreement is therefore deeper than whether a picture is attractive. They use different standards to decide whether the photograph has succeeded.

How do the setting and first-person narration shape the experience?

What does the studio contribute?

The setting, the place and circumstances of the action, centres on the photographer's workplace. Waiting outside and then entering the studio makes the customer dependent on the photographer's decisions. The hour-long delay establishes this unequal relationship before the sitting begins.

The reading material extends the joke. The magazine titles move from ladies to girls to infants, while their dates move backwards from 1912 to 1902 to 1888. This arrangement can be read as comic regression, making the waiting period seem increasingly absurd.

Inside the studio, light, cloth, camera and a hooked stick give the photographer visible equipment to manage. These practical details contrast with the narrator's discomfort. The professional appears busy with arrangements while the human subject increasingly feels treated as a collection of troublesome parts.

What can the narrator know?

First-person narration presents events through a participant's voice. We hear the narrator's thoughts directly, but learn about the photographer largely through speech, actions and the narrator's impressions. This distinction helps separate an observable event from a comic interpretation of it.

For example, the photographer stays quiet under the black cloth. The narrator says he knows the man is praying, but this is his interpretation of the silence. Similarly, expecting a kiss records the narrator's mistaken thought, not the photographer's intention.

The narrator's qualifications matter. He believes his protest has dignity and thinks he detects pride on Saturday. These are personal assessments. They allow readers to notice the gap between how he experiences the scene and how his dramatic behaviour may appear.

Why is the viewpoint effective?

This viewpoint, the perspective from which events are presented, makes the embarrassment immediate. Yet the narrator also exposes his own misunderstandings. We can sympathise with his wish for a faithful portrait while recognising humour in his exaggerated responses.

How does the altered proof expose the central conflict?

What changes have already been made?

The central conflict, the main struggle organising the story, becomes visible in the proof. The narrator asks whether the picture is really of him. The photographer confirms that it is, although his later explanations reveal why the customer struggles to recognise it.

The following comparison separates changes already visible in the proof from a further change proposed for the print. Delphide and Sulphide are the process names used by the photographer: the former is associated with replacing eyebrows and altering the brow area, the latter with removing ears.

Why is the distinction between proof and print important?

The proposed removal of the ears is the immediate trigger for the final outburst. Saying they have already been removed would change the sequence. At this point, their accurate appearance briefly offers the narrator reassurance, which the photographer's proposal immediately destroys.

The photographer calls the mouth adjustment small, but its acceptability is disputed. His description does not mean the narrator welcomes it. The disagreement concerns who decides what should be altered and what purpose the photograph should serve.

Note: The final speech includes sarcastic demands for more alterations. Those demands are not a record of work already completed. The ears still resemble the narrator's in the proof.

Which themes and messages emerge from the encounter?

How does the story explore identity?

A theme is a recurring idea explored through events and characters. One central theme here is the connection between appearance and identity. The narrator's face has faults, but it is familiar to him and belongs to his lived experience.

The photographer views individual features as separate items available for correction. The narrator sees them as parts of one recognisable person. The proof brings these views into conflict because the altered features no longer provide the likeness he wanted to preserve.

Why does self-acceptance matter?

Self-acceptance differs from believing oneself perfect. The narrator acknowledges his face's faults and says he has learned to love it. His defence rests on affection and familiarity, not on winning an argument about conventional beauty.

This theme makes the first protest central to the story. The narrator insists that the photographer does not own the face he is criticising. His repeated claims of possession defend a personal relationship with his appearance against an outsider's dismissive judgement.

What is the criticism of professional pride?

Professional pride becomes a problem when confidence in technique prevents attention to the customer's purpose. The photographer explains his processes and admires the result, but fails to understand why the customer is distressed. What pleases the maker disappoints the person represented.

The satire is directed at this particular misuse of expertise. The conflict does not require us to conclude that every photograph or every adjustment is harmful. Here, alterations become objectionable because they replace the desired likeness with the photographer's preferred version.

How are memory and friendship connected?

The final speech introduces the photograph's intended emotional value: the narrator wants friends to keep it after his death. Its usefulness depends on recognition. An impressive surface cannot supply the personal connection lost when familiar features are changed.

The ending therefore contrasts decoration with remembrance. The photographer might admire the result, and his friends may value it, but the narrator considers it worthless to him. Value depends on the human purpose the object fulfils, not merely on its finish.

What message links these themes?

A supported reading is that skill should remain attentive to the individual it serves. Respecting someone's wishes requires listening as well as technical ability. The narrator's distress shows the cost of improving an image by standards that ignore its intended meaning.

How do literary devices create humour and criticism?

How does irony work?

Irony involves a contrast between expectation and outcome, or between words and their intended meaning. A customer seeking his own likeness receives an image he can barely identify. The service meant to preserve his appearance instead becomes a means of replacing it.

The ears create a particularly sharp reversal. The narrator finds comfort in their resemblance, but the photographer offers to correct that very resemblance. A successful detail by the customer's standard becomes unfinished work by the photographer's standard.

How do exaggeration and repetition work?

Hyperbole is deliberate exaggeration for effect. The narrator imagines his scorn as powerful enough to blast the photographer on the spot. This magnifies his anger into a comic performance without requiring the reader to take the destructive image literally.

Repetition, the recurrence of words or patterns, gives force to his defence of his face. His repeated claims that the features belong to him make ownership unmistakable. The emotional rhythm also contrasts with the photographer's detached catalogue of faults.

The final list of commands extends the exaggeration. The narrator moves from altering facial features to reviving a necktie and reconstructing a waistcoat. Treating clothing as something needing revival makes the photographer's confidence in improvement appear increasingly absurd.

How do dialogue and sound control pace?

Dialogue, conversation between characters, carries much of the action. Short commands are followed by compliance, mistakes or resistance. When the photographer quickly reverses his instruction about opening the mouth, the exchange conveys how little freedom the narrator has during the sitting.

Onomatopoeia is a word that imitates a sound. The sound Snick! marks the taking of the photograph and interrupts the narrator's protest. Its suddenness turns an emotional defence into another action controlled by the photographer.

What makes the final speech sarcastic?

Sarcasm is cutting mockery that often uses apparent approval to express criticism. The narrator's permission to continue changing the picture is sarcastic because he immediately rejects its value. He is not sincerely asking the photographer for a more elaborate version.

The sequence of substances includes chemical-sounding names followed by cowhide. That unexpected addition makes the list ridiculous. It mocks the parade of processes without explaining them as scientific procedures, and helps turn the photographer's technical language against him.

How can key quotations support answers about the story?

Which quotations establish the disagreement?

“The face is quite wrong,”

Speaker and context: The photographer says this after examining the narrator through the camera. His blunt judgement establishes the problem: he treats the customer's actual face as something defective, rather than first considering how to represent it faithfully.

“This face is my face. It is not yours, it is mine.”

Speaker and context: The narrator protests after repeated criticism and directions. The repetition stresses ownership. His argument is that acknowledging faults does not give the photographer the right to dismiss his attachment to his own features.

“Is it me?”

Speaker and context: The narrator asks this while looking at the proof on Saturday. The question condenses his uncertainty into three words. A portrait intended to preserve recognition has made recognition doubtful.

Which quotations expose the conflicting standards?

“I've retouched them. They come out splendidly, don't they?”

Speaker and context: The photographer replies to the narrator's concern about the eyes. His satisfaction contrasts with the customer's unease. He assumes that the altered appearance is an improvement, without answering the underlying concern about likeness.

“The ears, though,” I said, “strike me as a good likeness; they're just like mine.”

Speaker and context: The narrator identifies a recognisable feature in the proof. This moment is important because the photographer next proposes removing the ears. The quotation supports the distinction between an alteration already made and one merely proposed.

“To me it is but a worthless bauble.”

Speaker and context: The narrator rejects the photograph at the end of his final speech. The phrase makes its worthlessness personal: it fails his purpose of preserving a familiar image for his friends, whatever value others may give it.

How does the ending complete the narrator's emotional journey?

What becomes clear in the last speech?

The ending explains why the altered picture causes more than annoyance. The narrator wanted a likeness for friends to keep after his death. His final protest therefore concerns affection and remembrance as well as his right to decide how he is represented.

His first protest defended the face itself; his last speech defends the purpose of its photograph. This connection gives the story unity. In both moments, the photographer's preferred standards conflict with the personal meaning that the narrator gives to familiar features.

Why does he tell the photographer to keep it?

Telling the photographer to keep the result is a rejection of its usefulness to him. The image now serves the photographer's tastes better than the customer's need. The narrator says the photographer and his friends may value it, preserving the possibility of their different judgement.

The ornate finish he imagines cannot repair the missing likeness. His escalating instructions expose the gap between adding decoration and restoring recognition. More work would not solve the problem if it continued to follow the same disregard for what he wanted.

What is the effect of the tears?

The final tears combine hurt with comedy. The narrator has delivered an impressive attack, yet leaves emotionally overwhelmed. The scene does not end in agreement or a corrected portrait. Its abrupt close leaves the reader with the distance between technical confidence and human understanding.

Glossary

• Unwarrantable — Unjustifiable or unreasonable; the narrator comically treats his ordinary request as an improper intrusion.
• Frosted skylight — An overhead window with glass that scatters light rather than providing a clear view.
• Three-quarter position — A pose with the face partly turned instead of facing the camera directly.
• Animation — Liveliness of expression, which the photographer notices while the narrator is protesting.
• Negative — The photographic image developed after exposure and used to produce a print.
• Proof — A preliminary photograph examined before the finished print; the narrator sees his on Saturday.
• Retouch — To alter details of a photographic image, as the photographer does to the eyes.
• Delphide — The photographer's name for a process associated with replacing eyebrows and changing the brow area.
• Sulphide — The photographer's name for the process he proposes using to remove the ears from the print.
• Likeness — A recognisable resemblance between an image and the person or thing it represents.
• Bauble — An attractive object of little real value; the narrator uses it to dismiss the altered photograph.
• Sarcasm — Cutting mockery, often expressing criticism through apparent agreement, praise or permission.

Common errors and misconceptions

• Misconception: The narrator wants the photographer to make him handsome. Correct: He wants a recognisable image of his actual face for his friends to keep after his death.
• Misconception: The narrator thinks his face is perfect. Correct: He acknowledges its faults but says he has learned to love it after living with it for forty years.
• Misconception: The photographer removes the ears before showing the proof. Correct: The ears still resemble the narrator's; their removal is proposed for the print.
• Misconception: The photographer is confirmed to be praying. Correct: The narrator interprets his silence beneath the cloth as prayer. The photographer does not confirm the interpretation.
• Misconception: The photograph is taken during a calm, agreed pose. Correct: The photographer takes it as the narrator protests and begins to rise from his seat.
• Misconception: Delphide is the process proposed for removing the ears. Correct: Delphide is discussed with the eyebrows and brow area; Sulphide is proposed for removing the ears.
• Misconception: The final speech records more alterations already completed. Correct: Its exaggerated commands are sarcastic. The narrator rejects the photograph, then breaks into tears and leaves.

Exam-style questions with model answers

Q1. During the sitting, the narrator admits that his face has faults, says he has lived with it for forty years and declares that he has learned to love it. What two attitudes towards his appearance does this reveal? [2 marks]

1. He is realistic about his appearance because he acknowledges that his face has faults.
2. He shows self-acceptance because long familiarity has taught him to love the face despite those faults.

Q2. The narrator says the ears in the proof resemble his own. The photographer replies that he can remove them in the print using Sulphide. Explain two ways this exchange reveals their disagreement. [2 marks]

1. The narrator values recognisable resemblance, so the unchanged ears please him.
2. The photographer treats that resemblance as something to remove, showing that his preferred alterations conflict with the customer's wish.

Q3. The photographer orders the narrator to open his mouth, immediately tells him to close it, and continues arranging his pose. As the narrator protests and starts to rise, the photographer takes the picture and praises its animation. Explain three comic effects of this sequence. [3 marks]

1. The rapidly reversed instructions make the sitting absurd, because the narrator is required to obey directions that scarcely give him time to respond.
2. The protest unexpectedly supplies the lively expression that satisfies the photographer, turning the customer's resistance into a useful part of the sitting.
3. The photographer's praise ignores the cause of that expression, exposing the contrast between his professional satisfaction and the customer's frustration.

Q4. On Saturday, the photographer shows a proof with retouched eyes, removed eyebrows and changes to the hair and brow line. He describes Delphide as a process for putting in new eyebrows and says the mouth is adjusted a little because the original was too low. Give four points showing how his explanations reveal his priorities. [4 marks]

1. Retouching the eyes shows that the photographer is prepared to alter distinctive features rather than simply preserve their appearance.
2. Removing the eyebrows and describing replacements treats the customer's natural features as material that can be exchanged for a preferred version.
3. Changing the hair and brow line shows that his own choices direct the form of the portrait.
4. Calling the mouth too low makes its suitability depend on his requirements, rather than on its belonging to the person represented.

Q5. The narrator waits an hour, initially accepts criticism, protests that his faulty face is his own and that he has learned to love it, then finds the proof's eyes unlike his. Finally, he explains that he wanted a likeness for friends after his death, rejects the image and leaves in tears. Trace his emotional development in five points. [5 marks]

1. At first, his willingness to wait and accept criticism suggests patience and compliance. He allows the photographer to control the encounter.
2. His protest marks a change to resistance. He defends ownership of his face because the criticism threatens something personally important to him.
3. His admission of faults, alongside affection for his face, shows self-acceptance. His defence does not depend on believing himself physically perfect.
4. The unfamiliar eyes in the proof turn the earlier discomfort into disappointment. The picture fails to provide the recognition he expects.
5. His explanation about friends gives the disappointment emotional depth. Rejection and tears show how strongly the loss of that intended keepsake affects him.

Q6. The narrator wants a recognisable portrait for friends to keep after his death. The photographer retouches the eyes, removes the eyebrows, alters the brow area and adjusts the mouth. When the narrator welcomes the ears' resemblance, the photographer proposes removing them too. Explain five ways these details support the conflict between personal identity and professional judgement. [5 marks]

1. The narrator's purpose makes recognition essential. A portrait for friends must preserve familiar features if it is to serve as the keepsake he wants.
2. The photographer's several changes show that he approaches the face as a set of details that he can alter according to his standards.
3. The changed eyes and eyebrows affect distinctive parts of the face. Technical work therefore risks weakening the personal identity the image should preserve.
4. The ears briefly satisfy the narrator because they resemble his own. His approval confirms that likeness, rather than extensive alteration, is his priority.
5. The proposed removal of the ears makes the disagreement especially clear. The photographer treats a successful likeness as unfinished work requiring another intervention.

Q7. At the end, the narrator mockingly tells the photographer to continue altering the image, even to revive the necktie and reconstruct the waistcoat. He says the photographer and his friends may value it, calls it worthless to himself, and leaves in tears. Analyse the ending in four points. [4 marks]

1. The invitation to continue is sarcastic: apparent permission expresses anger at alterations the narrator rejects.
2. The commands concerning clothing exaggerate the desire to improve everything, making the photographer's approach seem absurd.
3. The different judgements of value expose incompatible purposes. The photographer's circle may admire an image that is useless to the narrator.
4. The tears reveal emotional hurt beneath the mockery, so the ending combines comic excess with disappointment.

Key takeaways

• Stephen Leacock turns an ordinary photographic sitting into a humorous conflict over appearance, ownership and the purpose of a portrait.
• The narrator accepts that his face has faults, but its familiarity gives it a value that external judgement cannot replace.
• The photographer's commands and alterations reveal his absorption in personal standards and his failure to understand the customer's feelings.
• The photograph is taken as the narrator protests and starts to rise, producing an expression the photographer considers lively.
• The proof contains altered features, but the ears still resemble the narrator's; removing them is a proposed further change.
• First-person narration presents the narrator's thoughts and impressions, including comic misunderstandings that should not become claims about the photographer's intentions.
• Irony, exaggeration, repetition and sarcasm make the encounter amusing while exposing the damage caused by ignoring individual wishes.
• The narrator rejects the altered image because he wanted a recognisable keepsake for friends, then leaves in tears.

Test yourself

The narrator waits an hour before entering the studio. What does this suggest about control in the encounter?

The photographer controls the timing, while the narrator initially accepts the delay and follows his instructions.

The narrator acknowledges faults in his face but says he has learned to love it. Why is this self-acceptance?

He values his actual appearance despite its imperfections, rather than claiming that his features are flawless.

The photographer stays silent under the black cloth, and the narrator interprets this as prayer. What viewpoint distinction matters?

The silence is an observed event; prayer is the narrator's interpretation, not a confirmed intention.

The photographer takes the picture during the narrator's protest and admires its animation. What is ironic here?

The customer's resistance supplies the lively expression that pleases the professional whose actions caused the resistance.

The proof has recognisable ears, but the photographer proposes removing them. Have they already been removed?

No. They remain recognisable in the proof; removal is proposed for the later print.

The photographer discusses Delphide with the eyebrows and Sulphide with the ears. How do the processes differ in his account?

Delphide is associated with replacing eyebrows and changing the brow area; Sulphide is proposed for removing the ears.

The narrator wanted friends to keep his portrait after his death. Why would an unrecognisable picture disappoint him?

It would fail to preserve the familiar appearance through which the portrait was meant to support remembrance.

The narrator invites further changes but calls the image worthless to him. Why is the invitation sarcastic?

His apparent permission mocks the alterations; his rejection shows that he does not sincerely welcome more of them.