Major museum exhibitions can sometimes feel like nostalgia trips, if you are, or think you are, familiar with the artists or movement represented. And sometimes they can turn out to offer fascinating new insights and unexpected connections.
I’ve just been to one like that, and highly recommend it if you can make it to the National Gallery in Washington, DC before mid-January. It’s there now, after a run at the Musée d’Orsay in Paris; curators from the two museums assembled the exhibition.
Aftermath of the crushing of the Commune: a photo looking toward the Arc, and a lithograph by Manet, who was present during the brutal repression
The exhibition starts with a reminder that 1874, the year of the first exhibit by the group of artists we’ve come to know as Impressionists, was a bad time in France and especially in Paris. Memories of the defeat in 1870 and the brutal suppression of the Paris Commune the year after were in play, despite attempts at depicting unity and national pride.
Crowds at the 1874 salon, and the grand winner, Gerome’s Eminence Grise,
a painting of Cardinal Richelieu
The annual Paris Salon was a major event of France’s art world, drawing up to half a million visitors to its exhibit that drew the works of hundreds of artists and attracted thousands of visitors, buyers, collectors, and patrons. Its jury prizes were highly-valued as were purchases by the state for public buildings. Historical and religious themes and traditional styles dominated.
Monet’s Luncheon was rejected by the 1874 Salon
Against that background, a small group of artists who had begun working in newer styles and modes, and who had been finding their work rejected by the art-conservative judges of the official Salon set up a company, the Société anonyme des artistes peintres, sculpteurs, graveurs, etc. to put on an exhibit of their own.
Manet’s Masked Ball at the Opera, which depicted prostitutes and
dancers mingling with ‘respectable’ gentlemen at an annual event,
was also rejected, possibly because of the subject
They were far from a distinct or unified style. Some, including Sisley, Morisot and Pissarro, were already working in a style we recognize as ‘impressionist,’ with loose brushstrokes and a brighter palette. Degas and Cezanne, leading members of the group stuck closer to darker colors and more traditional style. What united them, more than style, was independence and a rejection of the status quo of the Salon.
Monet’s ‘Impression, Sunrise,’ the painting that may have given the
movement its name, although the word ‘impressionist’ was first
used by a hostile critic at the 1874 independent show
Many of us have heard that story as a kind of David and Goliath story, with David eventually outstripping Goliath in sales and esteem, and scandalizing the world with their new art and subjects, despite grand pooh-poohs from establishment critics. I certainly understood the story that way, but in some regards Paris 1874 spoils that story.
For a start, despite their brave front and independent manifesto, almost no one was paying attention to the Societé Anonyme’s exhibit; over the weeks it was open, almost no paintings were sold, only 7,000 visitors attended, and critical reaction was often harsh, but barely made a ripple in the art world of the time. It took several years and several shows to really reach the limelight.
Dubigny’s The Fields in June and Pissarro’s Chestnut Trees at Osry are similar
in subject, technique and more; Dubigny’s was shown at the 1874 Salon
while Pissarro’ showed his at the Societé Anonyme
But the exhibit makes a point in the 130 works included in this exhibition: While the Salon and its judges represented conservative orthodoxy, that wasn’t always true of the painters who exhibited there. The exhibit includes entries from both 1874 exhibits and invites guesses as to which exhibit they were in.
Andre Guillemet, whose view of the Bercy docks in Paris, could easily have fit in the independent exhibit, chose the Salon instead, and Manet, despite his styles and despite being Morisot’s brother-in-law, stuck to the Salon and never exhibited at the independent exhibit and sale.
A common theme, La Parisienne, and similar poses for Jean-Jacques Henner Auguste Renoir and Ernest Duez. Henner and Duez were at the Salon
The exhibition had a few surprises for me: some artists whose work I’ve seldom or never seen, and an unusual subject or two, such as this scene by Albert Maignan. While the Bayeux Tapestry depicts the conquest of England by William the Conqueror in 1066, Maignan depicts the tearful and fearful families of Norman warriors watching the invasion ships depart for battle.
And a wonderful character study of an old fisherman, by a painter I’d never heard of, Adolphe Felix Cals.
Because Paris 1874 focuses on that year and its rival exhibits, we don’t see many of the familiar works of later years and later shows. That makes room for some less-often works from that year and before, including several lithographs by Boudin of coastal scenes at places like Trouville, below, in 1865.
Here’s Morisot in 1869, painting the Harbor at Lorient, where she was visiting her sister Edma, the sitter, whose naval officer husband was stationed there. The style we call Impressionism is already clear here. Below, two more paintings of Edma and her daughter Jeanne. One is famous, the other less so but infinitely touching as Jeanne plays hide and seek clearly unaware how visible she is.
Clearly, there’s still room for an independent movement in art; these young artists were in the process of completing a very dark view of the world…
If you can’t make it to the exhibition, you might want to think about the catalog, with all the paintings and a series of very interesting accompanying essays.
The National Gallery is selling it for $65, but I found it online for $44 new, and within months there are likely to be many good-condition copies available for even less.
