The 717 Items in the Smithsonian Catalog

Daniel Garber, "Towering Trees" - acquired 1911




There are currently 717 American paintings/sculpture
that belong to the Art Institute
as cataloged by the Smithsonian.

But at least of them are not on display,
and not all of the ones on display
are in the Smithsonian catalog.

Which is a bit puzzling.

Deaccessioned: Part One

Jean Louis Forain "Sentenced for Life", 1910

This painting was acquired by the Winterbotham fund in 1921 (a fund that specialized in contemporary work)

It was sold at auction in 2005 for $31,000 -- which is probably substantially less than its purchase price 80 years earlier -- so I guess that Forain's star is setting.

But is it such a bad painting ? I suppose it's outside the narrative of modern art -- and best belongs in some attorney's collection. But I'm also wondering -- who does this kind of narrative any better ?

The Academy's Plea for Library Land

Marshall Field
(portrait bust at the Merchandise Mart,
sculptor: Milton Horn)

(note: the following clipping was taken from the Art Institutes's scrapbook. There was no reference to a date or name of the newspaper from which it came)


"The recent prosperous state of affairs throughout the country and particularly in Chicago, encourages us to once more put art on its feet in Chicago and rear an institution that shall not only be an ornament and credit to our city, but of incalculable advantage to all classes of our citizens as well as to the great Northwest. The effort now being made to procure for the use of the Public Library the space known as the Dearborn park seems to offer just the opportunity needed to secure a start in the right direction, there being ample space on the park ground for the two institutions., if the general government will grant the academy 125 X 162 feet of the same for the purpose of erecting a building thereon, we have no doubt of our ability to raise the necessary funds for its construction, as the academy is held in high estimation by our best citizens.

As showing the truth of the later statement, I append a copy of a petition that will shortly be submitted to Congress with the signatures thereon attached:


“To the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives of the United States, Washington D.C.: the undersigned artists and citizens, interested in the progress of art culture, now resident in Chicago, respectfully request your honorable body to grant a portion of the land asked for and known as Dearborn Park, and specified in a certain bill now before your honorable body, and which was sent by the corporate authorities of Chicago, in behalf of the public library of said city, to the Chicago Academy of Design. There being 385 feet frontage by 162.6 feet in depth in the space asked for in said bill, and there being more space than is required for library purposes, we ask that 125 feet of said frontage and 162.6 feet of depth be granted to the Academy of Design for the purpose of creating thereon a building devoted to art purposes.

Your petitioners pray that said bill be so amended by inserting the words “Chicago Academy of Design” after the words “Chicago Public Library” so as to read
“Chicago Public Library and Chicago Academy of Design”

Enoch Root, president Chicago Academy of Design, John F. Stafford, recording secretary; Paul Brown, J.F. Gookins, H.E.C. Peterson, G.S. Collis, A.D. Bucher, Leonard W. Volk, R.W. Wallis, , council of the Chicago Academy of Design

It is also signed by the following named gentlemen:

, Charles H. Schwab, C.W. Henderson, C.H. Fargo, M.D. Wells,

Marshall Field
J.W. Doane: Coffee and Tea importer; director of Pullman Palace Car Company
C.H. Fargo is a shoe manufacturer
M.D. Wells : wholesale boot and shoes
Charles H. Schwab: boot manufacturer
Max A. Mayer – Jewish philanthropist
Williams Sewars (an abutting property owner)
D.B. Fisk, Reid, Murdock, and Fisher (abutting property owners)
Joseph Rutter
F.A. Winston
J. Russel Jones: Delegate to Republican National Convention from Illinois, 1868; member of Republican National Committee from Illinois, 1868-70; U.S. Minister to Belgium, 1869-75.
Herbert C. Ayer
Potter Palmer (hotelier - The Palmer House)
S. B. Cobb
W. P. Nixon
John B. Drake (hotelier - son built the Drake Hotel)
Robert Law
E.G. Keith
Henry W. King
George C. Walker
F. F. Spencer
H.F. Evans
J.H. Dole (??)

An impressive list -- in order of importance, one presumes -- with the city's richest man, Marshall Field, at the top.

(but why is J.H. Dole included ? Is this the same man who is also quoted as being against this plea for land ? Are parts of this list fictitious ?)

ACADEMY vs. LIBRARY

The year is 1881,
one year before the Chicago Academy of Design
reorganized itself with its 1882 Constitution
(copied in the previous post)

and a clipping from a
Chicago newspaper,
"The Inter Ocean",
runs as follows:


A Rumored Attempt on the Part
of the Academy of Design
to Defeat


The Public Library-Dearborn Park Project,
Unless the Academy Can Get a Portion
of the Land.

What there is to the Institution Which Thus
Threatens a Very Valuable Public
Institution.

A Charter, $12,000 in Debts and Brazen
Effrontery Their Whole Stock in
Trade.

ACADEMY VS. LIBRARY

The passage of that most worthy measure, the Public Library Bill, by Congress, is being hampered and impeded by a gentleman named John F. Stafford, who represents an at one time very creditable institution called the Academy of Design, and which has been forgotten by well nigh all men except its creditors. There is no doubt about this Stafford's possession of the charter of the defunct academy of Design, and in that case he also assumes ownership of some $10,000 or $12,000 of debt under which that once well meaning institution went down. All this is nothing strange nor out of place, but when an attempt is made to trade upon the good name and splendid reputation of the present Academy of Fine Arts, it is time that the truth should be known. The Academy of Design is dead and well nigh buried; the Academy of Fine Arts is one of the best art schools in America, well managed, prosperous, and patronized by the best classes of society of Chicago and the West and South. The Academy of Design, a name, a charter, and a debt of $12,000, with no local habitation, and no existence except upon paper and in the pocket of Mr. John F. Stafford, now assumes to say that Dearborn Park shall not be given to the people for a site for a public library except the land thus acquired be shared with Mr. John. F. Stafford, who owns the charter of the dead and gone institution. The only danger in the matter is that Congressmen may be induced or allowed to think that the Academy of Design or its memory and the Academy of Fine Arts are one and the same.

Is there a confusion between the two similar names ?
Just why do you think
the founders of the new institution
chose a name so similar to the
one they was trying to replace ?

John T. Stafford, nicknamed "The Watchdog of the Lake"
presumably for keeping the lakefront free from development
was also noted for his participation
in the Chicago Art Exposition of 1875

Note: the "Inter Ocean" began as the
morning Chicago Republican (1865),
and was renamed the Chicago Inter Ocean in 1872
an upper-class arbiter of cultural tastes.
It went into decline after 1895, when it became the property
of Chicago politician, Charles T. Yerkes.

To put this matter properly before the public, a reporter for THE INTER OCEAN yesterday interviewed various officials of the Academy of Fine Arts and the result will be found below.


Mr C. L. Hutchinson, President of the Academy of Fine Arts, was found at his office, No. 15 Chamber of Commerce. When asked to define the difference between the Academy of Design and the Academy of Fine Arts, he said:

"The Academy of Design is dead. The Academy of Fine Arts Succeeded them"

"Did you use their charter?"

"Certainly not: we organized under the laws of the state. We had nothing to do with them, whatever. It is a sad and yet a ridiculous thing that the general public should be continually mixing the two names up. The Academy of Fine Arts is on good, solid, substantial basis, while the academy of Design is entirely bankrupt"

"How long has the Academy of Fine Arts been in existence?"

"Three Years. The school is a on a paying basis and one of the best in America"



"Have you heard anything of the effort to get part of Dearborn Park for the Academy of Design?"


"I have heard that Mr. John F. Stafford is in Washington urging amendments to the library bill, which asks for 125 feet fronting on Randolph Street"


"In this you academy has no interest?"

"No, unless it be to wish the library to get the entire block. We are constantly annoyed at being confounded with that defunct institution, and suffer constantly from its reputation."



"Do you know Stafford?"


"No, but I presume he is a very nice fellow"


The reporter looked keenly at Mr Hutchinson, but he never smiled.

"What is his object?"

"Why I suppose to resurrect the old concern and put it on its feet by a land grant, but I am afraid he will never be able to do it"

"The Academy of Design is very successful, is it not?"

(note: the reporter himself has confused the names here,
and the editor never caught the mistake )

"Very, as a school, and in all other ways. The present premises on State St. opposite the Palmer House , are too small. We are hoping nows to buy the corner. We are hoping now to buy the corner of Van Buren street and Michigan Ave, erect there a suitable building and transfer the school, and open a permanet art gallery.That is the spot formerly occupied by the Old Academy of Design. The present building is 54 feet front and 100 feet deep. We want to erect a new building with the same front but 175 feet deep. If we can't do that we will put up a temporary
building in the rear to which the school will be transferred as soon as completed.

"This will cost something?"


"Yes, $50,000, but we have $40,000 already subscribed for the purpose. It is a most feasilbe scheme. I don't believe in castles in the air, but this is a solid brick and stone reality."


"Who is president of your academy?"


"L.Z. Leiter, and C.L.Hutchinson is Vice President"


"Then I understand that you do not oppose the Library's getting control of the Dearborn Park?

"Certainly not. We want the library to have it. It is a very excellent and praiseworthy object"

(Note: Charles L. Hutchinson was President of the Board of Trade,
director of the Northern Trust Bank,
and first President of the Art Institute of Chicago
until his death in 1924)

The next gentleman seen was Mr. James H. Dole, who was found in his office at #27 Metropolitan Block.

"Mr. Dole, you are one of the trustees of the Academy of Fine Arts and a member of the executive committee?"

"Yes"

"You were also a trustee of the Academy of Design?"

"Yes. There were 15 of us appointed, and I was selected for President. After it had been running a year or so the question of the old debs came upo, and the trustees becoming disgusted dropped the thing and started the institution -the Academy of Fine Arts"

"Then there is no connection between the two institutions?"

"Of course not. The present academy is on of the best and most prosperous schools of the kind in America. The other is dead."

"What remains of the old academy?"

"Nothing but the charter and a lot of old debts"

"What good is the charter?"

"It allows them to hold personal property without taxation"

Another gentleman present during the interview said: "The old academy of Design is all broken up . The only man who takes any interest in it now is John F. Stafford, and he has no influence whatsoever."

"How did it happen to "bust""?


"Debt"


"How much?"


"Some $10,000 or $12000"


"And that still hangs over the charter ?"


"Yes, the effects of the Academy of Design were all sold out on an auction, and all that remains is the charter and the claims against it."


Mr. Homer N. Hibbard, United States Register in Bankruptcy in this city, was also interviewed.

"Mr. Hibbard, I understand you are familiar with the past history of the old and defunct institution known as the Chicago Academy of Design, whose supporters are now endeavoring to secure the passage in Congress of a bill granting to them equally with the Public Library, the
right to the Dearborn Park as a site for an academy building. What do you know of this old institution?"

"I know that there was such an institution, and that I paid a considerable amount of money which has never materialized anything. It never did amount to anything and finally it go financially weak in the back that all its things were sold - what little it did have in the way of room fixtures, art collections, study appurtenances etc. These were purchased by the parties who organized the present Academy of Fine Arts, which is in a prosperous condition, and which, if any art institution should share in the Dearborn Park lot, should do it.

"You think then, that the parties who claim to constitute the Old Academy of Design should not be considered in any bill for the alienation of the Dearborn Park lot?"

"I do. There is nothing of it left that can be called an art academy. It has no property. It is doing nothing for the encouragement of art, and has not done anything in that direction for years. It has nothing now but its name. It is simply a name tucked under the skeleton of the past, and has no real existence, and in fact never at anytime amounted to anything. Whereas the present Academy of Fine Arts has been working faithfully for years and is now in good working condition and doing good work for the promotion of a taste for art in this city; and yet this new art society has not asked for, and does not now ask for a site on the Dearborn Park lot. I cannot
see, indeed, that the body of men who call themselves the Academy of Design

HAVE ANY CLAIM WHATEVER

even the slightest, to a sight on the property. They have no capital at their back - no substantial supporters to warrant us in hoping that it would ever be able to effectually to utilize such a site should be given to them, for the wealthy friends of art in this city are the friends exclusively of the new organization - the Academy of Fine Arts -- which has practically shown its value and is now showing its value as a promoter of a taste for art in this city.

It is interesting to note that Homer H. Hibbard,
an attorney, does not claim that the Academy of Design
is still in debt.

It is also interesting to note that in 1885
he was on the Executive Committee of the Art Institute
of Chicago

Chicago Academy of Design - 1882

From the Stephen Douglas monument
by Lawrence W. Volk, founding member
of the Chicago Academy of Design








Note the date, 1882
four years after it's officers
had declared bankruptcy
and then joined a new organization,
the Chicago Academy of Art,
that would purchase its property at auction,
and later change its name to the Art Institute of Chicago


Note that this a free school,
supported by studio rents and exhibition sales






Note the stated purpose:

"Encouragement of the true and the beautiful in the arts of design"
(no doubt referring to the "Academia del Designo"
founded by Cosimo De Medici in the 16th C.)

and note that the dominant governing class of membership,
"the Academicians"
are to be those recognized as Artists

The "Honorary Academicians" is a self-appointed body
that chooses one of the three directors,
and would include both artists and major donors.

The other kinds of members are either
students or donors







note that whatever income exceeds expenses
is to be devoted to the purchase
of works of art and books
for the establishment of a permanent
art gallery and library

President: annually elected by academicians. His job is to preside at meetings,
oversee the work of treasurer and secretary (meetings may be called by any three members)


Vice pres: annually elected by academicians. Serves in place of president when necessary

Secretary: annually elected by academicians (he may be an honorary academcian)

Treasurer: chosen by the board of 3 directors from among themselves

3 directors appointed by: mayor, honorary academicians, academicians -- 5 years
in charge of all property, executes all contracts

Council of 6: annually elected by academy


Executive Committee: All of the above


Director of schools: 5 year term, appointed by executive committee

Recording secretary: 5 year term

So...

The Academicians (artists) have final say,
since they can meet whenever they want,
and elect the majority of the executive committee

But the organization is mostly run by the 3 directors
(one of whom is chosen by the Mayor of Chicago)
who serve 5-year terms
and enter into contracts on behalf of the academy.


(I believe this system
was modeled
after the large, free
art academies of some European cities,
like Munich)

***************

Here is the original 1869
charter
for the organization






Note that both

Lawrence W. Volk
and
J. F. Gookins


are among the founding members,
as well as those who
who presented
the revised
constitution of 1882




Here's a painting by Gookins



who was also something of an art critic
as evidenced by
a quotation printed
in the New York Times of 9/13/1886:

Gookins attacks those "who are bent on warping and prejudicing the public mind in favor of the greenery-gallery school in landscape and the Plutonian school in figure painting" as well as "They ,in a languid assumption of blase repose, commend the things done bya few young men in imitation of French landscapists who have done the same things so much better and they are aesthetically entranced by the pictures of what may be termed the mother-may-I-go-out-and-swim school and the lost-her-fig-leaf school, and they seek to make all that sort of thing fashionable and force it upon the American public to the exclusion of much that is pure and nobel and greater in every way."

...while Leonard Volk was the leading Midwestern sculptor
of his time
(and even got Lincoln to actually sit for a portrait)

(note: a fine essay on this topic may be found here )

Another day at the Museum

The day, once again, began at the library --
where someone has turned to the next page of "Oriental Field Sports"
by Captain Williamson





Though, I'm not sure that the artist, Samuel Howitt, was quite as familiar with elephants and tigers as he was with horses and pigs.

My next destination was the Vollard exhibit -- but I never got there

---( the waiting line was way too forbidding )---






So instead I visited the Japanese rooms -- to meditate on the distinction between
the Heian era (very important to fans of Lady Murasaki)
--and the Kamakura era that followed it ( very important to those who like Samurai movies)

The above is an iconic Kamakura piece by Unkei and Kwaikei (still found in Japan)





while this piece -- and the others that follow are now in Chicago.

The difference seems pretty drastic here, doesn't it ?
The Heian guardian looks strong -- but he's hardly forbidding,
while I can't imagine any thing , living or dead, that wouldn't run in terror from
the Kamakura piece if it began to move





But.. what about this piece ?
-- which is also Kamakura but oh-so-quiet

maybe .. it's too quiet ....

compared, say to this one ?

Well... that's my explanation anyway.

The Heian piece just feels a little more natural -- like a tree or natural feature

while the Kamakura seems more devoted to a specific purpose like
"I have come to save you from the terrible world"

Here's another Heian piece...

these things are sooooo relaxing..

like stumbling across a waterfall in the forest




and now for further comparison --- here's a Nara period piece in the same room
(Nara being the capital in the few centuries before the building of Kyoto)

This was the time when Chinese civilization was adopted
..and doesn't this fellow seem to be saying:

"I have come with the Truth"

Well.. moving onto something completely different -- I shot this Turkish dagger (1800-1900)

..because I knew Gawain would like to see its ornate detail
(and I really like those clusters of jewels)



Which is the same reason I shot this Indian mirror
..it's just too gorgeous (especially with that tiny rupee that perched on top)
(and I'd love to daydream about the faces that once were looking into its other side)

Finally -- yet again in tribute to Sir Gawain --

I found these
Seven sages of the Bamboo Grove
by Yashima Gakutei, c. 1825

Apparently in imitation of the 4 sages of Mount Shang,
these seven wise individuals fled from the evil Cao Cao's Kingdom of Wei
(i.e. in the time of the "Romance of the Three Kingdoms")

to look at scenery, make word games , write poetry, play music, and generally do all the things thatGawain thinks his friends should be doing.

(regretfully, one of them, Xi Kang, was executed for "immoral behavior" (i.e. excessive blogging) in 262

The poem in the above depiction was translated as follows:




With the arrival of spring
wise men stop in their tracks
a bush warbler disporting
in the bamboo grove

No matter how wise
in the spirngtime capital
fresh young bamboo
in Yuanji's eyes

A Day at the Museum

The library has now become the first place I go whenever I visit the Art Institute -- because it's so quiet -- and I feel so comfortable surrounded by the the early 20th American painting on its walls (and it even has the last remnant of the plaster cast collection: a life-size Khmer figure)

It's generally the stuff that otherwise would be in the basement -- but today I found something new --in the big glass display cases: some hand colored aquatints by Samuel Howitt serving as illustrations for the first, 1807 edition of "Oriental Field Sports" by Captain Thomas Williamson:

BEING A COMPLETE, DETAILED, AND ACCURATE DESCRIPTION OF THE
WILD SPORTS OF THE EAST;
AND EXHIBITING, IN A NOVEL AND INTERESTING MANNER, THE
NATURAL HISTORY
OF THE ELEPHANT, THE RHINOCEROS, THE TIGER, THE LEOPARD,
THE BEAR, THE DEER, THE BUFFALO, THE WOLF, THE WILD HOG,
THE JACKALL, THE WILD DOG, THE CIVET, AND OTHER DOMESTI
CATED ANIMALS : AS LIKEWISE THE DIFFERENT SPECIES OF
FEATHERED GAME, FISHES, AND SERPENTS.
THE WHOLE INTERSPERSED WITH A VARIETY OF
ORIGINAL, AUTHENTIC, AND CURIOUS ANECDOTES,
TAKEN FROM THE MANUSCRIPT AND DESIGNS OF
CAPTAIN THOMAS WILLIAMSON




Here's the text that accompanied by favorite picture -- and I'd like to pretend I'm Conrad, analyzing its peculiar sonorities, diction, and strings of subordinate clauses.

I like Captain Williamson (he served 20 years in Bengali)
He has a neat way of putting things.



Here's the full picture -- which is good -- but maybe not as exciting as Delacroix would have done -- or as gorgeous as a Mughal miniature.
And I especially like the detail that I posted at the top -- reminding me -- with its action and balance -- of the Sung calligraphy that I've recently been cutting and pasting.

And I have to mention -- this book was ENORMOUS.

Each page was nearly 24" wide -- so when open -- the book stretched out nearly 4 feet.
Now that's a coffee table book !





Then I went to re-visit the Vollard: Cezanne to Picasso exhibit
..but I had to wait in line for a few minutes
..which gave me the opportunity to notice things in the adjoining galleries that I might not have ordinarily looked at.

Like this Arthur Dove "Weathervane and crucifix"
God knows what it means (presumably something quite profound)
..but it did dominate the wall in that gallery -- reminding me, again, of a character from Sung calligraphy, perhaps Mi Fu -- being just as goofy -- but maybe more casual.

It feels like a sunny Easter Sunday to me -- where everyone has eaten too much and is ready to fall asleep in church.


Then ... finally .. I got into the exhibit .. and dived right into the detail areas of the Van Gogh.

(note: this is probably the place to mention that I am soooo grateful for the museum's new policy of unlimited free access for members to special ticketed exhibitions)

And moved on to the details made by Maurice de Vlaminck.

He claimed -- quite provocatively -- that he never set foot in the Louvre -- but I think he should be considered a kind of folk artist. He found somebody making things that he liked (Derain) and got coached on how to make more of same.

So what should we call him -- an urban folk artist ? Or maybe just another Flemish genius.

These detail-areas seem like fabrics to me --- except that each thread has been drawn -- and I think that what can make it so electric (too exciting by-a-half as Gawain might say)

For whatever reason -- broad strokes of intense colors seems to have fascinated several painters of this period (c. 1905) -- but when you see how terrible the results can be in the contemporary paintings found in summer art fairs -- you have to appreciate the special ability that was required to make it work out.

I recall a commentary suggesting that Vlaminck's landscapes recall the images that would have been flashing by his face as he pursued his earlier career as a competitive cyclist.


Roualt was no cyclist -- and the images aren't flashing by -- but there's still that love of intense colors

-- and enjoyment of textures that reminds of some photographers

(note: I'm only showing the details of this painting -- because I didn't like the whole thing)




Then I strolled over to the Chinese rooms to make some comparisons with things recently discussed over on Heaventree.

How does this piece (c. 1630)...



Or these pieces (c. 1730) compare with these that Gawain recently purchased in Taipei ?

What do you think ?

I'd say that these older pieces seem to demand more attention -- while the 21st C. pieces want to be more ambient -- creating a delicious - not so obtrusive - background for domestic behavior.




Similar to the difference I'd find between the following examples of 18th. C. carved calligraphy -- compared with the 11th. C. calligraphy examined a few posts ago.



These are actually rubbings taken from slabs -- and used in their own time as a kind of printed edition -- where a master copy would be carved and then copies could distributed throughout the empire.


These letters are very pleasant -- well balanced - well designed -- elegant and all that

..but I don't think they're intended to distract the reader from the text's message.

This is the first time I've gone to the museum -- wandered around looking at whatever catches my interest -- and then jammed it all into the same post in a rather confused, arbitrary way.

Hopefully, future posts will be a bit more focused -- but then -- maybe not.

This might be the first of many aimless excursions.

Ambroise Vollard -- Doctor Evil ?

I'm just back from "Cézanne to Picasso: Ambroise Vollard, Patron of the Avant-Garde " at the Art Institute -- where Pierre Bonnard's portraits of him are the ones that stick in my mind.





This portrays the dealer at one of his famous dinner parties thrown in the basement beneath his gallery -- apparently a very damp place -- with no pictures on the wall -- and Vollard's own chicken curry the only item ever on the menu.



But Bonnard also portrays the dealer with his best friend -- which has possibly been the inspiration for a notorious villian in late 20th Century cinema.



Doctor Evil ? Maybe not -- but I also don't think he should be called a "patron" of the avant garde.

He wasn't a patron -- he was a salesman/promoter/publisher -- just like the role Clive Davis famously played in the American popular music industry.

No matter how much you like something -- when your living depends on selling it -- you become a businessman, not a patron (I know ! -- that's my life as record dealer) -- and the first question you HAVE to ask is : "where's my money in this ?"

Ambroise Vollard discovered, promoted, commissioned many wonderful artists in that great European golden age at the turn of the last century -- but when you look at the things he chose for himself -- he was not especially a man of taste. He appears to have mostly collected things of personal interest -- portraits of friends etc -- while the very best things he bought were sold (at a profit) to others.










And here's the man who made him rich -- Paul Cezanne (who also did the portrait shown above)

Vollard is credited with "discovering" Cezanne -- like Colonel Parker discovered Elvis -- and since Cezanne, the trust fund child, never needed money, he let Vollard keep most of it -- which was quite a bit -- considering that over 650 Cezannes passed through his ledgers.


And this is a question I have to ask: has the market for avant garde painting ever been especially more sophisticated than the market for rock-n-roll records ?

Regarding Cezanne -- he spent, apparently, hundreds of hours working on that portrait (while Vollard was patiently posing) -- though I don't really see how that time was well spent. And the exhibit had a room full of his multi-figure mock-classical compositions (I 'm not showing them because I can't stand a single one)

But I enjoy his still life -- and especially his landscape --like the one shown above.

(the great Chinese landscape painters were not known for ever making any figure compositions -- and maybe Cezanne should has followed their example)




But the highlight of the show -- for me -- was Vincent!

His paintings are so alive -- they crackle with energy -- like this pair of old boots shown above.




..or this sunflower from the Met. (I'm not sure that Gawain would like them -- but Vincnet reminds me of those eccentric Sung calligraphers -- like the beloved "Recluse of Verdant Obtuseness")




...or this street scene -- with the judicious use of heavy-texture paint -- that can only be sensed in person (so the jpg's don't work)

But Vincent was already dead when Vollard became a dealer -- so although he did some shows with the estate --- very little sold --- and he sold the remainders off cheap. Why keep it ? It didn't look like a good investment -- at the time.







Oh, and really love this Vuillard -- it's hard to tell from the jpg -- but the pattern on the lady's blouse feels like a cluster of precious stones.

I so much like to be lolling about while a woman is preparing me dinner !





And, of course, I also like young women with their shirts off.

This Renoir is really glowing -- and the drawing is perfect -- even as it sometimes appears to be careless. (BTW -- Rodin saw this painting and bought it -- so now it can be seen at the Hotel Biron




Speaking of Rodin -- here's a design he made to accompany one of Vuillard's art books.. The story involves some kind of torture garden (ouch!). A bit misogynistic, perhaps, but so beautiful -- and the feeling that Rodin's figures settle into a delicious design the way I might settle into a big comfy chair.


And speaking of publications -- I never realized that Vollard was responsible for all my favorite Picassos -- i.e. the etchings he made for the Vollard edition of "The Sculptor's Studio"

Usually I condemn Picasso for his arrogant -- sloppy -- self indulgence -- but here's he's indulging my favorite fantasies -- and drawing like Raphael -- so I forgive him everything !





Vollard is also known for his investment in the late work of Degas --- the things that Degas never gave to his dealers -- for what, I think, was good reason -- i.e. the sharpness -- and maybe his eyesight -- was gone.

There was an exhibit of late Degas here in Chicago about 15 years ago -- and I hated it -- and especially its promotion as "Degas the Modernist" - "modern" because the work was so loose approaching ugly.

But I really like the large painting (above) that accompanied this exhibit.

Thrilling.




I also liked Degas' memoirs of the whorehouse -- monoprints that were not marketed in his lifetime. Very poignant -- very tasty --and kind of sad.

Vollard is credited with getting the aging Renoir to sculpt -- or, not actually to sculpt -- since his arthritic hands were too crippled -- but to collaborate with a young Spanish sculptor, Richard Guino -- and I think the word "collaborate" is giving Renoir a bit too much credit -- since Guino actually modeled the things -- Renoir was more like the producer (with Vollard as the "executive producer") Just like Billy Strayhorn with Duke Ellington -- Renoir, at first, got all the credit -- but since the 50's, the Guino family has been given the copyrights.







But Vollard's greatest achievement, so far as I'm concerned, was making Maillol a sculptor !

Yes! --- he is somewhat credited with directing Maillol's career toward sculpture. For example, he bought the above wood carving -- made a mold -- and began to cast copies in bronze -- circulating them throughout the artworld (Rodin bought one) and then giving Maillol his first solo sculpture show (before then he made decorative paintings and tapestries)

I have no illusions about Vollard's taste --- he did the same thing for Picasso's clumsy/ugly sculptural events -- and he sold quite a few --- but still ---- what if Maillol had never become an art star ? What if Elvis had spent his life driving trucks ? Businessmen are needed !

But my biggest disappointment in the show -- was that it didn't include any of the Vollard artists who DID NOT become art super-stars (the unfamiliar will always interest me the most)

This show -- like every museum show about art after 1850 --- is a kind of sacred narrative -- about the days when art-gods descended to earth -- and the great faith of MODERNISM was revealed to ignorant humanity.


And I'm just not sure that public institutions should be used to promote religious faith.

Charles Sheeler

I've been going to the Charles Sheeler (1883-1965) show every week now at the A.I.C. -- and I'm becoming a fan.

As Gawain wrote about his taste for Chopin here , if my mind is a lock, his painting fits like the key.

Fountain of the Great Lakes

This is Lorado Taft's "Fountain of the Great Lakes" completed in 1913





Now installed against a blank wall of the south wing of the Art Institute





Within a very pleasant garden courtyard, behind a rectangular pool




Though it originally had a more magnificent setting --- set before, not against, a classical facade -- broken by windows and columns -- and within a circular pool that raised it another three-feet off the ground -- giving it the opportunity to measure and control a much greater space. (it feels like a fountain in Rome, doesn't it ?)










These seem to be simple mid-west college girls








Dressed up in togas for a soiree at the sorority house. And I do wonder why they're spilling the water onto each other, instead of into the basins that they carry (each basin is supposed to represent one of the great lakes: Michigan, Superior, Ontario etc)











From the front -- it feels a bit heavy-handed and cluttered





But from the sides -- this statue does have some majestic views

More Xugu

Even if nobody here likes old Xugu except me -- I can't help myself -- I've got to post more !

Reflections off the glass make it impossible to show the entire painting (and it doesn't work at computer-screen-size anyway) -- but the above is a larger fragment of the fish pond.





And this one shows the calligraphy set into the garden-scape -- which is where it belongs













Here are some close-ups of the garden-scapes -- like sticking your head into the bushes -- just like with Jackson Pollock -- except that these bushes are measured-balanced-controlled-beautiful (and make me feel like a teenager in love)

















I guess this could feel like chalk-on-a-blackboard ---- ouch ! ---- but it feels to me like acrobats dancing on the high-wire -- beautiful and breathtaking.

AIC: calligraphy of Xugu

The story on Xugu (1823-1896) is that he was an army officer who became a Chan monk and made a living as a popular painter in Shanghai. Did the Taipei rebellion/disaster have any connection to this career change ? I don't know -- but thanks to this temporary exhibit of these items from the AIC basement, I do know that Xugu was a wonderful painter.

The use of light-versus-heavy brush strokes to create illusions of space in a human-size vertical, rectangular box --- well -- it's so delighful -- and just about impossible to reproduce on a computer monitor - even if I had a good camera -- and even if the illusion was not destroyed by glare from the protective glass.

But I could shoot the calligraphy -- and that is such as wonderful and ideosyncratic -- a world away from the rigid, boxed-in characters that are found so frequently.




Something about his painting -- and his calligraphy -- just makes me long for a night of food, music, and pleasure.

Maybe that was the purpose.

A.I.C. : the Braude Memorial Collection

Dorothy Edinburg collected drawings (18th - 20th C.) -- and this exhibit celebrates their donation to the museum -- as well as a certain approach to collecting that was spelled out in a monumental text that covers the first wall of this exhibition.

Rather than just picking what she liked to see, she chose drawings that would:

* effectively present the essence of an artist's achievement
* relate to objects in other media but also function as significant independant statements
* play a seminal role within an artist's ouvre
* satisfy high standards of authenticity and condition.

Here's the ones I liked the most:




This is what, for me, European figure drawing is all about: the crisp articulation of of volumes in space -- that just feels endlessly refreshing. The artist is Francois Lemoyne (1688-1737)-- and the subject is Hercules -- forced by a petulant queen to do woman's work (in the buff, no less !) Does this really feel like a Hercules ? I don't think so -- but there's so much rational optimism and vigor there -- I'm ready to believe that the whole mythological set-up is just a showpiece for good figure drawing (as Baroque opera might be called a showpiece for good voices)





Alessandro Magnasco (1667 - 1749) was a great cartoonist who was, perhaps, a little ahead of his time -- i.e. he had to place his whimsical, electric sketches into historical or religious paintings -- often leaving others to paint the landscape or architecture. Leaving the great symphonic compositions to a contemporary like Tiepolo, he was master of detail. (this exhibit had a Tiepolo -- but it was a disappointment -- compared to many others that I've seen)





Jean Baptiste Oudry (1686-1735) "Sick Stag": The previous drawings seemed to be preparatory sketches for paintings -- but this one, like many others in the show, seems to have been done as a decorative item iself -- drawing on paper just as others might paint on ceramic plates. Usually this kind of work bores me -- even if it is evidentaly well made. But this one has such an atmosphere of sweet melancholy -- and I love to feel sad. (and Oudry is one of my favorite animal-painters)





Over the years, I've collected books of "Master Drawings" and Piazetta is one of the usual suspects. I've always enjoyed the fullness of his volume -- but was never happpy with how it all fit together. The notes that accompanied this drawing may have explained why: Piazetta sold these sketches to tourists, not to churches or courtiers -- so sentimentality was more valued than profundity.






This little Italian landscape by Jacques Louis David (1748 - 1825) actually gave me more enjoyment than anything else in the show. He did it in 1775 -- soon after winning the Prix de Rome and and a trip to Italy. It's all that thrill of Classical culture -- its stateliness -- it sunniness - and more than any other, this drawing takes me to a place I want to be.







Prudhon (1758-1823) is the hero of French drawing because he turned the standard academic exercise into an objet d'art - with a charming classical atmosphere. This drawing is nice -- but as it recalls the drawing of the previous century (Lemoyne) or the classical sculpture of the next (Maillol) -- I feel its shortcomings. Did he successfully negotiate that delicate space between the model's right arm and her torso ? I just don't think so.




Maybe you have to love cats to enjoy this pastel -- but it just seems to present the essence of the feline mischief with which I am all too familiar. If a choice must be made between thorough and lively --- I'll always pick lively.





One of the things that irritates me the most about this kind of exhibit is the servile compliance with the canon: the endless repetition of the same famous artists -- as if there weren't tens-of-thousands of good, interesting drawings made by names unknown. But then the collector would have to rely on taste -- and that's not how this -- or many other collections --were made.

But the above artist, Hermann Max Pechstein (1881-1955) is pretty far from the A-list -- and I really enjoyed the hippie atmosphere of the above scene: zoftic art chicks cavorting nude in the campground beside his big red tent. Looks like fun to me !




The most recent piece that I enjoyed was this lifesize charcoal drawing by Nicholas De Stael done in 1953. American abstract painting interests me about as much as lawn bowling -- but I like the story -- and the results -- of this abstract painter's love affair with a tall young woman -- whose beautiful body brought him back to the world of figurative art.

No erudite theory is required to enjoy drawing -- and looking at -- the beloved.

Could Cezanne draw ?

Could Cezanne draw ?

This is a question to which I've always figured the answer was "No" -- he just didn't seem to have the ability to imagine a 3-dimensional space (whether deep or shallow) and articulate lines within it. When I see a painting like "Bathers" -- I'm thinking this is a man who would like to draw, but couldn't ---- so he developed a style that didn't require that ability. (a style which, by the way, I think was often very successful with landscape or still-life.)



But then I saw the following drawing at an exhibit at the Art Institute:




This drawing is dated to 1862 -- when Cezanne was taking art classes at the age of 23 -- and it looks to me like a fine academic study. It has volume, volumes-on-top-of-volumes, and a sense of design within space. It's kind of strong -- and delicious -- and it's what I'd want from a talented performer in the school of Jacques Louis David -- a figure set to do some noble thing in a Classical dream.

But did Cezanne actually do it ? There's a unbroken provenance from the artist's hand to the current owner -- but how much was done by his teacher ? Especially when we consider the next drawing that was done one year later:




What a difference a year makes -- or -- what a difference the presence of a good teacher made.

I hate to lock-step with conventional art history -- but it does now seem to me that Cezanne had the ability to draw figures in the European tradition -- he just chose to go in a different direction. (and having made that decision, I wish he -- and those who followed his lead -- had stayed away from the figure thereafter)

A.I.C. : Hands of the Heian and Kamakura

It looks like the 12th Century was something of a watershed in Japanese history -- and this large-scale event was marked by new styles of painting - sculpture - and prose -- that are memorable, dramatic, and often-called realistic.

Can we tell that difference from looking at the hands of a few near-life-size statues in the collection of the A.I.C. ?

Here's the Heian:




Heian: 10th-12th C. -- Yakushi Nyorai (deity of healing)

Yakushi Nyorai

Heian: 11th C. -- Bishamon -- deity who guards temples directions)

Bishamon

-------- and here's some Kamakura:

Kamakura:1185-1333 -- Shukongo Jin (deity who protects the law)


Kamakura:1185-1333 -- Shukongo Jin

Kamakura:1185-1333 -- Shukongo Jin


Kamakura: 1185-1333 -- Nyorin Kannon (deity of compassion, wish granting)

Kamakura: 1185-1333 Fudo Miyo-o


Fudo Miyo-o


Kamakura: 1185-1333 Jizo Bosatsu (deity of compassion)


Jizo Bosatsu

I'm not sure what conclusions to draw.

The Kamakura deities of protection seem much more fierce -- with energy being expressed rather than potential -- and that Heian deity of compassion seems
oh-so-delicate. Overall -- maybe the Heian feels more other-worldly or heavenly -- while the Kamak

Lee Mikyung

Once every year, I send a memorial to the emperor (i.e. the new director of the Art Institute) -- giving him valuable advice concerning the administration of his empire.

I realize that -- given my bad attitude -- were this a real emperor/empire -- I would have been beheaded several years ago -- but Mr. Cuno tolerates my opinions -- and is actually kind enough to write me in reply.

The problem is --- whatever I raise an issue -- he addresses it -- but not as I would have wished.

For example -- on one of my walks through the galleries, I discovered the following piece:



Ode to Balsam Flowers (detail)

The above is a small section of a 4-screen , 6-foot high, display of calligrapy --
by the Korean artist Lee Mikyung. According to the label, the script is an anachronistic, Korean style preserved by aristocratic women ( while their husbands preferred to write in Chinese characters).


Lee Mikyung was born 1918 -- and this piece was done in 1991 -- so chronologically, she would be considered a contemporary artist. (everything done after 1950 is now considered "contemporary")

I'm glad the piece is being shown --- it's a bit regimented/formal -- i.e. the characters don't seem to play with each other very much --- but each one is wonderful to study -- and god knows there are enough of them.


When I wrote to Mr. Cuno, I asked why this traditional Korean contemporary calligraher was on display --- but not-one-single traditional Euro-American -style painter was on the walls. (and god knows there are enough of those -- painters of portraits/landscape/still-life etc) Why should traditional Korean culture be honored -- but not our own ?

Last week I discovered that this problem had been solved: the Lee Mikyung had been sent to the basement -- and a different ( and much older ) Korean painting was now on display.

I suppose this is just a coincidence --- but in the same memorial, I asked why members should wish to renew their membership to the museum -- since the admitance fee is "pay what you wish" -- and the only real benefit was free admission to the high-priced special exhibits (which new museum policy has discontinued)

And now -- I have just learned that "pay what you wish" will soon be replaced by "pay $12" (or some such amount)

So once again -- my concerns were addressed -- but not in the way I would have wished !