Category Archives: Art

Henri Rousseau’s The Sleeping Gypsy (1897)

The art world didn’t used to be quite sure what to do with an artist who hadn’t come up through the ranks in the con­ven­tion­al man­ner, by study­ing at some­where like the Roy­al Acad­e­my of Arts or one of the Écoles des Beaux-Arts. They cer­tain­ly didn’t know what to do with Hen­ri Rousseau (1844–1910) who only start­ed paint­ing in his ear­ly for­ties, was com­plete­ly self-taught, and had pre­vi­ous­ly been earn­ing his liv­ing as a tax col­lec­tor (hence his lat­er nick­name Le Douanier). His style, too, was not treat­ed kind­ly by crit­ics – although it would lat­er be referred to as prim­i­tivism or Naïve art, Rousseau’s paint­ings had a child­like sim­plic­i­ty and frank­ness about them that were wide­ly dis­par­aged by the high­brows.

Picas­so, though, knew a nat­ur­al born artis­tic genius when he saw one; when he hap­pened upon one of Rousseau’s paint­ings being sold on the street as a can­vas to be paint­ed over, he imme­di­ate­ly sought out and met Rousseau. Lat­er he would host a ban­quet in Rousseau’s hon­our which would become famous as a notable social event due to the time­ly pres­ence of so many artists and lit­er­ary fig­ures from the time (Guil­laume Apol­li­naire, Juan Gris, Gertrude Stein et al).

Rousseau paint­ed a lot of jun­gle scenes, even though he nev­er vis­it­ed a jun­gle nor even left France. Here’s a gallery of Rousseau’s art that show­cas­es his dis­tinct style, with appeal­ing sim­ple shapes and blocks of colour.

The Sleep­ing Gyp­sy (French: La Bohémi­enne endormie) is prob­a­bly Rousseau’s most famous paint­ing. Paint­ed in 1897, it is a fan­tas­ti­cal depic­tion of a lion mus­ing over a sleep­ing woman on a moon­lit night. Rousseau’s own descrip­tion is as good as any:

A wan­der­ing Negress, a man­dolin play­er, lies with her jar beside her (a vase with drink­ing water), over­come by fatigue in a deep sleep. A lion chances to pass by, picks up her scent yet does not devour her. There is a moon­light effect, very poet­ic. The scene is set in a com­plete­ly arid desert. The gyp­sy is dressed in ori­en­tal cos­tume.”

It is a bewitch­ing image; The Sleep­ing Gyp­sy is held by the Muse­um of Mod­ern Art in New York and is housed right next to Vin­cent van Gogh’s famous The Star­ry Night. That’s not a bad pair­ing!

The Sleep­ing Gyp­sy
Hen­ri Rousseau

Andrew Wyeth’s Christina’s World (1948)

Andrew Wyeth (1917–2009) is per­haps not a wide­ly known name out­side of the States, but he was one of the greats of mid­dle 20th cen­tu­ry Amer­i­can art. His oeu­vre was Amer­i­can Region­al­ism, the real­ist art move­ment that depict­ed scenes from the rur­al, small-town Amer­i­ca of the Mid­west. Land and peo­ple, paint­ed by an artist with an appre­ci­a­tion for nature and the abil­i­ty to fire the imag­i­na­tion. He was born in Chadds Ford, Penn­syl­va­nia, into an estab­lished art-ori­ent­ed fam­i­ly, his father being the cel­e­brat­ed artist and illus­tra­tor N C Wyeth. Andrew was brought up on the art of Winslow Homer, the poet­ry of Robert Frost and the writ­ings of Hen­ry David Thore­au, and was thus inspired intel­lec­tu­al­ly as well as artis­ti­cal­ly.

One of Wyeth’s best-known works is his tem­pera paint­ing Christi­na’s World, which is held in the Muse­um of Mod­ern Art (MoMA) in New York; it was paint­ed in 1948, when he was 31 years old. The work depicts his neigh­bour, Christi­na Olson, sprawled on a dry field fac­ing her house in the dis­tance, in Cush­ing, Maine. Christi­na had a degen­er­a­tive mus­cu­lar dis­or­der that ren­dered her unable to walk, and she spent most of her time at home. She was firm­ly against using a wheel­chair and so would crawl every­where, and Wyeth was inspired to cre­ate the paint­ing when he saw her crawl­ing across the field.

Christi­na’s World

Christi­na’s World was first exhib­it­ed at the Mac­beth Gallery in Man­hat­tan in 1948. It received lit­tle atten­tion from crit­ics at the time, but Alfred Barr, the found­ing direc­tor of the MoMA, bought the paint­ing for $1,800 and it grad­u­al­ly grew in pop­u­lar­i­ty to the point that today, it is con­sid­ered an icon of Amer­i­can art. The Olson house itself has been pre­served and ren­o­vat­ed to match its appear­ance in Christi­na’s World, and because of Wyeth’s pro­file, it was des­ig­nat­ed a Nation­al His­toric Land­mark in June 2011.

Olson House

Andrew Wyeth

 

Albrecht Dürer’s Self-Portrait At Twenty-Eight (1500)

Albrecht Dür­er (1471–1528) was a Ger­man painter and print­mak­er and a lead­ing light of the North­ern Renais­sance.  Born in Nurem­berg to a suc­cess­ful gold­smith, he lived in the same street where his god­fa­ther Anton Koberg­er was turn­ing Gutenberg’s print­ing press into a huge com­mer­cial enter­prise and pub­lish­ing the famous Nurem­berg Chron­i­cle (1493). Albrecht learnt the basics of gold­smithing and draw­ing under his father and his pre­co­cious skills in the lat­ter led him to under­go an appren­tice­ship under print­mak­er Michael Wol­ge­mut in which he learnt the art of cre­at­ing wood­cuts for books. After his Wan­der­jahre – essen­tial­ly gap years – in which he trav­elled to study under var­i­ous mas­ters, he set up a work­shop and began to estab­lish a rep­u­ta­tion for his high-qual­i­ty wood­cut prints.

Dürer’s wood­prints were main­ly reli­gious in nature, often in sets such as his six­teen designs for the Apoc­a­lypse, the twelve scenes of the Pas­sion, a series of eleven on the Holy Fam­i­ly and Saints, and twen­ty wood­cuts on the Life of the Vir­gin. He was also par­tic­u­lar­ly renowned for his three Meis­ter­stiche, mas­ter prints that are often grouped togeth­er because of their per­ceived qual­i­ty, name­ly Knight, Death and the Dev­il (1513), Saint Jerome in his Study (1514), and Melen­co­l­ia I (1514). He also made sec­u­lar wood­cuts, such as his famous Rhi­noc­er­os (1515), which he nev­er actu­al­ly saw but cre­at­ed his print using an anony­mous writ­ten descrip­tion and brief sketch of an Indi­an rhi­noc­er­os brought to Lis­bon in 1515.

How­ev­er, today we focus on his pan­el paint­ing in oil, Self-Por­trait (or Self-Por­trait at Twen­ty-Eight), held today in the Alte Pinakothek in Munich. Paint­ed ear­ly in 1500, just before his 29th birth­day, Self-Por­trait is the last – and most per­son­al and icon­ic — of his three paint­ed self-por­traits. It is remark­able for its direct­ness – does it remind you of any­one? Yes, its resem­blance to many ear­li­er rep­re­sen­ta­tions of Christ has not gone unno­ticed: there are clear sim­i­lar­i­ties with the con­ven­tions of reli­gious paint­ing, includ­ing its sym­me­try and dark tones, and full-frontal con­fronta­tion with the view­er. He even rais­es his hands to the mid­dle of his chest as if in the act of bless­ing.

If that is the case, isn’t that blas­phe­my? Sounds some­what dan­ger­ous, no? Per­haps we’re pro­ject­ing too much intol­er­ance onto the fif­teenth (well, new­ly-six­teenth) cen­tu­ry, or per­haps Dürer’s moti­va­tion was sim­ply a way to (lit­er­al­ly) imi­tate Christ, which could be seen as a good thing. Art his­to­ri­an Joseph Koern­er inter­prets it square­ly as a pio­neer­ing chal­lenge to the norms of self-por­trai­ture, albeit putting it in that par­tic­u­lar­ly ver­bose way only art his­to­ri­ans can do:

By trans­fer­ring the attrib­ut­es of imag­is­tic author­i­ty and qua­si-mag­i­cal pow­er once asso­ci­at­ed with the true and sacred image of God to the nov­el sub­ject of self-por­trai­ture, Dür­er legit­i­mates his rad­i­cal­ly new notion of art, one based on the irre­ducible rela­tion between the self and the work or art”.

Albrecht Dür­er, Self-por­trait at Twen­ty-Eight

Akseli Gallen-Kallela’s Kalevala Paintings (1890s)

Greece has its Ili­ad and Odyssey, Italy its Aeneid, Por­tu­gal its Lusi­ads, Ice­land its Eddas, Ger­many its Nibelun­gen­lied, Britain its Beowulf and Le Morte d’Arthur, and India its Mahabara­ta and Ramayana. I am talk­ing of course about nation­al folk-epics, those lit­er­ary mas­ter­pieces that were orig­i­nal­ly an oral canon of folk-sto­ries per­co­lat­ed down through the mists of time and lat­er writ­ten down and inte­grat­ed into the world­view of its peo­ple.

Well, Finland’s was the epic poet­ry col­lec­tion known as the Kale­vala, which was devel­oped quite late — dur­ing the 19th cen­tu­ry — but still from ancient tra­di­tion­al folk-tales. The Kale­vala was an inte­gral part of the Finns’ nation­al awak­en­ing in the era of the Grand Duchy of Fin­land when they were under the yoke of the Russ­ian empire, and it was instru­men­tal in the devel­op­ment of the Finnish nation­al iden­ti­ty, ulti­mate­ly lead­ing to inde­pen­dence from Rus­sia in 1917.

This nation­al awak­en­ing coin­cid­ed with the so-called Gold­en Age of Finnish Art rough­ly span­ning the peri­od 1880 to 1910. The Kale­vala pro­vid­ed the artis­tic inspi­ra­tion for numer­ous themes at the time in lit­er­a­ture (J. L. Runeberg’s The Tales of Ensign Stål; Alek­sis Kivi’s The Sev­en Broth­ers), music (Jean Sibelius), archi­tec­ture (Eliel Saari­nen), and of course the visu­al arts, the most notable of which were pro­vid­ed by one Akseli Gallen-Kallela.

Born Axél Walde­mar Gal­lén in Pori, Fin­land, to a Swedish-speak­ing fam­i­ly (he Finni­cised his name in 1907), Gallen-Kallela first attend­ed draw­ing class­es at the Finnish Art Soci­ety before study­ing at the Académie Julian in Paris. He mar­ried Mary Slöör in 1890 and on their hon­ey­moon to East Kare­lia, he start­ed col­lect­ing mate­r­i­al for his depic­tions of the Kale­vala. He would soon be inex­tri­ca­bly linked with the inde­pen­dence move­ment as he pro­duced his scenes from the old sto­ries.

The most exten­sive paint­ings that Gallen-Kallela made of the Kale­vala were his fres­coes, orig­i­nal­ly for the Finnish Pavil­ion at the Expo­si­tion Uni­verselle in Paris in 1900, but paint­ed again in 1928 in the lob­by of the Nation­al Muse­um of Fin­land in Helsin­ki where they can be seen to this day. How­ev­er, many stand­alone works exist too; here’s a flavour of his art, though if you want to know what they depict you’ll have to read the Kale­vala!

Alek­si Gallen-Kallela

John Atkinson Grimshaw’s Boar Lane, Leeds (1881)

Last Sun­day I popped along to see Monet’s icon­ic The Water-Lily Pond, on loan at York Art Gallery, and very nice it was too, being the cen­tre­piece of a nice col­lec­tion of key loans fea­tur­ing var­i­ous French en plein air pre­cur­sors to Impres­sion­ism. How­ev­er, whilst there, I was remind­ed that the gallery had also recent­ly acquired for its per­ma­nent col­lec­tion a piece by an artist a lit­tle clos­er to home, Leeds-born John Atkin­son Grimshaw, known not for the Impres­sion­is­tic brush­work or gar­den scenes of Mon­et and his ilk but for real­is­tic noc­tur­nal scenes of urban land­scapes. The paint­ing is Liv­er­pool Docks at Night (1870s) and it’s a fine exam­ple of Grimshaw’s oeu­vre. It was also some­thing of a coup for York Art Gallery, giv­en that it had been accept­ed by HM Gov­ern­ment in lieu of inher­i­tance tax from a col­lec­tion and had been allo­cat­ed to the gallery for the bar­gain­ous price of £0.

Grimshaw was born in a back-to-back house in Park Street, Leeds, in 1836, and at first looked des­tined for a nor­mal, anony­mous life —  he mar­ried his cousin Frances at age twen­ty and got a job as clerk for the Great North­ern Rail­way. How­ev­er, the young John had an artis­tic gift and an ambi­tion, and it must have tak­en a great deal of courage and self-belief for him to dis­may his par­ents by pack­ing in his job and launch­ing him­self as a painter, but he did just that, in 1861. His pri­ma­ry artis­tic influ­ence was the Pre-Raphaelites and true to their style he paint­ed with accu­rate colour and light­ing and with vivid detail. Although he did start out paint­ing a vari­ety of gen­res, Grimshaw was lat­er drawn to depict­ing moon­lit views of city streets in Leeds and Lon­don, and dock­side scenes in Hull, Liv­er­pool, and Glas­gow. James McNeill Whistler, with whom Grimshaw worked lat­er in his career in his Chelsea stu­dios, said: “I con­sid­ered myself the inven­tor of noc­turnes until I saw Grim­my’s moon­lit pic­tures”.

Unlike Whistler’s Impres­sion­is­tic night scenes, “Grimmy’s” noc­turnes were sharply focused and almost pho­to­graph­ic in their qual­i­ty, and there is an eerie warmth about them. Rather than con­cen­trat­ing on the dirty and depress­ing aspects of indus­tri­al life (that he would have had no trou­ble find­ing), Grimshaw imbued his paint­ings with a lyri­cal evo­ca­tion of the urban land­scape and there is poet­ry in his cap­tured mists, reflect­ed street­light in wet pave­ments, and dark fig­ures wrapped up against the weath­er. His twi­light cities became his “brand” and became very pop­u­lar with his mid­dle-class patrons; he must have done well because by the 1870s he and his wife were liv­ing at Knos­trup Old Hall, in the Tem­ple Newsam area of Leeds, a far cry from the back-to-back in Park Street.

Here is a favourite of mine, Boar Lane, Leeds (1881), a street we Leeds dwellers have walked down many a time on a win­ter’s day like this.

 

Boar Lane, Leeds (1881)
John Atkin­son Grimshaw

John Everett Millais’ Ophelia (1851)

If you were to choose any British art gallery to walk into today, you would be sure to find one or more paint­ings by one or more artists belong­ing to the Pre-Raphaelite Broth­er­hood. The Pre-Raphaelites were a group of Eng­lish painters, poets, and art crit­ics, found­ed in 1848 by William Hol­man Hunt, John Everett Mil­lais, Dante Gabriel Ros­set­ti, and oth­ers, who sought to reform art and return it to the glo­ry days, as they saw it, of Ital­ian fif­teenth cen­tu­ry art. That peri­od of art, so-called Quat­tro­cen­to art, was char­ac­terised by abun­dant detail, colour and com­plex­i­ty; in the fol­low­ing cen­tu­ry, how­ev­er, artists – such as Raphael – were seen by the group as hav­ing a cor­rupt­ing influ­ence on art, ush­er­ing in the unnat­ur­al and stylised art of Man­ner­ism. Parmigianino’s Madon­na With The Long Neck (1540) is often used as an exam­ple of Man­ner­ism play­ing fast and loose with prop­er per­spec­tive, as I’m sure you can see.

Parmi­gian­i­no’s Madon­na With The Long Neck (1540)

Today, we’re look­ing at a clas­sic of the Pre-Raphaelites, name­ly Ophe­lia, the 1852 paint­ing by British artist Sir John Everett Mil­lais (and held in Tate Britain). Ophe­lia is of course a char­ac­ter from Shake­speare’s Ham­let, a Dan­ish noble­woman dri­ven mad by her love for Prince Ham­let and who ulti­mate­ly drowns in despair. Her drown­ing is not usu­al­ly seen onstage in the play, but mere­ly report­ed by Queen Gertrude who tells the audi­ence that Ophe­lia, out of her mind with grief, has fall­en from a wil­low tree over­hang­ing a brook. She lies in the water singing songs, as if unaware of her dan­ger (“inca­pable of her own dis­tress”), her clothes, trap­ping air and allow­ing her to stay afloat for a while (“Her clothes spread wide, / And, mer­maid-like, awhile they bore her up.”). But even­tu­al­ly, “her gar­ments, heavy with their drink, / Pul­l’d the poor wretch from her melo­di­ous lay” down “to mud­dy death”.

Mil­lais paints Ophe­lia in a pose with open arms and upward gaze in the man­ner of saints or mar­tyrs (they did love a trag­ic woman, the Pre-Raphs). In keep­ing with the tenets of the Pre-Raphaelites, he has used bright colours, with lots of detailed flo­ra and fideli­ty to nature. Despite its nom­i­nal Dan­ish set­ting, the land­scape has actu­al­ly come to be seen as quin­tes­sen­tial­ly Eng­lish (Ophe­lia was paint­ed along the banks of the Hogsmill Riv­er near Tol­worth in Sur­rey). The flow­ers shown float­ing on the riv­er were cho­sen to cor­re­spond with Shake­speare’s descrip­tion of Ophe­li­a’s gar­land.

Fun fact: at one point, Mil­lais had paint­ed a water vole pad­dling away near Ophe­lia, but changed his mind (prob­a­bly cor­rect­ly) after an acquain­tance mis­took it for a hare or rab­bit. Although ful­ly paint­ed over, a rough sketch of it still exists in a cor­ner of the can­vas hid­den by the frame, appar­ent­ly.

Mil­lais’ Ophe­lia (1851)

Paolo Veronese’s The Wedding Feast At Cana (1563)

Great art comes in many shapes and sizes, from por­trait minia­tures right up to mon­u­men­tal can­vas­es depict­ing epic scenes with casts of thou­sands. Today we’re going to look at an exam­ple of the lat­ter, one which hangs in the Lou­vre and deserves to have the same-sized crowd of admir­ers that per­pet­u­al­ly gath­er around the Mona Lisa there (and per­haps it does usu­al­ly, but I do have a mem­o­ry of being able to admire it unmo­lest­ed by oth­er peo­ple and able to take in its con­sid­er­able fea­tures). It’s Pao­lo Veronese’s The Wed­ding Feast at Cana (Nozze di Cana, 1562–1563), depict­ing the bib­li­cal sto­ry of the Wed­ding at Cana, in which Jesus mirac­u­lous­ly con­verts water into wine, thus jus­ti­fy­ing his invi­ta­tion sev­er­al times over.

It’s a whop­ping 6.77 m × 9.94 m and indeed as such it’s the largest paint­ing in the Lou­vre. Veronese exe­cut­ed his paint­ing slap-bang in the mid­dle of the peri­od in art known as the Man­ner­ist age (c.1520‑c.1600), in which there was a ten­den­cy of artists to take the ideals of the High Renais­sance (1490–1527) — pro­por­tion, bal­ance, ide­al beau­ty – and exag­ger­ate them such that arrange­ments of human fig­ures have an unnat­ur­al rather than a real­is­tic feel to them. It’s as if artists felt that every­thing that could be achieved had already been achieved by the likes of Da Vin­ci, Raphael and Michelan­ge­lo, and they need­ed a dif­fer­ent approach.

The can­vas was orig­i­nal­ly hung in the San Geor­gio Monastery in Venice, until Napoleon’s sol­diers nicked it as war booty in 1797. It depicts a crowd­ed ban­quet scene in the sump­tu­ous style char­ac­ter­is­tic of 16th cen­tu­ry Venet­ian soci­ety but framed in the Gre­co-Roman archi­tec­tur­al style of clas­si­cal antiq­ui­ty. There are 130 human fig­ures dressed fash­ion­ably in Occi­den­tal and Ori­en­tal cos­tume alla Tur­ca, and there are indi­ca­tions that we are post-feast, with guests sat­ed and await­ing the wine ser­vice.

In the fore­ground are musi­cians play­ing stringed instru­ments of the late Renais­sance, with leg­end hav­ing it that the musi­cian in the white tunic is a depic­tion of Veronese him­self and the oth­er musi­cians mod­elled on fel­low artists Jacopo Bas­sano, Tin­toret­to and Tit­ian. Behind the musi­cians are seat­ed Jesus of Nazareth, the Vir­gin Mary, and sev­er­al apos­tles. Amongst the wed­ding guests are depict­ed many his­tor­i­cal per­son­ages from Veronese’s day, such as Mary I of Eng­land, Holy Roman Emper­or Charles V, and Suleiman the Mag­nif­i­cent. There are so many quirky ele­ments to dis­cov­er– a lit­tle dog on the table here, a lady pick­ing her teeth there, a dwarf hold­ing a bright green par­rot – that to do so could take up some con­sid­er­able time.

Here are some details (click on them to enlarge), with the whole mas­ter­piece in its entire­ty below.

 

James Cox’s Silver Swan Automaton (1774)

Vis­i­tors to the Bowes Muse­um in the town of Barnard Cas­tle in Coun­ty Durham are reg­u­lar­ly blown away by the trea­sures housed in this provin­cial town, miles away from the major cities where art col­lec­tions of this qual­i­ty may be expect­ed. The build­ing alone is worth the vis­it; it is elab­o­rate­ly mod­elled in the style of the French Sec­ond Empire, pur­pose-built to house the art col­lec­tion of John Bowes, and opened to the pub­lic in 1892.

Bowes Muse­um, Barnard Cas­tle

The col­lec­tion con­tains paint­ings by El Gre­co, Goya, Canalet­to, Frag­o­nard and Bouch­er, as well as items of dec­o­ra­tive art, ceram­ics, tex­tiles, tapes­tries, clocks and cos­tumes. The pièce de résis­tance, how­ev­er, is today’s sub­ject, the Sil­ver Swan automa­ton, cre­at­ed by Lon­don jew­eller James Cox and the inven­tor John Joseph Mer­lin.

The Sil­ver Swan was first record­ed in 1774 as a crowd puller at the famous Cox’s Muse­um of James Cox, an entre­pre­neur as well as a tal­ent­ed jew­eller. The exquis­ite­ly craft­ed swan has an inter­nal clock­work-dri­ven mech­a­nism with 2000 mov­ing parts (designed by Mer­lin), and at an appoint­ed time each day at Bowes Muse­um, the automa­ton is cranked up and goes through its 32-sec­ond per­for­mance.

The swan sits in a stream made of glass rods and sur­round­ed by sil­ver leaves, and small sil­ver fish can be seen “swim­ming” in the stream. When the clock­work is wound, the music box plays and the glass rods rotate giv­ing the illu­sion of flow­ing water. The swan turns its head from side to side, preens itself, and after a few moments bends down to catch and eat a fish. The swan’s head then returns to the upright posi­tion and the per­for­mance is over.

The Sil­ver Swan was exhib­it­ed at the 1867 Paris Inter­na­tion­al Exhi­bi­tion, and it was here that John Bowes and his wife saw it, fell in love with it, and in 1872 had the oppor­tu­ni­ty to pur­chase it (for £200, or about £20,000 in today’s mon­ey, still an absolute steal). The Amer­i­can nov­el­ist Mark Twain also saw the Sil­ver Swan at the Paris exhi­bi­tion in 1867 and described it in his book The Inno­cents Abroad:

I watched the Sil­ver Swan, which had a liv­ing grace about his move­ment and a liv­ing intel­li­gence in his eyes – watched him swim­ming about as com­fort­ably and uncon­cerned­ly as it he had been born in a morass instead of a jeweller’s shop – watched him seize a sil­ver fish from under the water and hold up his head and go through the cus­tom­ary and elab­o­rate motions of swal­low­ing it…

If this inspires you to see the swan for your­self, leave it a few months: it is cur­rent­ly being restored but is expect­ed to return to its pub­lic next year.

George Stubbs’ Cheetah And Stag With Two Indians (1765)

If you hap­pen to be in Man­ches­ter with a spare hour or two, do call into its art gallery on Mosley Street where you’ll find a host of inter­est­ing paint­ings, not least of which is Chee­tah and Stag with Two Indi­ans by George Stubbs. Stubbs was an Eng­lish artist, born in Liv­er­pool in 1724 and who moved to York in 1744 to pur­sue his pas­sion for human anato­my, study­ing under the sur­geon Charles Atkin­son at York Coun­ty Hos­pi­tal. He was also a nat­ur­al and entire­ly self-taught artist, and worked as a por­trait painter in York for ten more years, but he would become famous lat­er not for paint­ing human sit­ters but ani­mal ones, par­tic­u­lar­ly hors­es (of which his best-known, Whistle­jack­et, is at the Nation­al Gallery in Lon­don).

Whistle­jack­et

By 1764, Stubbs had estab­lished a rep­u­ta­tion for his anatom­i­cal­ly accu­rate ani­mal paint­ings, and attract­ed the atten­tion of the roy­al court, who had com­mis­sioned him, the year before, to paint Queen Charlotte’s South African zebra. He was, then, the obvi­ous choice when a cer­tain out­go­ing Gov­er­nor Gen­er­al of Madras, Sir George Pig­ot, arrived back in Lon­don with a menagerie of “wild beasts and curiosi­ties” as gifts for King George III, and was look­ing for an artist to paint a por­trait of the most exot­ic of those gifts, a mag­nif­i­cent chee­tah.

Eas­i­ly tamed and trained, chee­tahs had been used as hunt­ing ani­mals by the Mogul Emper­ors for hun­dreds of years. In that spir­it, the King’s uncle, the Duke of Cum­ber­land, was eager to put the King’s chee­tah through its paces and so arranged a demon­stra­tion in Wind­sor Great Park, where George Stubbs was present to cap­ture the occa­sion on can­vas.

A stag was duly placed in an enclo­sure of the roy­al pad­dock while the chee­tah was pre­pared by Pigot’s Indi­an ser­vants. First, they ‘hood­winked’ the ani­mal by tying a red blind­fold over its face, whilst one of the ser­vants held it by a restrain­ing sash around the hindquar­ters. A ser­vant then pulled back the hood back to allow the chee­tah a first sight of its quar­ry, whilst the oth­er one ges­tured towards the stag, and the preda­tor was unleashed. What hap­pened next was not quite what was intend­ed: accord­ing to the St James’s Chron­i­cle the stag staunch­ly defend­ed itself and end­ed up chas­ing the chee­tah off!

The paint­ing has been praised for its sin­cere ren­der­ing and lack of Euro­pean con­de­scen­sion: in an age when for­eign vis­i­tors were pic­tured at best as colour­ful exotics, at worst as sin­is­ter or ridicu­lous car­i­ca­tures, Stubbs endowed the ser­vants with a grace and authen­tic­i­ty equal to the mag­nif­i­cent crea­ture they were car­ing for.

Post­script Chee­tahs are no longer to be found wild in the Indi­an sub-con­ti­nent: the last three indi­vid­u­als were report­ed­ly shot in 1947 by the Mahara­jah of Sur­gu­ja.

Chee­tah and Stag with Two Indi­ans
George Stubbs, self-por­trait

Wassily Kandinsky’s Yellow-Red-Blue (1925)

My appre­ci­a­tion of art spans many cen­turies. I’ve mar­velled at the Gre­co-Romano art of the clas­si­cal world; con­tem­plat­ed fres­coes adorn­ing Byzan­tine monas­ter­ies and church­es in Turkey, Arme­nia and Cyprus; spent hours in gal­leries mus­ing over paint­ings from the Medieval and Renais­sance peri­ods, through the eras of Baroque, Neo­clas­si­cism and Roman­ti­cism to late nine­teenth-cen­tu­ry Impres­sion­ism and on to…well to be hon­est, when we hit the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry, my enthu­si­asm starts to wane. Sure, Art Deco was a bona fide, aes­thet­i­cal­ly pleas­ing and inno­v­a­tive art move­ment, and Cubism had its place, but when I start to con­sid­er Sur­re­al­ism, Min­i­mal­ism and Abstract Expres­sion­ism, I’m less impressed.

Sure, sure: it’s emi­nent­ly pos­si­ble to sit and enjoy a mon­u­men­tal and vibrant Jack­son Pol­lock can­vas in New York’s Met­ro­pol­i­tan Muse­um of Art — and I have done — and there will always be excep­tion­al and intrigu­ing art to be found through­out the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry. But my con­tention is that over­all these tend to be out­liers, and that in amongst the gems there is a broad seam of dis­tinct­ly uncap­ti­vat­ing art. You can enjoy a Mark Rothko but can you real­ly be cap­ti­vat­ed by it? I can’t. And don’t get me start­ed on the tru­ly mod­ern “art” of the last four decades, the likes of Damien Hirst, Tracey Emin, the Chap­man Broth­ers, Mar­tin Creed et al…please!

Hav­ing said that, I’m going to give a free pass to one of the head hon­chos of Abstract Expres­sion­ism, the Russ­ian painter and art the­o­rist Wass­i­ly Kandin­sky (1866–1944). With Kandin­sky I can embrace the new cen­tu­ry vibe and be inspired by all that art the­o­ry behind colour and form. Kandin­sky wrote volu­mi­nous­ly about art the­o­ry: his writ­ing in The Blue Rid­er Almanac and the 1910 trea­tise On the Spir­i­tu­al in Art were bold affir­ma­tions that all forms of art can reach a lev­el of spir­i­tu­al­i­ty. He found­ed the short-lived but influ­en­tial Blue Rid­er group (Der Blaue Reit­er) with like-mind­ed artists such as August Macke, Franz Marc, and Albert Bloch, who exper­i­ment­ed bold­ly with colour, lines and form, and gave pri­or­i­ty to spon­tane­ity and impro­vi­sa­tion.

Kandin­sky’s paint­ings are expres­sive explo­sions of colours, lines and shapes that have an extra­or­di­nary force and musi­cal qual­i­ty about them. Kandin­sky recog­nised that there were impor­tant con­nec­tions between music and abstract art: music is abstract by nature and does not try to rep­re­sent the exte­ri­or world but instead express­es the imme­di­ate inner feel­ings of the soul. That is why Kandin­sky referred to his works as “com­po­si­tions”. I get it. I seem to remem­ber hav­ing this com­po­si­tion — 1925’s Yel­low-Red-Blue (Gelb-Rot-Blau) — on my kitchen wall in the nineties, and, to extend the musi­cal metaphor, I find it rather jazzy!

Kandin­sky, Yel­low-Red-Blue
Wass­i­ly Kandin­sky