Stlukesguild

I have already posted this to the Art Group here at LitNet... but on the outside chance that there are some others outside that group interested in art... I'll offer it up in my blog as well.

I have long admired Whistler... although I will admit that I have not often given him the consideration that is his due... You must smile at his audacity which led to his becoming one of the first real modern "bad boys" of art. This was often hidden behind the absolute elegance of his work. Whistler's art is in many respects appears initially to be the polar opposite to his often aggressive personality, being discreet and subtle, sophisticated, and elegant... but the creed that lay behind it was radical. He believed that painting should exist for its own sake, not to convey literary or moral ideas. He was undoubtedly a master portraitist... capable of capturing the style of the most dashing or charming sitters:





In spite of the reputation Whistler gained as an elegant portraitist, he was far more concerned with the abstract nature of art... an abstract organization of colors and shapes... than with the more literal concerns with capturing a literal likeness or conveying a narrative. Whistler would have certainly agreed with Walter Pater, who asserted that "all art aspires to the state of music" and as such he often orchestrated his compositions around a limited color scheme in order to convey a desired mood in a manner not unlike musical composition. He would commonly title his paintings in such a manner as to highlight this formal orchestration and this analogy to the abstract/formal nature of music... as in this painting: Symphony in White no. 1.



In spite of his reputation as an aesthete... or perhaps in concert with it... his work commonly shocked more conservative minds. With this painting, the artist's mother, for example, was disturbed by the reputation of the artist's less-than-virginal model and lover, Jo, represented in a bridal-like virginal white... with perhaps sly allusions to Diana... the virginal goddess of the hunt.

Perhaps my absolute favorite single painting by Whistler is his exquisitely ravishing Harmony in Pink and Grey: Portrait of Lady Meux. Susan Langdon (also known as Valerie Susie Reece, 1852–1910), daughter of a Devonshire butcher and victualer, married Sir Henry Bruce Meux, Bart., a brewer. A colorful figure in society, she once created a sensation by appearing at a hunt riding an elephant. She was perfectly suited to the sensation-seeking Whistler. This is the second of three portraits Whistler made of her. I am lucky enough to have seen this portrait in real life several times.



Whistler was deeply influenced by the sensibilities of Asian art... especially Japanese. Whistler was but one of many artists whose work was profoundly marked by the Japanese influence. The tall, narrow compositions favored by Whistler were certainly inspired by Japanese scroll paintings, and by the panels of Japanese screen painting. Ukiyo-e prints would influence Whistler with regard to composition, point of view, and subject matter. Japanese decorative art (ceramics, kimonos, etc...) would provide lush settings for many of Whistler's paintings. The influence of Japonisme would also result in the biggest scandal of Whistler's career... but also his greatest masterwork.

One of Whistler's patrons, Frederick R. Leyland, commissioned the artist to produce a painting suited to be hung in his home among his collection of Chinese porcelain. The resulting painting was entitled, La Princesse du pays de la porcelaine — or The Princess from the Land of Porcelain. Leyland's architect, who had nearly completed the showroom for Leyland's Chinese ceramics with expensive leather wall coverings and fine wood paneling consulted the artist, concerned that the colors of the painting might clash with the room design. Whistler offered to make a few minor alterations in order to ensure the proper harmony. Assuming the decoration of the room to be virtually complete, Leyland went back to his business in Liverpool. In his patron's absence, Whistler was inspired to make bolder revisions. He covered the ceiling with Dutch metal, or imitation gold leaf, over which he painted a lush pattern of peacock feathers. He then gilded the walnut shelving and embellished the wooden shutters with four magnificently plumed peacocks. Whistler entertained visitors and amused the press in the lavishly decorated room, never thinking to ask permission of the owner of the house. His audacious behavior, coupled with a dispute over payment for the project, provoked a bitter quarrel between the painter and his patron. Leyland would not consent to pay the two thousand guineas that Whistler wanted. Perhaps in retaliation, Whistler took the liberty of coating Leyland's valuable leather with Prussian-blue paint and depicting a pair of peacocks aggressively confronting each other on the wall opposite The Princess. He used two shades of gold for the design and highlighted telling details in silver. Scattered at the feet of the angry bird are the coins (silver shillings) that Leyland refused to pay; the silver feathers on the peacock's throat allude to the ruffled shirts that Leyland always wore. The poor and affronted peacock has a silver crest feather that resembles the lock of white hair that curled above Whistler's forehead. (The entire story of this work can be read here:
http://www.asia.si.edu/exhibitions/o...ck/default.htm )







Right on the heels of the Peacock Room scandal came what may have been an even more damaging scandal... at least in terms of the artist's reputation with the larger public. Whistler had produced a body of landscape paintings that he entitled "Nocturnes". Among the finest of these were Nocturne in Blue and Gold, Old Battersea Bridge, and Nocturne in Black and Gold, the Falling Rocket.





Both of these paintings were deeply influenced by Japanese Ukiyo-e printmakers:





In spite of the art historical precedents, the paintings were publicly dismissed by the great British art critic, John Ruskin, as an example of the artist having thrown a paint pot in the public's face. Ruskin's judgment was all the more damning, considering that he (Ruskin) had been the greatest champion of J.M.W. Turner, who surely set the precedent for the atmospheric nature of Whistler's paintings. Whistler sued Ruskin for libel... and won the court case... to the tune of one-shilling. His actions, however, deeply hurt marred his reputation with the British art public resulting (in part) in the artist's bankruptcy shortly after.

Soon thereafter, Whistler moved to Venice where he spent some two years turning out a wealth of paintings, pastels, and etchings. Ironically, it was Venice that had been the greatest inspiration for the atmospheric effects of J.M.W. Turner's paintings.













Following Whistler's sojourn in Venice, he would return to Britain where he would rapidly regain his reputation... and even gain an international reputation as an artist... his works in demand in France and the United States. He never gave up his rebellious nature, even going so far as to publish his The Gentle Art of Making Enemies in 1890, collecting reminiscences, the artist's account of the Ruskin trial, and numerous letters to newspapers chronicling his many petty grievances against various acquaintances and friends.