Raphael goes to Moscow
September 19 2016
Eight paintings by Raphael from Italian museums, including the artist's self-portrait, have gone on display in Moscow's Pushkin museum. “Raphael. Image Poetry: Works from the Uffizi and Other Italian Museums” runs until December 11th. More here on Artinfo, and here (in Russian) on the Pushkin site. Quite a coup for the Pushkin museum.
Cornelius Johnson exhibition
July 13 2016
Picture: Weiss Gallery
I've been meaning to mention an excellent exhibition on the work of Cornelius Johnson, Charles I's sometime court artist, at the Weiss Gallery in London. The show is on till 15th July, and there is a good catalogue published too - the front cover shows a newly identified self-portrait (above).
Rembrandt pair at the Rijksmuseum
July 13 2016
The Rijksmuseum has made a nice video about their new Rembrandt acquisition (made jointly with the Louvre) of the portraits of Marten and Oopjen Coppit. Meanwhile, in the New York Times, their former owner Eric de Rothschild has spoken of the process of selling them.
Selfies galore in Edinburgh
July 13 2016
Picture: Scottish National Portrait Gallery
A new self-portrait exhibition opens this week at the Scottish National Portrait Gallery, including examples by Rembrandt and the Scottish artist John Byrne (above), of whom I'm a great fan. More here.
Leighton's 'Flaming June' returns to London
June 20 2016
Picture: Guardian/Museo de Arte de Ponce
In The Guardian, Maev Kennedy reports that Lord Leighton's masterpiece, Flaming June, is to return on loan to the studio where it was painted in London (now the Leighton House Museum). She also recounts the picture's extraordinary history after Leighton's death in 1896:
In the early 20th century, when Victorian art was already falling out of fashion, Samuel Courtauld, the millionaire collector and founder of the Courtauld Institute, called it “the most wonderful painting in existence”.
It was on loan to the Ashmolean in Oxford in the early 1900s, but vanished for decades before being rediscovered in the early 1960s, boxed in over a chimney in a house in Battersea. The composer Andrew Lloyd Webber, whose own collecting helped revive serious interest in the art of the period, never forgave his grandmother for refusing to lend him £50 to buy it when he saw it soon afterwards in a shop on the Kings Road. “I will not have Victorian junk in my flat,” she told him.
The picture was bought by the Museo de Arte de Ponce in Puerto Rico in 1963.
Unknown Lucian Freud self-portrait
June 16 2016
Picture: Lucian Freud Archive
A previously unknown self-portrait by Lucian Freud (archive) has gone on display at the National Portrait Gallery in London. A new exhibition will explore the NPG's recently acquired Freud archive, which features a range of letters and sketches. More here at the NPG's website.
Flemish drawings at the Scottish National Gallery
June 2 2016
Picture: NGS, Jacob Jordaens, 'Head of an Old Woman'
It's a bumper time for lovers of Flemish drawing at the moment - as I mentioned earlier, there's a show at the V&A on until November, and opening soon here in Edinburgh is 'Rubens & Company - Flemish drawings from the Scottish National Gallery'. Says the Gallery's website:
The Scottish National Gallery has a fine collection of Flemish paintings, including famous works by Peter Paul Rubens and Anthony van Dyck. The Print Room houses some 35,000 works on paper which, due to their fragility and sensitivity to light, can only be displayed for short periods of time and are therefore little-known.*
Rubens & Company highlights an outstanding selection of the Gallery’s Flemish drawings of the seventeenth century. Masterpieces by Rubens, the towering figure of the Flemish Baroque, are shown alongside famous works by Jordaens and Van Dyck and accompanied by works by less prominent artists such as Jan Cossiers, Abraham van Diepenbeeck and Cornelis Schut, which have rarely, in some cases never, been displayed before. Many of them are preparatory drawings or studies which offer a fascinating insight into the function of drawings as well as studio practice. Rubens & Company celebrates these artists and invites our visitors to discover and enjoy their skill in the art of drawing.
The exhibition is accompanied by a beautifully illustrated catalogue, providing a lively panorama of Flemish draughtsmanship in the seventeenth century, its subjects and techniques.
The show opens 18th June, until 28th August. Come to Edinburgh!
*Note to the Scottish National Gallery - none of your drawings by Rubens and Van Dyck are illustrated on your website.
Antoon arrives in Birmingham
May 19 2016
Picture: Birmingham Museums
The National Portrait Gallery's Van Dyck self-portrait has arrived in Birmingham for the latest leg of its national tour. It's been good to see Birmingham Museums make such a big deal of the arrival on social media, with pictures like the above. I think people really like this sort of behind-the-scenes information. It might even help make museums seem less formal and intimidating to those who find them so.
Some years ago I had the privilege of opening a crate similar to the above when the self-portrait was delivered from Sotheby's to the Philip Mould gallery in London, where I used to work.
The exhibition around the Van Dyck loan is called 'Turning to see', and is curated by the artist John Stezaker. It runs until 4th September, when, according to my Van Dyck tour t-shirt, the picture heads back to London.
Gang jailed for disrupting art exhibitions
May 19 2016
Video: You Tube / Trollstation
Four Youtubers from South London have been jailed for between 16 and 20 weeks for taking part in a 'hoax' raid at Tate Britain and the National Portrait Gallery. The 'internet pranksters' as the Evening Standard described them, walked into two exhibitions at the galleries holding fake paintings and wearing tights over their heads. They then set off a portable alarm and rushed around shouting 'I've got the painting'. Visitors in the galleries can be seen in the video leaving in a sudden rush, or as the Standard says 'running away in panic'. Arrests were made shortly afterwards.
The four men pleaded guilty to causing 'fear and provocation of violence'. Commenting on the case, Detective Constable Anthony Parker, from the Met's Public Order Crime Team, said:
The actions of these five men was outrageous.
To go into busy public places wearing masks shouting and screaming at a time of heightened awareness of the terrorism threat facing the UK is deplorable.
The group terrified those visiting the galleries. It is only by pure chance that no one was injured or suffered serious health issues as they fled in what the judge described as a "stampede".
All five men now have a number of weeks in jail to consider just how unfunny their stunts actually were.
Is that why these men are now in jail, because their stunt wasn't funny enough? I'm no fan of the sort of silliness seen in the film above, but I'm also instinctively uneasy about both the jail sentence and the criminal conviction here. It's pretty obvious from the footage that it wasn't a real art theft. You can see one of the stunts from another angle here.
If these men had been environmentalists protesting against BP's sponsorship of the arts, or well-spoken art students from Central St Martin's making, say, a piece of live art 'exploring the divergent atmospheres of safety and insecurity in a gallery setting', I suspect they'd have been treated very differently.
What do you think?
Update - a reader writes:
It’s over the top to give them a custodial sentence…this is why fines and community service exist. However they should have not set off the alarm, that was irresponsible. Even in times of heightened terrorism people still have a sense of humour and as you correctly pointed out if it was students performing a bit of this or that the outcome would have been different I suspect. They should have claimed they were making a point about the EU Remain/Leave referendum and they would have got away with it!
Guffwatch - Turner prize edition.
May 13 2016
The Turner Prize shortlist has been unveiled. It's the usual yawn inducing stuff, the most notable of which is a sculpture of a man pulling his bottom apart (above).
But hurrah for Will Gompertz, the BBC's arts editor, for taking aim at the curatorial artspeak that accompanies the Turner Prize announcement:
Where do they go to learn to produce these texts laden with pseudo-academic speak? Does their dense, mangled prose reflect a lack of confidence in the artists whose status and work - the curators' might think - needs to be elevated by arcane, pompous language?
Or, perhaps, it is insecurity about their own place in the "snobby" artworld (as Laurie Anderson described it to me) that leads them to write such nonsense?
To be clear: The purpose of the Turner Prize is to provoke a conversation about contemporary art among the public. The stated role of the Tate is to "increase knowledge, understanding and appreciation of art".
Both objectives are undermined and poorly served by the incomprehensible "artspeak" used by the institution's curators. It is not clever and it is very off-putting.
Here, by way of example, is an explanation of Helen Marten's work: "Whilst their complex references might not be made immediately explicit to the viewer there is something alchemic in the way the materials collide, and ideas are often communicated through the obstinate wilfulness of the finished form.
"Marten's objects read almost as hieroglyphics, a visual system of communication that is expressive yet rooted in logic, which makes rational the combination of a pickle with an electrical circuit, or a pillar drill alongside a bowl of fish skins."
You get the point, I won't go on - and nor should the curators who wrote the texts, until they've been on a plain-speaking course or locked in a room with a collection of books by masters of writing about art such as Ruskin, Gombrich, Hughes and - for good measure - Bridget Riley.
AHN is not alone!
The 'Isleworth Mona Lisa' (ctd.)
May 11 2016
In the Financial Times, Georgina Adam probes further into the mysterious world of those non-Leonardo exhibitions that keep popping up in places like China. The latest is the outing for the 'Isleworthless Mona Lisa' in a shopping complex in Shanghai:
This is the unlikely venue for the second outing for Leonardo da Vinci’s “Earlier Mona Lisa”, an exhibition showcasing a portrait also called the “Isleworth Mona Lisa” and designed to “prove” that Leonardo really painted it. It was first shown in Singapore last year.
The multimedia presentation, held in a low-ceilinged former hotel, features just one painting — the “Mona Lisa” — which its owners maintain was painted by Leonardo 10 years before the Louvre version. Leading up to it are interactive computer displays and posters all designed to hammer home its authenticity, including the statement: “Twenty-eight out of 29 experts believe this is either possibly or certainly a painting created by da Vinci.”
Others beg to differ, among them the renowned Leonardo scholar Martin Kemp. “Everything points to the Isleworth painting being a copy,” he has written. “There are families of copies of the Mona Lisa. This family … is not the best.”
The inauguration of the Shanghai exhibition was accompanied by a great deal of hoop-la. The portrait arrived last month “under maximum security protection” in a 500kg, bulletproof case, say the promoters. A Chinese TV star and former Miss Asia, Kristy Yang, was shipped in to say how much she liked the work, which was presented to the media at a “select invitation-only ‘Box Opening Ceremony’”.
New evidence, say the organisers, confirmed that the work is “without a shadow of doubt” by Leonardo himself and so makes a “groundbreaking change to global Art History”.
So what is it doing in a shopping district in Shanghai?
And this last question tells you all you need to know about the merits of this painting.
Dutch and Flemish drawings at the V&A
May 11 2016
Picture: V&A, Sir Anthony Van Dyck, 'Christ Crowned with Thorns'
Here's a good exhibition coming soon at the V&A: 'Master Strokes: Dutch and Flemish Drawings from the Golden Age'. The show opens on 14th May and runs till 13th November. Says the V&A press release:
This summer the V&A will for the first time display some of the most important works from the Museum’s outstanding collection of Dutch and Flemish drawings: one of the principle holdings in Britain. Master Strokes: Dutch and Flemish Drawings from the Golden Age will present over 70 works from the 16th to the 19th century, including masterpieces by Peter Paul Rubens, Sir Anthony van Dyck and Rembrandt van Rijn, and a recently re-attributed drawing by Carel Fabritius. These will be supported by rich collections of works from many lesser-known Golden Age artists who were hugely relevant in their day yet are no longer considered household names, such as Hans Bol and Jacob Jordaens. Designs for architecture and the applied arts will also be on display, demonstrating the diversity and enduring artistic and technical excellence of Netherlandish artists of the 17th century – a period of extraordinary prosperity and artistic output.
But what's this 'Jordaens no longer considered a household name'? We'll have to see what we can do about that...
Bosch at the Prado
May 3 2016
The Bosch exhibition at the Nord Brabaants Museum runs till 8th May, and has been an extraordinary success. The show (mostly) then moves to the Prado, where it opens on 31st May. That's an impressive turnaround. The video above looks forward to the Prado's opening.
'Giorgione' at the RA (ctd.)
April 26 2016
Picture: San Diego Museum of Art
I greatly enjoyed the Royal Academy's new exhibition, 'In the Age of Giorgione'. The catalogue is excellent, and is largely free from modern art history speak. Instead, we get for each picture an overview of what evidence there is for an attribution, and how opinions have changed over the centuries. All of which is useful for an exhibition centred around Giorgione, for whom we have only a handful of securely attributed pictures. (One of these is an exquisite portrait of a man from San Diego Museum of Art, above). It's a shame that in the exhibition itself, the thorny question of who painted what is almost completely unaddressed in the wall text and labels, so that the casual visitor comes away thinking pictures are far more certainly attributed than is really the case. In many cases, wall labels simply state artist and title.
There's a fascinating review of the exhibition in the London Review of Books by the art historian Charles Hope, which is well worth reading. Hope (and I hope he doesn't mind me saying this) is known amongst some parts of the art trade as 'Charles Nope', such is his (alleged) tendency to doubt attributions. I think it's fair to say that in general he prefers to look for certainty of attribution in documentary sources, and in the uncertain world of Giorgione attributions this approach is essential. I think also that in the Giorgione exhibition his scepticism over many of the attributions is well founded. He writes:
Although the term connoisseurship normally carries associations with discernment and a certain rigour in aesthetic judgment, when applied to the study of Giorgione these qualities have been and remain conspicuously lacking. Optimistic guesswork would better describe the process.
Hope's central charge against the world of Giorgione scholarship - that many Giorgione attributions are only arrived at because we can't think of an alternative name:
None of the other six pictures in the exhibition accepted as by Giorgione looks like his secure works, and the only significant reason for attributing them to him is that no one can agree on an alternative candidate. As almost all the experts are convinced, on the basis of no evidence at all, that, apart from Titian and Sebastiano (who soon left for Rome), there were no other painters of real talent working in this general idiom in North Italy in the years around 1510, it is not surprising that Giorgione and the young Titian are now each commonly credited with unrealistically vast numbers of paintings in a remarkable variety of styles.
I am far from an expert in early Italian Renaissance art, but I do agree with Hope about the wide variety of works we now call early Titian. Although we are told in the literature that Titian, when young, was a talented mimic of other artistic styles, I still found it hard to entirely believe everything presented to us in the RA show as early Titian. And I agree particularly with this point of Hope's:
In the case of Titian this is well illustrated by a couple of large pictures on the two end walls of the third room. One, Jacopo Presented to St Peter, is said to be c.1508-11, the other, Christ and the Woman Taken in Adultery [below], c.1511, yet in style and technique they look utterly different. The attribution of the second of them is justified by a comparison with some frescoes in Padua that Titian painted in 1511, with which it does have something in common – but many artists could have seen those frescoes. In the previous room there is a painting from the Uffizi said to be by Giorgione, The Trial of Moses, which was first attributed to him in 1795, when nothing was known of his style, and which resembles none of his secure pictures. However, the figures are very similar, and in one case virtually identical, to those in another set of frescoes in Padua dating from after Giorgione’s death. One would have thought that, by the logic used for the Titian attribution, the Uffizi picture ought to be by the painter of the frescoes it resembles. But this possibility is seldom even discussed.
As I've remarked before on AHN, there has been an art historical tendency over the last century or so to take pictures away from Giorgione's oeuvre and give them to early Titian. For what it's worth, the Christ and the Woman Taken in Adultery was the one picture not attributed to Giorgione in the exhibition that I came away wondering if it might indeed be by him. It is, as another art historian said to me, too poetic and lyrically drawn to be early Titian, and sculptural enough to be by Giorgione. These are subjective notions I know, but I also thought the handling was different from early Titian, and close to those few examples of Giorgione that we can confident of. (Another consideration in all these questions, of course, is that of condition, and it's clear from the literature that not enough consideration has been given to condition issues when assessing attributions - often, a 'badly drawn hand' can just be a knackered one).
And just to confuse matters even further, I thought that the 'Giustiniani Portrait' of a young man (above), which (regular readers will remember) was to be made the subject of a debate as whether it was by Titian or Giorgione, was more likely to be by Titian, even though it is labelled in the exhibition without caveat as being by Giorgione (and despite one of the show's curators, Per Rumberg, also believing it to be by Titian).
Anyway, it's all good attributional fun, and the RA is to be applauded, in these connoisseurship-phobic days, in putting the exhibition on.
Update - a reader writes:
[...] you gave a very judicious response to Charles Hope's LRB piece on the RA's Giorgione show. Charles [...] is a formidable archival and analytical art historian. There is no one who knows more about the documents relating to Titian. And he deserves to be one of your heroes of art history, for saving the Warburg Institute and Library from the misguided machinations of the University of London a few years ago. He wrote a brilliant account of that whole sorry saga, in the LRB about two years ago.
This is quite true - saving the Warburg was a heroic act, and so Charles Hope is formally declared an art history hero.
"Georges de La Tour" at the Prado
March 12 2016
There's a new exhibition on at the Prado on the French 17th Century artist Georges de La Tour, of whom I've always been a fan. The show is on until 12th June this year. More here.
"Van Dyck" at the Frick (ctd.)
March 12 2016
The curators of the Frick's wondrous new Van Dyck exhibition, Adam Eaker (above left) and Stijn Alsteens (right, who here looks as if he could well be in a Van Dyck) can be heard discussing their new show in some depth in this interview on New York's WNYC radion station.
Test your connoisseurship
March 6 2016
Poor old Giorgione, his oeuvre steadily whittled away by art historians as they decide much of it is early Titian, to the extent that his agreed output is now so limited we must wonder how he was ever so famous in his day. Now, in the Royal Academy's news exhibition on Giorgione, visitors will be asked to decide who painted the above picture, Portrait of a Young Man; Titian or Giorgione?
This story in The Guardian covers the contrasting views between Prof. Peter Humfrey, who argues for Giorgione, and Prof. Paul Joannides, who plumps for Titian.
Update - here is Alistair Sooke's review in The Telegraph.
Paxman on Delacroix
March 6 2016
Video: Art Fund UK
Here's Jeremy Paxman's take on the National Gallery's new Delacroix show.
"Van Dyck" at the Frick
March 6 2016
Video: The Frick Collection
I greatly enjoyed the new Van Dyck exhibition athe Frick Collection in New York, 'Van Dyck, the Anatomy of Portraiture'. I will write in more depth about the show and the exhibits, but in the meantime, here is my review in The Financial Times.
The show is open now, till 5th June. There is a superb catalogue available here.