Category

19th century

Turner Painting to be Sold!

J. M. W. Turner, Modern Rome – Campo Vaccino, 1839
This July, Turner’s painting Modern Rome – Campo Vaccino (1839, shown above) will appear on auction at Sotheby’s in London.  This auction news has attracted quite a bit of attention as of late – and for good reason.  First of all, this painting is absolutely stunning (don’t you agree?).  Second, this is the last painting of Rome that Turner ever made.  Turner traveled to Italy multiple times in his life, and even exhibited a small group of his work in Rome. Therefore, this last painting of Rome is historically important in regards to Turner’s career.  And finally, this upcoming auction is significant because this painting has only been on the market one other time, back in 1878.  Sotheby’s projects that the work to reach somewhere between $18 million and $27 million in the upcoming auction. 
I sure wish I had that kind of cash lying around.  I can only hope that this work will be purchased by a museum (or bought by a collector who permanently lends the painting to a museum).  It is such a beautiful painting and so representative of Turner’s interests in light and color – it doesn’t seem right for the canvas to end up in a private collection.  I think lots of people should have the chance to enjoy this painting.
For more links and commentary on the auction, see here (Art History Today), here (The History Blog), and here (New York Times article).
P.S.  I discovered the Art History Today blog this past week.  It’s really interesting and I highly recommend it.
— 5 Comments

Van Gogh News!

What immediately comes to your mind when you think of paintings by Van Gogh? Sunflowers? Starry nights? Creepy self portraits with bandages that cover up a mutilated ear? Well, my friends, it looks like you can add new subject matter to Van Gogh’s oeuvre: a windmill and tricoleur flag. This painting on the right, Le Blute-Fin Mill (1886) was recently authenticated as a Van Gogh painting. Honestly, I never would have considered this to be by Van Gogh, mostly because of the human figures: not only are the uncharacteristically large, but there are a lot more bodies than you normally see in Van Gogh’s work. But I really like the use of color, and that does remind me of Van Gogh. I especially like the red highlights of the woman’s dress in the foreground. What do you think? Do you like this painting?

This authentication is pretty exciting – Le Blute-Fin Mill is the first Van Gogh to be authenticated since 1995. However, admittedly, the painting has long been disputed as by Van Gogh – an eccentric art collector bought the painting and always claimed it to be by the master, but no one took the collector seriously. You can read more about the story and authentication here.

In other Van Gogh news, the famous The Night Cafe (1888, shown left) is involved in a dispute regarding ownership. This painting has hung for almost fifty years in the Yale University Art Gallery, but now Pierre Konowaloff, the great-grandson of the previous owner, is trying to claim the painting back. It seems like a pretty sticky situation: Konowaloff’s great-grandfather bought the painting in 1908, but it was subsequently nationalized and sold by the Soviet government during the Russian Revolution. Therefore, Konowaloff believes that the painting classifies as “stolen” and feels justified in claiming it back.

I personally don’t think that Konowaloff has a very good chance of getting The Night Cafe back, but what do other people think?

— 6 Comments

Equality Leading the People

Delacroix, Liberty Leading the People, 1831

Last night I was reading a little bit of Théophile Thoré’s review of the 1848 Salon exhibition. The year 1848 was a very important year in European history. It was the year that Marx’s Communist Manifesto was published, and the year that socialist revolutions broke out all over Europe. Thoré was commenting on the contemporary political sentiment and fervor, and implied that similar political fervor is found in Liberty Leading the People (a painting by Delacroix that was made earlier, around the time of the national French revolution in 1830). Thoré wrote, “It is said that [Delacroix] has just begun an Equality Leading the People, for our recent revolution is the true sister of that national one to which he paid homage eighteen years ago. . . . One can only hope that Delacroix makes haste, and that both paintings will soon be on display, hanging side by side.”1

From what I can tell, Delacroix never made Equality Leading the People, and Thoré may have been discussing only hearsay. Nonetheless, this got me thinking. What type of figure would Delacroix have picked to represent Equality? Given the context of the 1848 socialist revolutions, I’m guessing that he would have picked some type of proletarian (member of the working class).

I think that Equality Leading the People would have contained an interesting idea that is still relevant with current issues. What if Equality Leading the People was being painted today? What figure would you pick to represent Equality? My first thought was Martin Luther King, Jr. or Rosa Parks. What person (or generalized type of figure) would you choose?

1 Théophile Thoré, “Salon of 1848” in Art in Theory: 1815-1900, edited by Charles Harrison, Paul Wood and Jason Gaiger, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, Ltd., 1998), 181. (Is available online here).

— 4 Comments

Loggia dei Lanzi and Subjugation

Several years ago, I sat in the Loggia dei Lanzi (Florence) and sketched some details of the statues found there. If I had thought hard about it, I might have noticed that several of the sculptures there share an interesting commonality. See if you can find the common theme:

Giambologna, Rape of a Sabine, 1581-83

Cellini, Perseus, 1545-54
(I recently wrote a post about Perseus here.)

Pio Fedi, Rape of Polyxana, 1866

Do you notice anything? All of these sculptures have subject matter which emphasizes the subjugation of women or “man’s longed-for control over woman.”1 I’ve been reading an article this week by feminist Yael Even who reveals this common theme in the loggia space. It’s quite fascinating. The most interesting thing to me, though, is that another sculpture used to be located here. Donatello’s Judith and Holofernes (1456-57, shown right) was the first sculpture placed in the Piazza della Signoria (where the Loggia dei Lanzi is located). However, over time, Donatello’s sculpture was shuffled around different sections of the loggia and elsewhere. In 1980, the sculpture was eventually moved (concealed?) to the inside of the Palazzo Vecchio. Yael Even points out that the difficulty with placing this sculpture has to do with the subject matter – instead of emphasizing the subjugation of women, Donatello’s sculpture depicts a woman killing a man.1

When looking at all the depictions of female subjugation in the loggia, it’s no wonder that this sculpture sat uneasily (literally!) with the Florentines. After all, wouldn’t it make a (male) viewer uncomfortable to know that women can retaliate?

I really recommend that you read Even’s article.

1 Yael Even, “The Loggia dei Lanzi: A Showcase of Female Subjugation,” in Woman’s Art Journal 12, no. 1 (1991): 10.

2 Ibid.

— 7 Comments

Banksy + Degas = Simon Cowell

If someone asked me to guess American Idol judge Simon Cowell’s taste in art, I probably would have named something sensible, marketable, and creative – maybe some work by an abstract expressionist painter like Morris Louis. But my guess would have been way off.

Cowell, who reportedly is a secret art collector, is known to be a fan of the Impressionist painter Degas and the graffiti artist Banksy (yikes – what a combination!). I just read here that for Christmas this year, Cowell received a commissioned work by Banksy – and the painting is a remake of Degas’ The Rehearsal of the Ballet Onstage (c. 1874, shown above). Apparently, in this Bansky commission, Cowell has been painted in the scene as the ballet master.
Gulp. I like Degas, but I really question how this Banksy commission turned out. It sounds rather horrific.

So what kind of critique did Cowell give his Christmas present? According to sources, the judge looked at the painting and immediately called it “hilarious.” What a news flash – I guess Simon Cowell has a sense of humor! And in true Cowell fashion, this is an expensive sense of humor: this “hilarious” painting is estimated to cost $800,000. That’s a lot of money for a joke.

— 2 Comments

Email Subscription


Archives

About

This blog focuses on making Western art history accessible and interesting to all types of audiences: art historians, students, and anyone else who is curious about art. Alberti’s Window is maintained by Monica Bowen, an art historian and professor.