Eighteenth Century French Drawings in Paris

Eighteenth Century French Drawings in ParisReview by: Guy WaltonThe Art Bulletin, Vol. 50, No. 1 (Mar., 1968), pp. 95-97Published by: College Art AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3048518 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 18:55

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

College Art Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The ArtBulletin.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 18:55:02 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=caa

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3048518?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Exhibition Review 95

EIGHTEENTH CENTURY FRENCH DRAWINGS IN PARIS

GUY WALTON

In 1967 the Cabinet des Dessins of the Louvre unveiled the result of many years of research in two related exhibitions, Le cabinet d'un grand amateur P.-J. Mariette (April-June) and Dessins franCais du XVIII sibcle: Amis et contemporains de P.-J. Mariette (April-Oc- tober). Though for some time it has been the practice of the Cabinet to mount shows related to major international art exhibitions, last summer's exhibitions were an unprecedented tour de force, because the Cabinet itself presented both the major international show and a supplementary exhibition drawn from its own superb collections. For each it produced a fine catalogue that must rank as an important scholarly publication.

Pierre-Jean Mariette (1694-1774) was certainly worthy of such an extensive commemo- ration. Though the drawing collections of some amateurs may have rivaled and even sur- passed that of Mariette, certain factors made his collection absolutely unique. He system- atically studied master drawings with an in- credible thoroughness and tried to see and/or obtain an example of the draftsmanship of every artist whom he considered to be of any importance or professional standing, both con- temporaries and old masters. Mariette became the greatest connoisseur of his era. His collection was so even in its high level of quality that his stamp is still treasured by drawing collectors.

Mariette was also one of the greatest writers on art, of any time. His logical and systematic approach to the study of the subject, akin to that of the contemporary Encyclopedists, led him to the compilation of an immense body of notes which he organized into the Abece- dario. This material, published in the nineteenth century, is still a fundamental source of information for scholars. Mariette's eter- nally questioning mind left little unverified, and the correctness of his information is extraor- dinary. No responsible scholar doubts his word without good reason. And beyond the correct facts, his remarks about the styles of the artists he discusses are invariably pro- found. In many cases his stylistic characteriza- tions have remained unsurpassed to this day.

The first of the two Mariette exhibitions, Le cabinet d'un grand amateur, a spectacular show of European master drawings in the Gal-

erie Mollien of the Louvre, fell logically into the line of recent Council of Europe exhibitions on Charlemagne and Christina of Swe- den. It dealt with the life and the collection of a great art patron. A section of the show was devoted to the collector, containing portraits, manuscripts, Mariette's books, memen- tos of his friends, etc. However, by far the greatest portion of the exhibition was devoted to the drawings owned by Mariette. After all, he was a historical personality of far less importance than either Charlemagne or Chris- tina. Two hundred seventy-nine sheets were shown. Though Mariette's collection originally numbered thousands, these carefully identi- fied items were actually able to suggest the wide range of his taste, and the remarkable quality of the works he was able to obtain.

The catalogue, providing an up-to-date life and valuable bibliographical material that suggests Mariette's activities as a writer, will obviously become a standard reference work. This fine book gave some consolation to the many interested scholars, including this writer, who missed the exhibition.

Summer travelers abroad could still see the exhibition Amis et contemporains de P.-J. Mariette, which remained on view until Octo- ber. This was a fascinating group of works which, while inferior to the large exhibition in the variety and quality of the drawings, was actually superior in demonstrating the genius of Mariette.

The exhibition was organized around two somewhat overlapping and complementary principles. It contained works by artists men- tioned in Mariette's writings and, in addition, others by artists represented in his collection. This second dimension of the show was wel- come and necessary, both because the Abece- dario is preserved in a fragmentary and un- finished form (the author died before turning his notes into a book) and because some figures who obviously interested Mariette, since he collected their drawings, were omitted from his writings.

One of the show's great strengths was the presentation of works by many artists of con- siderable interest who usually are excluded from exhibitions of eighteenth century French art in favor of the most popular masters. In this exhibition of 102 items, Frangois Boucher was represented by only three and Watteau by six sheets. However, the sculptor Edmb Bouchardon, a figure rarely encountered else- where, contributed twelve sheets, because Mar-

iette made it quite clear that he was most im- pressed by his drawings.

This shift of perspective produced a fascinating result. The visitor was treated to a cross-section of the eighteenth century French school without the usual restrictive interven- tion of traditional nineteenth and twentieth century evaluations. This barrier removed, the viewer seemed to be invited to reevaluate the material. The catalogue greatly aided this proc- ess by providing both short biographies of each of the artists represented (frequently es- sential since many of the personalities were completely unfamiliar) and, where available, carefully chosen excerpts from Mariette on the stature or potential of the artist and on his abilities as a draftsman.

The invitation to a reassessment was particularly underscored by the inclusion of sev- eral important personalities, such as Greuze, whom Mariette held in little esteem. Thus an attempt was made to present an overall view of the eighteenth century, including both Mar- iette's evaluations and those now generally in favor. The catalogue introduction by Mlle. Roseline Bacou suggests that this broad view was a primary goal of the organizers of the show.

Mlle. Bacou states quite explicitly that a principal aspect of Mariette's artistic prefer- ences-his interest in academic painters and sculptors-invites a fresh look at a sector of eighteenth century art that has largely been ig- nored by later periods. The exhibition thus seems to be the first important manifestation of the opening up of a new frontier in art historical scholarship. Studies of such little-known figures as Bouchardon, Michelange Slodtz, Subleyras, and many others are well under way. The show seems to have sought to focus the attention of the art world on an important new area of study.

If the introduction to the catalogue was an excellent guide to what new ideas inspired the exhibition, it was a most limited and unfortunate characterization of Mariette's taste and interests. It stated categorically, for example, that "Raphael, Michelange et Annibal Car- rache sont ses maitres." Yet it is the name of the proto-Baroque Correggio that appears most often when Mariette is about to praise painters of his own time in the Abecedario. With such an orientation as Mlle. Bacou's, one can- not account for Mariette's enthusiasm for Boucher's paintings, or for the elegant Man- neristic works of Parmigianino amply docu-



96 The Art Bulletin

mented by his own words and the remarkable Parmigianino and Schiavone volume from Mariette's print collection in the Metropolitan Museum. And Mariette's enthusiasm for Al- brecht Diirer is evidenced both by drawings in the larger show and by the many pages devoted to the artist in the Abecedario. He was in fact astonishingly catholic in his taste.

Mariette had one unfortunate blind spot. He could not bear art that did not contain the high aims and ideals of the grand manner. The enthusiasm of the eighteenth century for Dutch seventeenth century genre, landscape, and still life painting was not his. He was mad- dened by Greuze's treatment of high moral scenes in a genre setting. Chardin ranked in his eyes only as a revival of the low art of the brothers LeNain. However, this limitation should not be taken as Mariette's narrow en- dorsement of the great central Italian Neo- classicists as the paragons of art. He was a man of his age, who respected grace and ele- gance as much as grandeur, and he was able to appreciate originality and high artistic aims even in periods and national schools where those qualities he most enjoyed in art were in short supply. The exhibition Le cabinet d'un grand amateur supplied plentiful evidence of this.

The individual catalogue entries, containing comments on the artists from Mariette's writings, do him more justice than the introduction. Time after time, his remarks strike just the right note. His tendency was to look for the positive features of an artist first and then to criticize if necessary; yet the total effect of his remarks allows the reader to determine, for example, whether he considered the figure a genius, a superior talent, a competent master, a hack, a fraud, or a debutante with promise. With such a sensitive commentator, a visit to the exhibition became an enlightening expe- rience. For example, some of Mariette's general remarks about Charles Antoine Coypel--"Il alla chercher des modules d'attitude et d'ex- pression sur le thbitre, et il n'y trouva, mime dans les meilleurs acteurs, que des grimaces, des attitudes forc4es ... oi des sentiments de l'ame n'ont jamais aucune part .. ."--explain perfectly the delicate, rather silly pastel France Rendering Thanks to Heaven.

One was not only amused but instructed. From the mass of biography and comment in the catalogue, something of the relations be- tween the principal figures of Mariette's age emerged. Particularly interesting were histori-

cal relationships among artists that often ex- plained similar subjects and styles. Groups be- gan to appear around important figures. The Italian sanguine landscapes of the late 1750's and early 1760's by Charles Natoire (the director of the French Academy in Rome) and those of the little-known Jacques-Frangois Amand fit nicely with the more famous landscapes made in the same period and location by Fragonard and Hubert Robert. The migra- tion together to Rome in 1728 of Subleyras, de Tremollieres, Slodtz, and Dandr&-Bardon suggested another significant group. Then there were the friends and enemies of that difficult personality Bouchardon. The lines crossed, led back and forth, and from this the sense of the fabric of an era emerged.

The presentation of a new comprehensive view of the age through the medium of drawings had both its advantages and disadvan- tages. The organization of a painting and sculpture show on this scale would have been nearly impossible. Many of the personalities involved are now known only by a small number of completed works, and these are frequently not portable or obtainable. Well- documented drawings generally exist. On the other hand, the art of certain of the personalities discussed scarcely emerged at all through the drawings displayed. Nicolas Vleughels, who as director of the French Academy in Rome from 1724 to 1751 must have had an important influence on such pensioners as Bouchar- don, Natoire, Subleyras, VanLoo, Slodtz, Bou- cher, etc., was represented by only one sheet -a study of the legs of a woman, which, though an attractive work, gave little indica- tion of his artistic orientation.

As to the pleasures provided by the drawings themselves, the decision to orient the show to the presentation of secondary and tertiary personalities produced a rather low- keyed result. The careful training in drawing typical of the French school of this time produced highly competent works, and yet really thrilling sheets were infrequent and often oc- curred in unexpected quarters. There was a brilliant oil sketch by Largilliere of four mag- istrates dressed in red robes for a famous lost votive picture for the H6tel de Ville of Paris, a magnificent tiger by Franrois Desportes, and an incredibly elegant heron by Oudry. The success of these works in minor genres some- how stole the spotlight from the main theme of the show. Of the specially featured artists, only Edmb Bouchardon emerged as an un-

expectedly powerful draftsman. The female nude studies for the caryatids at the base of his famous equestrian Louis XV (formerly on the Place de la Concorde) had both the grace, the finesse of execution, and the austere grandeur that Mariette enthusiastically praised in this artist's graphic work. Subleyras was also imposing, though his ability to produce successful gigantic machines such as his famous altar for Saint Peter's in Rome was hardly conveyed by the drawings displayed.

The popularly accepted major artists remained outstanding. Watteau's figure studies were certainly a highlight of the exhibition. (It was fitting that only figures rather than full scenes should have been shown, to conform to Mariette's taste.) Boucher was well represented, and a particularly interesting early al- bum of his drawings was on view for the first time. Fragonard was less well represented with a group of his later works. One wished for a sheet from the first Roman visit to compare with Natoire's 1759 sheet and other campagna views of the 1760's.

With the emphasis on many little-known figures it is not surprising that a high percent- age of the sheets had not previously been shown publicly. However, even in familiar areas there were many novelties. The exhibition presented not less than five previously unexhibited works by Boucher's teacher Fran- gois Lemoine, the painter of the famous ceiling of the Salon d'Hercule at Versailles.

The many original qualities of the exhibition inevitably lead to contemplation of oppor- tunities missed. In the first place, there was something arbitrary about the restriction of material to French artists. Mariette's lack of chauvinism was amply demonstrated by his collection. He saw art as an international phe- nomenon and had regular correspondents such as Zanetti in Venice and Bottari in Florence to report on the contemporary Italian scene. He was in close touch with the directors of the French Academy on recent developments on the art scene in Rome. In an exhibition that laid stress on the Neoclassical side of his taste, some reference to Mariette's reaction to the development of Roman Neoclassicism was missed. It is clear from Mariette's writings that one of his favorite draftsmen was Carlo Ma- ratta. And his reception of Mengs, for example, is indicative of his insights in that area of the contemporary scene. Mariette stated that Mengs was a good portraitist, yet he strongly disputed the judgment of the contemporary



FRENCH DRAWINGS 97

critics who saw Mengs as a new Raphael. In this case, as so often, Mariette's enthusiasm for the grand manner did not interfere with his artistic judgment. His opinion remains that of virtually all writers today.

A few French artists were inexplicably excluded from the exhibition. The absence of Chardin was felt particularly. Even if that painter was not a celebrated draftsman or a

friend of Mariette (there are famous pastel self-portraits), the amateur's severe stricture of his work in the Abecedario is highly indicative of an important aspect of his point of view. The following unexpected statement by Mariette should really have been included in a catalogue that tried to convey some sense of his view of the contemporary scene, even if it reduces his stature as a critic in modem eyes:

" ... sa touche est lourde et n'est point varibe. Son pinceau n'a rien de facile. Il exprime tout de la meme maniere ... qui rende son ouvrage trop froid." And though the exclusion of the portraitist Nattier might be permissible in the context of the aims of this show, the exclusion of Vien, Pigalle, and Falconet left unfortunate gaps in the total picture.

New York University



Documents

Eighteenth Century French Drawings in Paris