|
|
London's Grossvenor Galary and New Gallery - .
Grosvenor Gallery
1877 "" Grosvenor Gallery, -, : , , , , , , Allingham.
Interior of the Grosvenor Gallery - West Gallery, published in The Illustrated London News, 5 May 1877
1877 (Sir Coutts Lindsay) . J. Comyns Carr and Charles Hallé. , , , Edward Burne-Jones and Walter Crane . , . . .
- , , .
1877 , -. . , , . . . , - , " ".
:" , ; , Grosvenor, ... ". - - .
The Grosvenor Gallery was an art gallery in London founded in 1877 by Sir Coutts Lindsay and his wife Blanche. Its first directors were J. Comyns Carr and Charles Hallé. The gallery proved crucial to the Aesthetic Movement because it provided a home for those artists whose approaches the more classical and conservative Royal Academy did not welcome, such as Edward Burne-Jones and Walter Crane. Lindsay and his wife were well-born and well-connected, and both were amateur artists. Blanche was born a Rothschild, and it was her money which made the whole enterprise possible. The Grosvenor displayed work by artists from outside the British mainstream, including Edward Burne-Jones, Walter Crane and other members of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood. In 1877 John Ruskin visited the gallery to see work by Burne-Jones. An exhibition of paintings by James McNeill Whistler was also on display. Ruskin's savage review of Whistler's work led to a famous libel case, brought by the artist against the critic. Whistler won a farthing in damages. The case made the gallery famous as the home of the Aesthetic movement. Founded as an alternative exhibition space to the Royal Academy, the Bond street venue was istantly perceived as a haven foe avant-garde artists, particularly those associated with the notion of art for art's sake.Lindsay stated:"There are several men in London whose ideas and method of embodying them are strange to us; but as I do not think strangeness, ore even eccentricity of method, sufficient excuse for ignoring the woks of men otherwise notable, I have built the Grosvenor Gallery that their pictures... may be fairly and honestly judged".An amateur artist in mural and ceramic design, Lindsay was a particular supporter of decorative painting.
.
1877
- , , .
, .
Moor contributed The end of story, Sapphires and Marigolds to the inagural ehxibition of the Grosvenor Gallery.
The End of Stoty, Sapphires, Marigolds.
Affronted byThe Falling Rocket, John Ruskin accused Whistler of “flinging a pot of paint in the public's face” in the Fors Clavigera. As a leading art critic of theVictorian era, Ruskin’s harsh critique of The Falling Rocket caused an uproar among owners of other Whistler works. Rapidly, it became shameful to have a Whistler piece, pushing the artist into greater financial difficulties. With his pride, finances, and the significance of his Nocturne at stake, Whistler sued Ruskin for libel in defence. In court, he asked the jury to not view it as a traditional painting, but instead as an artistic arrangement.[5] In his explanation, he insisted that the painting was a representation of the fireworks from the Cremorne Gardens. During the trial, Sir John Holker asked, “Not a view of the Cremorne?” to which Whistler was quoted as saying, “If it were a view of Cremorne, it would certainly bring about nothing but disappointment on the part of the beholders.”[6] However, his case was not helped when The Falling Rocket was accidentally presented to trial upside down.[7] His explanation of the composition proved fruitless before the judge. The Ruskin vs. Whistler Trial, which took place on November 25 and 26, 1878, was disastrous for Whistler. While he did not lose, he only won a farthing.[8] After all the court costs, he had no choice but to declare bankruptcy. Whistler was forced to pawn, sell, and mortgage everything he could get his hands on.[9] Whistler included a transcript of the case in his 1890 book The Gentle Art of Making Enemies.
The Falling Rocket , " ". . , . . , .
1878
- Laus Veneris ( ) Le Chant d' Amour.
In 1878 Moor's Birds and Burne-Jone's Laus Veneris were hanging in close proximity at the Gallery.
BIRDS
LAUS VENERIS
1879
TOPAZ
1880
Jasmine
1882
The Tree of Forgiveness, by Burne-Jones
According to Burne-Jones' own list of works, he worked on 'The Tree of Foregiveness' in 1881 and completed it in 1882. The face of Phyllis was most probably modelled on Maria Zambaco, a member of the Ionides family, with whom Burne-Jones had an affair in the late 1860s. He exhibited it at the Grosvenor Gallery in that year where it received mixed reviews. Some critics found the approach to the figures strange, The Times for example noted that: ‘The picture is a strange one, its effect repellent in the extreme…the anatomy is not only shown, but insisted on – flung violently in the spectator’s face, so that for some time nothing can be seen but muscles of every description, all of them twisting and straining...’.In contrast all the critics agreed that the details of the painting such as the almond blossom and flowers, were painted with great accuracy and appreciation of colour. Henry James, the American writer, wrote in support of the picture pointing out that the subject was difficult and impossible to make natural. The artist had to content himself with making the work look ‘lovely’. The art dealers Thomas Agnew & Sons purchased the painting from the Grosvenor Gallery exhibition and sold it to the Liverpool businessman William Imrie for £2,100 in December 1882.
Cupid's Hunting Fields
| Sir Edward Coley Burne-Jones | |
|
|
1884
1890 The third Grosvenor pastel exhibition.
A bathing place
Marie Spartali Stillman exhibited at the Dudley Gallery, then at the Grosvenor Gallery and its successor, the New Gallery
1890- , New Gallery, , .
"":
1 -
2 -
...
7 -
8 -
9 -
10 - MORRIS, Marshall, Falkner & Co
11 -
...
20 - King René's Honeymoon Cabinet
21 - ()
22 - , ,
