The Kaufman Collection
One of the most significant additions to the National
Gallery (really to any museum) was the acquisition of the Kaufman collection
and the decision to put it on permanent display on the ground floor. Spread out over three rooms and
spanning the 18th century through the early 19th, the
collection will undoubtedly expose many visitors to American arts by virtue of
its central location and the high quality of the examples. Like most collections formed in the
twentieth century (and even those today) the collection is heaviest on the
Northeast: Boston, Newport, and Philadelphia dominate the Queen Anne and
Chippendale holdings while New York and Baltimore emerge in the Federal
period. A notable exception to
this general trend is the exquisite Virginia Tea Table and a federal period
Clothes Press from Charleston, and its always heartening to see more attention
being paid to Southern furniture, the collection of which has long been
neglected by our Nationally known museums.
Perhaps the nicest part of the exhibition is that it rewards
close looking—there are details that emerge from furniture when it is
considered, re-engaged, and patiently examined. For example, the spectacular japanned high chest from Boston
with gilt finials and shell is at first overwhelming—it’s a rare example of
japanning and gilding in the period and an exceptionally graceful form. It took a second visit back to the
piece for me to notice the hand tooled designs on the brasses and the evidence
of saw or file marks still present.
A number of the early Boston pieces on display shared similar working,
but each had a slightly different design.
On the japanned chest (I think that's what the photo is from, it might be the japanned William and Mary dressing table too), you really get a sense of each individual strike
of the tool, the shape of the instrument used to create it, and the varying
force behind each impact. It seems
to me that the brasses, more so than an inventory taken upon death, yields
specific clues about the workbench and the tools that workmen used. Just on this brass alone, you see a
small circle used in the background, a middle sized circular tool used and a
larger circle surrounding that. A
straight-edged tool (likely the width of the lines in the central gridded
square) formed the border and straight lines of the piece, and a larger circle
still must have been used for the larger, open curves. The changing thickness of the curves
seems to indicate that the maker used a fully circular tool to make these arcs,
but struck the tool at an angle so that only a half circle appeared in the
brass. Carefully using a
vocabulary of just five shapes, the artist creates a variety of forms and
texture. Although the well-lit
gallery makes close looking like this rewarding, I couldn’t help but think
about how theses details in the chest would have shimmered differently in the
flickering light of candles.
Some other details I noticed were the extent of separation
between the ball and claw on this piece of Newport Furniture.
My students were easy to spot throughout the day as they
were usually on or near the floor, trying to better see the details of
construction and carving like they are here with a Philadelphia Table.
Another item of note is a late classical Philadelphia table
whose inlaid stone top was imported from Italy. (As an aside, I have a new phone, hence the preponderance of panoramic shots)
The base and frame were made by Anthony Quervelle but there’s
another signature on the top that seems significant “N. Fish [Fash?].” A little research (perhaps it has
already been done?) might shed some additional light on the top including where
it was made and what sort of operation this was. Were these custom ordered? Pre-designed?
From furniture we moved to paintings, and as always the
National Gallery does not disappoint.
From Stuart’s Skater to Copley’s Watson and the Shark, to still life,
portrait, and what I have always found to be Bellow’s best painting (the Last
tenement) there is always more to see.
I was kind of delighted that one of the paintings I really like seemed
to show its age—Winthrop Chandler’s Mrs. Samuel Chandler—because for the first
time I noticed that there’s a painting underneath this painting.
Evident in raking light and close
examination (somewhat close, the guards remain unamused by really close
looking) there is evidence of a different dress, a different chair height, what
appears to be a bouquet or ball of yarn on the table with trailing ribbons and
numerous other changes. This is
covered briefly in the National Gallery’s American Naïve Paintings catalog but
I wondered if this was even the same sitter?
Was it a correction requested by the sitter at the time she
saw the painting, or a later addition like the Elizabeth Freake’s dress? I think a number of us came out of the
visit with new questions, and this perhaps is the best thing a museum can do: foster
new inquiry.
No comments:
Post a Comment