TRAVELS OF THE WEST WIND

The West Wind

TRAVELS OF THE WEST WIND

by Joan K. Yanni

The movement of Thomas Ridgeway Gould’s The West Wind to the 19^th-century galleries after decades in the tour entrance brings a sense of rediscovery to the piece. A new, bright blue wall sets off its white classical elegance and its flowing skirt. It seems to beckons us to come and look closely.

The West Wind personifies manifest destiny, the westward settling of new America. Stars around the waist indicate the patriotic theme of the piece. Though the sculpture is heavy marble, it seems to float lightly over its pedestal. The figure is on tiptoe, the wind blowing against it and outlining the contours of the body. The right hand holds the skirt, while the left curves over the bust toward the right shoulder. The head of the figure looks over the left shoulder; the wind blows the hair away from the face, showing a lovely, serene profile.

It is interesting to notice the grey veins in the marble (marble is not pure white) and to see that in some places the marble is carved so deeply that it is almost transparent. What is probably a pile of leaves and earth descends from the back of the skirt and attaches it to the marble base. It seems to be a counterweight to the body of the figure, all of which is at the front of the piece.

The West Wind was created by the American sculptor Thomas Ridgeway Gould and became his most celebrated work. Gould, born in Boston in 1818, started a career as a dry-goods merchant, carving sculptures as a hobby. When his business collapsed during the Civil War, he decided to try sculpture as a profession.

As most sculptors of the day, Gould traveled to Italy where he could study the Old Masters. Here, too, he could find plenty of Carrara marble--Michelangelo’s marble--and carvers. (At this time it was the custom for the sculptor to make clay models of his creations and have hired craftsmen copy it.) Gould went to Italy in 1869 and lived in Florence the rest of his life, returning to the US only twice, once briefly in 1878 and again in 1881, the year he died.

The West Wind was created in 1870 and bought by Hon. Demas Barnes of Brooklyn. The work was so popular that seven replicas were produced in two sizes. Daniel W. Powers of Rochester bought a duplicate, the same size as the first. Our figure is dated 1876. One of these two, it is not clear which was shown at the 1876 Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia-- six-month celebration of America’s founding. The confusion comes because the Barnes statue was listed in the catalogue of the exhibition as the one on display.  But another source lists the version on view as having been lent by “its owner, Mr. Powers, of Rochester, NY.” Whichever was in Philadelphia, the Barnes version is now in the St. Louis Mercantile Library and the Powers version traveled to Rochester for display in the Powers Gallery.

Powers was a prosperous Rochester banker who had been born  in Batavia in 1818, the same year as Gould. Though he came to Rochester to work in a hardware store,  by the age of 31 he had established a successful brokerage and banking business.

He built the Powers building in 1870, a handsome many-storied fire-proof structure at Main and State Street.  Five years later, after a trip to Europe during which he bought many Old Master copies (which was customary at this time), as well as some new works and commissioned The West Wind, he opened his famous art gallery.  As he bought  art, the gallery grew from one room until it eventually occupied three floors. It was open to the public seven days a week and two evenings for the admission price of twenty-five cents.

But,back to Gould.  The sculptor had connections in Rochester before his West Wind arrived here.  He was the uncle of Marion Stratton Gould, who had died at the age of thirteen and whose mother, Mrs. Samuel Gould, created an endowment in her memory. The first purchase through the fund was El Greco’s The Apparition of the Virgin to St. Hyacinth.  Some subsequent purchases made possible by the fund were Mortimer Smith’s Home Late, Reginald Marsh’s People’s Follies, Marsden Hartley’s Waterfall, Morse Pond, Ralston Crawford’sWhitestone Bridge and Arthur Dove’s Cars in a Sleet Storm.  Mrs. Gould also bequeathed her brother-in-law’s marble relief The Ghost in Hamlet to the Gallery. Many of MAG’s most important works are still acquired through this fund.

It had been Power’s intent to donate his gallery to the city after his death, but when the city denied his request for tax relief and even tried to levy a tax on the gallery, Powers changed his will and left his fortune to his wife and children, with nothing to the city or to maintain the gallery. After this death in 1898, an auction of the best works from the gallery was held in New York City. The West Wind was not in the sale. Some of the largest paintings and sculptures had been left behind and subsequently moved from the gallery to other parts of the building to make room for office space.

In 1952 Memorial Art Gallery curator Isabel Herdle was putting together a show celebrating the 75^th birthday of the Rochester Art Club.  She looked for The West Wind in the Powers Building, but was unable to find it. It did not make the RAC show, but tenacious Isabel never gave up. According to gallery stories, she made repeated visits to the building, picture of the sculpture in hand, until in 1965 she came upon a cleaning woman and, on a whim, showed her the picture.  The woman told her exactly where the statue was: on the second floor in the shadow of a staircase next to a phone booth. After a cleaning, the marble looked as good as new.

Another tale of the sculpture must be told. For a time West Wind stood in the lobby of the Powers hotel, and lawyers who passed by on their way to a court case would rub the statue’s toe for good luck. Thus the toe is worn smooth and shiny.

When was West Wind in the lobby and not in the top floor galleries?  Too many questions spoil a good story!

Source: Elizabeth Brayer: MAGnum Opus; Susan Dodge Peters, editor: Memorial Art Gallery: An Introduction to the Collection;  Marjorie Searl, editor, Seeing America, Cynthia Culbert, Chapter 21,“Thomas Ridgeway Gould : The West Wind”; curatorial files

THE REMBRANDT ADVENTURES

                                                  THE REMBRANDT ADVENTURES

                                                                By Betsy Brayer

There is no greater master of psychological penetration than Rembrandt van Rijn (1606-69). George Eastman purchased Young Man in an Armchair in 1911 after it had been examined by Wilhelm von Bode, premier Rembrandt scholar of his generation and director of the Kaiser Friedrich Museum in Berlin.  It was the first old master portrait to enter the Eastman collection. By 1927 Eastman wrote that he was no longer buying landscapes but was concentrating exclusively on portraits.

Young Man in an Armchair

Although Eastman was emotionally attached to this painting, he constantly fretted about its condition. “Why are the shadows so dark and murky?” he would ask his advisors. “What happened to the signature?  Have the hands been repainted?  Is it over restored?  Did I pay too much?” After Bode’s Rochester visit in 1911, Carmen Mess of Knoedler’s conveyed some answers and advice. According to Bode, the painting was signed and dated 1660. “He [Bode] suggests your having the Rembrandt placed on an easel & so exposing it to a strong light whenever you are away from home as he claims this keeps it from getting too dark & is a good thing for the paint.” No curator today would agree with that advice! Eastman had the painting “restored” and cleaned several times. William Valentiner, director of the Detroit Institute of Arts and a Rembrandt scholar, borrowed the painting for Rembrandt exhibitions in 1924 and 1930 and sent Eastman an x-ray of the hands that was taken during the 1930 exhibition. The x-ray showed that the hands had indeed been repainted.

The theft of the Rembrandt from Eastman House in 1968 was the catalyst that brought the whole 17^th-century Dutch school to the Gallery permanently.  During Harris Prior’s years as Gallery director (1962-1975) 17 works were transferred. Minor works had been transferred in 1936 and 1950.  The Rembrandt caper was the work of amateurs. Two nights earlier (a practice run, apparently) the thieves successfully removed Eastman’s painting of Cabin Interior—Rainy Day by Arthur B. Davies.  On a January evening in 1968, a W. C. Fields film was playing in the Dryden Theatre and Nan Brown was working late for Beaumont Newhall on the third floor of the house.  The three thieves stayed after the movie—probably in the men’s room—then moved effortlessly into the house, took the painting, and exited via a window. They left the gilt frame dangling on a fence and tire tracks in snow that were identified as belonging to a small foreign car.  Harry Silver, a guard who is remembered by the insurance office as announcing, “I’m Hi-O Silver, but I left my horse outside,” spotted the open window on morning rounds.

The painting went missing for nine months. The three thieves hailed from Rochester, Buffalo, and Chicago, ages 38 to 50. A police informant in Montreal offered to buy the painting for $50,000 and negotiations ensued. On October 15, 1968, state police gathered at the Clinton County airport near Plattsburg to arrest the three who were about to load the Rembrandt, rolled and wrapped in tissue paper, aboard a small plane bound for Canada. Eventually charges were dropped: one man had turned informant and achieved immunity and the other two were wanted for “ serious” crimes in Buffalo.

As the bruised painting was rehabilitated, relined, re-varnished, remounted and repaired, the theft became the vehicle to bring it to the Gallery. By the terms of Eastman’s will, the painting belonged to the University of Rochester. After George Eastman House became an independent museum, the paintings remained there by courtesy and inertia. With a new, enlarged, temperature controlled and secure Gallery building opening in 1968, it became something of a cause for director Harris Prior to bring the whole 17^th-century Dutch and Flemish school (Hals, Rembrandt, van de Cappelle, van Dyck) to the Gallery permanently. He achieved it.

From the evidence of the Eastman correspondence, experts of that period never doubted that the painting was by Rembrandt, but its authenticity has been questioned since Eastman’s lifetime.  Between 1913 and 1990 Rembrandt’s official oeuvre shrank from 988 works to fewer than 300, thanks to the Rembrandt Research Project sponsored by the Dutch government. These experts claim that Rembrandt ran a large-scale commercial studio much as Rubens did, in which assistants worked on most of the portraits. Conceived in the 1960s, by 1989 the project had published three volumes (1584 pages) covering works up to the year 1642. Our painting dates from 1660. But commission members who saw our painting on exhibit during the Rembrandt tercentenary in 1969 and again here in 1970 wrote to a Gallery curator in 1989 that the painting’s “chances of convincing us eventually of its authenticity are practically nil.”

The authenticity debate is still not settled.  Dr. Christopher Brown, curator of 17^th-century Dutch and Flemish paintings at the National Gallery, London, rejects the “hypothesis of a flourishing studio turning out Rembrandtesque works.” He sees no documentary evidence for a studio of this type and endorses the traditional view that the artist simply worked very hard as the most sought-after portrait painter in Amsterdam. Brown cites “the fierce pace of his work” as the definitive factor in “variations in quality” in the portraits. No one ever said ours is the best Rembrandt ever seen—but there are undisputed works (such as portraits of his son Titus) that could be considered second-rate.

David Walsh, who teaches 17^th-century art at the University of Rochester, agrees with Brown. In a talk to the Memorial Art Gallery docents in 2001, Walsh, who unlike the Dutch commission, has lived with and taught from our Rembrandt for many years, said there is nothing about our painting that would cause him to doubt that it is by Rembrandt.  Also, an analysis by the Fogg Museum at Harvard showed that the materials used—canvas, pigments, etc.--are 17^th-century and typical of those favored by Rembrandt.

Betsy Brayer, the author of Magnum Opus: The Story of the Memorial Art Gallery, George Eastman, and many articles on Rochester’s architecture and art, is also a docent, graduating with the class of 1989. 

A RENAISSANCE SUIT OF ARMOR

A RENAISSANCE SUIT OF ARMOR

By Joan K. Yanni

An exciting addition to MAG’s Renaissance collection is a beautifully decorated suit of etched armor.

Suit of Armor

The armor is a partial set consisting of etched steel pieces--helmet, breastplate and tassets (thigh protectors), backplate, gorget (collar) and shoulder plates. The breastplate is dated 1562, and the other pieces date from the same period. All were made by the same workshop for the Dukes of Brunswick, and all would have been worn by the Duke’s knights and soldiers as they battled neighboring states and honed their skills in tournaments and jousts.

In addition to being historically important, the armor is also a significant artwork that illustrates Old Testament stories, classical myths, and Renaissance birds, beasts and grotesques. On the breastplate, a medallion illustrating the Old Testament story of Daniel in the Lion’s Den is inscribed in German “My life and destiny rest in God’s hands. O my lord God, I pray that you protect my soul, life and honor. 1562.”

A panel at the top of the breastplate is decorated at left and right with the Old Testament scenes of Cain killing Abel and Abraham preparing to sacrifice Isaac.  A center vertical panel is split into three sections. At the top is the Old Testament scene from the Book of Samuel showing Joab kissing and stabbing Amas. (King David named Amas rather than Joab head of his army; in retaliation Joab pretended to greet Amas with the traditional kiss and instead stabbed him.) Two classical figures are in the middle section, and a satyr can be seen in the lower section.  The side panels are decorated with classical and allegorical figures.

The decorations on the backplate are similar to those of the breastplate. Scenes from the story of Adam and Eve are found at the top. One shows Eve emerging from Adam’s rib; the other shows the Temptation, with the devil in the form of a snake inviting Eve to become all-knowing by tasting the apple.  Like the breastplate, the central panel of the backplate is split vertically into three sections.  At the top are two long-legged birds; the scene of Samson and the lion is in the center; a clothed half-figure surrounded by flags is in the lower panel. The side panels are decorated with classical allegorical figures.  The main bands of the helmet are decorated with a hunting motif of hounds chasing rabbits.

The era of plate armor lasted 300 years, from about 1340 to 1650.  Before that time soldiers had worn garments of chain mail, made up of hundreds of tiny metal rings hammered and linked together to form a mesh. This protected the wearer from slashing swords, but newer, deadlier weapons called for  protection  A mace was capable of crushing bones, and a lance or arrows shot from powerful longbows were able to pierce coats of mail. Arrs tried padded garments to lessen the impact when a knight was hit, and finally used pieces of solid metal.  Eventually a combination of padding and plate armor was used to produce suits of armor. The knight would put on a padded undergarment first. This not only gave him  protection in battle, but the padding made the metal plates a bit  comfortable.

                  

Another factor that called for the development of plate armor was the rapid development of firearms. The first cannon fired in Europe was in Italy in 1330.  Portable firearms appeared in armories in the 16^th century, gradually superseding bows, swords and pikes (lances some 12 feet in length) as infantry weapons.  Plate armor, made from solid metal, now had to be strong enough to protect the wearer from gun fire.

But this strength required heavier metal, which was difficult to manipulate. The armor was therefore redesigned as an ensemble of lighter pieces attached to the padded body of the soldier. The parts were articulated to allow movement, much like the tail of a lobster.  Knowledge of human anatomy was necessary for arrs to design plate armor that would bend with the movements of the body.

The parts of the fighter’s body most at risk to life-threatening injury--head, chest and shoulders--were most heavily protected.  Next highest priority was given to body parts active during combat: arms, hands, elbows, knees and legs.  Finally, feet were given protection. The amount of armor each soldier had depended on his military rank and what he could afford. The king wore full armor, specially designed and artistically decorated; the aristocratic cavalrymen, such as officers, were typically protected by a complete, or almost complete, suit of armor with as much decoration as its wearer could afford.  The foot-soldier would be issued half armor, protecting only his chest and head. These items were mass-produced, not custom-designed. The infantrymen were the most vulnerable--and expendable--in a battle.

The further development of firearms finally led to the extinction of full body armor.  Once projectiles were able to penetrate plate armor, there was no way to protect the wearer, and the armor became almost useless.

The Gallery’s armor is from a distinctive Brunswick group identified in inventories in 1667 and 1732. The bulk of this arsenal was sold off in the 19^th century, but the dukes of Brunswick kept the most attractive pieces to furnish their castle.  In 1942 the remaining pieces were transferred to Schloss Marienburg in Germany, near Hanover, to avoid capture by invading Soviet troops.

A few years ago, the Royal House of Hanover decided to sell off the bulk of the collection. MAG’s armor was acquired in 2006 from an arms and armor dealer. It had been restored by a conservator specializing in armor and is in excellent condition. According to Susan Daiss, director of education, it will attract visitors of all ages, particularly schoolchildren, and will play a critical role in the museum’s educational mission.

Source: Curator of European Art Nancy Norwood and press release by Shirley Wersinger, PR editor/graphics coordinator

PARTRIDGE'S MEMORY

PARTRIDGE’S MEMORY

by Joan K. Yanni

(Portions of the following are taken from an article by Curatorial Assistant Marie Via, written for the Averell council newsletter.  Further information about the artist has been added.)

Memory

The hooded marble figure titled Memory (13.12) has been an imposing presence in the upper galleries for over 75 years.  Gallery founder Emily Sibley Watson commissioned William Ordway Partridge to create the figure in remembrance of her son by a previous marriage, James G. Averell.  Partridge also sculpted, from a photograph of the young man, the bas-relief plaque set into the marble pedestal above the epitaph that reads:  "James G. Averell (1877-1904).  He loved life, beauty and honor.  His mother dedicates this building to his memory."

Due to Partridge's extended illness during the summer of 1913, work on the sculpture lagged behind schedule.  When it became clear thatMemory would not be finished in time for the Gallery's gala opening in October, a plaster copy was created for the occasion.  The completed marble version was installed later that year.

James Averell was born in Rochester in 1877.  When he graduated from Harvard in 1899, he decided to pursue the study of architecture. Like so many well-to-do men of his generation, he embarked upon a tour of Europe, immersing himself in the art and architecture of other cultures. He continued his studies at Harvard and in the spring of 1904 joined the firm of Herbert D. Hale in Boston.  Tragically, he succumbed to typhoid fever a few months later, leaving behind a more striking reputation as a sportsman (he belonged to five hunt and polo clubs at the time of his death) than as an architect.

KUBA TEXTILES

KUBA TEXTILES

by Joan K. Yanni

Four Kuba textiles—the first African weavings in the permanent collection—have been acquired by the Gallery and were unveiled at the opening of Royal Kuba Art.  When the exhibition ends, they will be on view (one at a time) in the African gallery.

Unknown, Shoowa Velvet

The textiles are examples of "musese," also called "Shoowa velvet," or "Kasai velvet," a high-quality, but pile-type of cloth worn by the Kuba.  Musese, like other Kuba textiles, is made of fibers from the raffia palm, but it is by far the most luxurious.  Indeed, the use of raffia for cloth is unusual; in most of the rest of Africa, wool and cotton fibers are used for textiles.

The "velvet" fiber is made up of strips of the outer layer of the young leaves of dried raffia.  The raffia fiber is rubbed by hand or with pieces of wood, beaten, then divided by a fine-tooth comb until it becomes very soft, supple and silky—hardly resembling raffia at all.  Traditionally the weaving is done by men, who learn it at an early age. The women do the embroidering.

The raffia cloth which forms the base of the velvet is dyed yellow, orange, red and sometimes violet and purple.  If it is meant for royalty, it is left in its natural state, for white is the color of nobility.  Vegetable dyes are used except in the case of green, which is obtained from copper oxide.  Work on one high-quality velvet may last a year or more.

Once the fibers have been woven into cloth, soft filaments are threaded in a needle, several at a time, and caught in the fabric.  Then, with a special razor, the filaments are cut to about 1/16 of an inch on both sides of the weft to produce the pile.  The pile design may be surrounded by a back-stitch border.  Musese is worn by both men and women on state occasions, and is a symbol of the status.  It is also used as currency.   Motifs embroidered in any Kuba cloth are done without preliminary sketching, so that though the designs may be similar, no two are exactly alike.  The patterns are geometric and mala-like, often using diamond or chevron designs.  The motifs have names drawn from the natural world, such as stones, smoke and Lion's paw.

The origin of weaving among the Kuba has been said to date from the reign of King Shyaam (c. 1600).  One story says that the king wanted a wife, and all the Kuba maidens danced before him.  A young girl named Kashasha had secretly embroidered a skirt with magnificent designs which so dazzled the king that he made her his queen.

`           `           `********

There are four objects in the MAG collection, all in the same case that can be related to the Kuba exhibition.  The brass collar or necklace (68.106) is incised with intricate geometric designs and would be worn by royalty in special ceremonies.  The ivory pendant, or amulet (51.114), would be given to a young man as a badge of adulthood when he was admitted to the society of men.  The amulet has the stylized marks of large Pende masks:  half-closed eyes, small nose, small mouth.  Highly prized, the piece would be passed on or sold only after the owner's death.

The wooden double cup (51.112) was used for drinking palm wine during the rituals.  Two figures on each side of the cup represent slaves who carry the cup.  Designs similar to those of the Kuba can be seen on the top of the cup.  The mask (72.54) is typical of Yaka culture from Zaire, and would be worn in ceremonies to honor a particular spirit or to celebrate a special event.

STEWART'S RAKE AND FORK

Fork

STEWART’S RAKE AND FORK

by Joan K. Yanni

Two enigmatic ceramic pieces that resemble human forms were on view in the Contemporary Gallery. They are Rake (92.85) and Fork (92.84), the latest work of Bill Stewart, well-known ceramist, sculptor and professor of art at the State University College at Brockport.

Both figures are life-size, mysterious yet whimsical.  Rake suggests a brown, black and pink figure from primitive art.  Its surface is rough and crackly; its base looks like four black prongs—a rake—and its head is topped by a black conical shape with what looks like an air vent or speaker attached. A small cow-like head protrudes from the side of the figure.  Fork is colored in shades of lime and blue-green, with a partially blue head.  Its small breasts suggest a female form; a curved handle protrudes from its head.  Its two-pronged base (fork) resembles a mermaid's tail with peeling scales.  On its head is a closed water jar or basket, with holes in its top.  On the figure's side is scratched the intriguing message, "Rain causes grass to laugh."

Stewart's early works were usually colorful and funky.  These new sculptures combine elements of his whimsical pieces with his later monumental black sculptures, The Council, installed at the Rochester airport.

What are these recent figures and what do they mean?  Even the artist cannot always explain.  In a statement about his work given to the Dawson Gallery during a show of his sculptures, Stewart wrote, "There are things that appear intuitively in the objects I make that are puzzling to me.  Total explanations are difficult, if not impossible.  Things materialize and images occur that simply "feel right."  I am interested in invention, in energy, surprise and in some instances, creation before explanation."   Of the unusual look and finish of the clay, Ron Netsky in an October 14, 1992, article in the Democrat and Chronicle stated that the surfaces of these works are the result of Stewart firing them up to seven times instead of the usual two, and often glazing over glazed surfaces.  Stewart says of his technique, "Process and content remain vital.... Touch is significant: the connection with materials and the manual art of forming is evident.  In some cases the work may involve found and fabricated forms integrated with the clay as well as an intuitive sense of texture, modeling and assembly.

"The images appear to have their roots in an ancient past but the content is also influenced by contemporary concerns.  The objects relate to a time when there was no gap between animals and man, a time of myths and legends, a time of magical rites, rituals and curiosities."

Stewart goes on to say, "I am interested in how people provided answers for things puzzling and unknown in their environment, along with their strong connection with the spiritual qualities associated with nature.  I am attempting to produce work that is enigmatically primitivistic and sophisticated, focusing on nature and the figure as a representational as well as metaphorical image. To do so one must occasionally reach inside to the secret past or lunge into the absurd.  The resulting images hopefully will have a strong sense of the fantastical and retain a touch of whimsy.

The combination of ancient and contemporary elements in the figures is similar to Rick Hirsch’s works in the same gallery.  All fit perfectly into a "Myths and Legends" tour, and can be linked to the Judeo-Christian references in the works on the second floor, and to the legends connected with the objects in the ethnographic and ancient American galleries downstairs.  What stories children will be able to make up about them!