Take part in a conversation between The Ian Potter Museum of Art Curator Bala Starr and finalists of the Basil Sellers Art Prize 2010. Finalists Glenn Morgan & David Ray respond to their works and their experience of the prize. Gain personal insights into the artists’ thought processes and what inspires them.

Free Admission.
Time: Saturday 11 September, 2.00pm

Glenn Morgan is known for his witty dioramas of concerts and sporting events. Works on display include a bus full of Geelong Cats premiership players, the euphoric scene at Sydney Swans 2005 premiership game and Steve Waugh’s final test cricket match in 2004. Morgan’s work celebrates the spirit and energy of Australian sport.

David Ray is a ceramicist whose hand-crafted vessels incorporate an abundance of colours, textures and decals. Ray has created trophies that symbolize alternate views of triumph: coming second in a competition, being delusional about one’s abilities, or the simple achievement of just turning up.

RSVP by Wednesday 8 September email: potter-events@unimelb.edu.au Telephone:  03 8344 0327

http://www.art-museum.unimelb.edu.au/events_Public_detail.aspx?view=92

Call for Applications, 2011-12 – http://humanities.sas.upenn.edu/applications/postdoc/cfa.shtml

Topic: Adaptations

Five (5) one-year Mellon Postdoctoral Fellowships are available for the 2011-2012 academic year for untenured scholars in the humanities who received or will receive their Ph.D. between December 2002 and December 2010. The fellowship is open to all scholars, national and international, who meet application terms (see Guidelines below).

The programs of the Penn Humanities Forum are conceived through yearly topics that invite broad interdisciplinary collaboration. For the 2011–2012 academic year, we have set Adaptations as the theme. Humanists and those in related fields are invited to submit research proposals on any aspect of this topic, except educational curriculum building and the performing arts.

Fellows teach one undergraduate course in addition to conducting their research. The fellowship stipend is $46,500, plus health insurance. Fellows also receive a research fund of $2500. Fellows are required to be in residence during their fellowship year (September–May).

Application Deadline: Friday, October 15, 2010
Applications will be accepted via online webform only.
Awards will be announced by the end of December 2010.

Lisa Beaven

Evariste Luminais, The Sons of Clovis II (1880) in the Art Gallery of New South Wales

Fig 1 Evariste Lumis, 'The Sons of Clovis II', 1880

This is, without doubt, the strangest painting in the New South Wales Art Gallery (Fig. 1). Painted on a heroic scale, with the figures almost life-size, it is impossible to ignore and while I am looking pools of people gather around it. Two boys float feet-first towards us on what looks like a luxuriously upholstered bed but which is actually a raft. The fine silk textiles and their embroidered garments contrast with the rough-hewn planks of wood beneath them. In the background fine tongues of land project into an expanse of water, which is a dull muddy yellow, the colour of the Yarra river. The raft drifts on an angle to the picture plane, so that the first thing we notice are the magnified feet of the boy on the left, which thrust into our space (Fig. 2). They are covered in thick white cloth, held in place with leather strapping. On his left foot the cloth has fallen away to reveal his big toe. The creamy white of the bandages forms the brightest part of the painting. The strangeness of the scene grows the more you look at it. The only thing moving is the drifting raft, the ruffled surface of the water, and the rich embroidered cloth covering the boys, which has slipped and trails unnoticed in the water (Fig. 3). The boys are remarkable for their stillness, and the dark-haired boy on the right, with his glassily bulging eyes and beaky nose has his hands resting on his chest and looks already dead (Fig. 4). The other blonde boy is alive as his eyes are open and his drawn features are picked out by the pale sunlight. He looks out at us with an expression of such abject despair, pain and shock, his face showing the marks of his ordeal, with deep shadows under his eyes and a pitiful down-turned mouth.

So what is the subject of this strange floating sickbed that drifts towards us? I had always thought that these figures were invalids, or perhaps lepers, or victims of a epidemic, set adrift to prevent contagion, and left to die under a leaden sky. But the story behind the painting is more sinister and gothic than this. These are the sons of Clovis II, who rebelled against their father, and as a punishment were hamstrung by their mother. What we see is the tragic aftermath of this mutilation. The boys are lying because they cannot stand, and in this crippled state were set adrift on the Seine. The gold, jewel-studded shrine hanging on the front of the raft, and the rich textiles all hint at their royal status, while the deep red of the high cushions behind their head symbolize blood and the violence done to them.

© Lisa Beaven 2010

Painting details: Oil on canvas, no dimensions given, bought by the New South Wales Gallery in 1886.

[View with PicLens]

A Bill Kent Foundation has been established to honour his memory. Details can be found to the following website: http://www.monash.edu.au/giving/news/billkent.html

Educating Americans about Modern Australia: The Carnegie Corporation’s Art in Australia 1788-1941 exhibition to the USA and Canada, 1941

Date: Thursday 2 September When and Where? Time: 12:05 to 1:45 pm

Venue: History Meeting Room, David Myers Building East E125, La Trobe University (Unless otherwise notified).

Seminars are open to anyone who wishes to attend.

For more information – Please contact Dr Robert Kenny r.kenny@latrobe.edu.au or history@latrobe.edu.au

Critical Failure – Visual Arts Critcism

Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder, but criticism lies in the pens and hard drives of our finest minds. This panel discussion draws on some of our leading arts writers as they ask what’s wrong with visual arts reviewing?

The Panel members will be:

A Carracci School Landscape on the lid of a virginal at the Powerhouse Museum in Sydney

Fig. 1 Virginal Overall

On display in the Powerhouse Museum, Sydney, at the moment is a virginal, which according to the label is a Bolognese work of 1629, made by a local priest, Vincentius de Taeggiis (85/372 OIC) (Fig. 1). The underside of the lid is painted with a landscape, by an unidentified artist (Fig. 2).  It is in a rather old-fashioned (for 1629) Flemish style, with layered trees, hunting scenes, trees composed of broad leaves painted light over dark over light (centre) and a yellow light in the sky. But there are also Carracci elements: the stress on Pozzoserrato-like mounds (Louvre Hunting landscape), a composition extending laterally with evenly weighted vertical elements, open expansive landscapes between, and framing coulisses (Berlin River Landscape), and especially the men fishing with nets in a river that has fish net weirs stretched across it (Louvre Fishing). The wide format means that there are three vertical accents, two side coulisses, and four distances. It seems to hark back to the 1580s or 90s, and one wonders whether it might not be a little older than the virginal apparently is. Or else a rather old fashioned painter. On reflection, it might best be classified as ‘Carracci school’.

The distance at the left is higher than the others, Flemish style, and shows a three-storey palazzo or villa with side wings, a tower behind, and a terrace in front (Fig. 3). I can’t think of an obvious building to which this might refer. Below the terrace is a formal giardino, rendered as green areas (grass or simply a reluctance to detail it further) divided by ochre paths. There are two main divisions along a central axis aligned with the palazzo doorway, forming two rectangular plots, and in the centre of each plot is a cypress in a circular or oval bed. There is an interesting play of variations, not only between the two plots, but within each, where the left side is different from the right. The left plot makes more play with circles, the right with squares. I wonder whether there are precedents for this kind of asymmetry in published designs, such as those by Serlio. As I recall, all of Serlio’s designs are perfectly symmetrical.

The first of the three vertical accents is a hillock with steps leading up and a little pavilion on top (Fig. 4). This consists of four columns on a square plan, supporting entablature beams. Above the beams is a kind of attic zone, with projections above the columns linked to a cresting pierced by a round hole at the centre on one visible side, and something different on the other: I think this is meant to be a view of the inside of the corresponding feature on the other side. Rising from the column projections are ribs that meet in the centre that seem to form a flattened arch. A ball with some kind of projection marks the crown of the arches. The material of the structure might be stone or wood, and it is all covered with leafy foliage. On top of the two side column projections are small living trees, seemingly planted in ball-shaped bases. There are no trees on the other two projections—perhaps they are omitted for clarity. One could say that the artist has a habit of showing two sides, rather than four, probably because this makes representation easier. Four men with ruffs are seated within the pavilion, while a servant ascends the steps with a tray with a glass on it.

In the left coulisse is a little rocky outcrop or grotto, with a pool in front with a fountain (Fig. 5). The fountain basin is a circular bowl on a low ball-shaped stem, with water apparently flowing out at three (presumably four) points. The artist shows them coming out of the bottom of the bowl, which makes little hydraulic sense. Placed in the bowl is a statue group of a boy with a trident—presumably an infant or comic Neptune—riding a sea monster with a twisted tail. It may perhaps allude to those seas-monsters at the Casino of Pius IV, or at least the Roman type to which these refer. A jet of water emerges from his mouth.

In the ground between fountain and pavilion hillock a dance is going on (Fig. 6). On the left seated women are lined up, perhaps sitting on a bench. Nearby, four women play musical instruments: a cello-like instrument, a wind instrument (recorder or flute), a drum, and a harp. The fact that they are women is interesting, and I think unusual: I cannot think of any representations of female musicians at this date, though others might know them.  The dresses are of various colours, dark blue or black, red, mauve(?) and orange (?). One woman on black stands apart: perhaps she is in charge in some way. To the right are the men, all standing, and all wearing hats. One carries a gun. It is as if they have been hunting, as we see elsewhere in the picture, and have knocked off to join the dance. In the middle a couple is dancing, while behind them another pair is about to join them. There are no ruffs here—all the men wear low collars of the type fashionable from the 1610s or 20s onwards, and the women wear shawls and aprons.

On the right side of the picture are hunting scenes (Fig. 7). In the background is a hunt of two deer, which are being pursued by hounds and two unarmed huntsmen. A similar hunt, but with the men on foot, appears in the second bay from the right. In the right foreground a wild boar has been tackled by two dogs, and a third is about to join them, while a man comes up from the left with a spear. A man on horseback fires a musket at the boar. He wears a sash, broad-brimmed plumed hat, and a ruff. Another man, apparently on horseback, is visible behind him, partly obscured by a tree. This theme is typical of Paul Brill.

In the second bay from the left are the aforementioned fishermen, which do not appear in Brill but are a staple of Annibale Carracci and his followers, including Domenichino and Grimaldi (Fig. 8). One is half-naked and his long nightshirt is tied up and around his left leg: he wears a hat of the same cloth. His companion wears a loose green top and collar, and again seems to have stripped off his lower garments. Each holds a pole to which one end of a net is attached. They seem to have been moving to the right, trapping fish in the net between them. A third man, dressed in a red jacket over a light-coloured nightshirt and a hat, also holds a pole. This might be attached to the third side of the net, the idea being that he lifts it up to trap the fish. There are eye-like forms in the water, which might be attempts to represent fish or may simply be the way the artist rendered the water. In the distance beyond the net weir a typical Carracciesque boat is being punted; it has an arched covering over the centre part and some sort of framework on the stern.

© David R. Marshall 2010

Contact: david.marshall@unimelb.edu.au

[View with PicLens]

London, The National Gallery, 30 June – 12 September

Reviewed by David Maskill

This exhibition, currently showing at London’s National Gallery, is one of the highlights of the summer season. As art institutions struggle with the effects of the recession, blockbusters that rely on extensive and costly loans and on the attendant crowds to pay for them have been in decline in recent times. If this exhibition is anything to go by, this may not be such a bad thing. Drawn mostly from the National Gallery’s own collection, the curators have selected forty works and explore their material histories to tell fascinating tales of deception, curatorial blunders and rediscoveries of long lost masterpieces. This is a show that needs the visitor to take time and to look closely at the works on display – an experience that the blockbuster rarely allows. On both occasions that this reviewer visited the exhibition (entry is free), it was possible to have the space to look carefully without being jostled or caught up by a conveyor belt movement of automatons. (One could compare this experience with the unfortunately crowded Masterpieces from the Uffizi Gallery: Italian Renaissance Drawings that recently closed at the British Museum. Despite, or perhaps because it was a paying show with all the attendant publicity, it was overrun and virtually impossible to get close enough to see anything properly. It may be a better experience in Florence, but I doubt it.)

Fakes, Mistakes and Discoveries is organized around a series of themes. ‘Fakes’ considers works that have been unveiled as outright forgeries such as Madonna of the Veil from the Courtauld collection, formerly thought to be a masterpiece by Botticelli, but now attributed to the skillful forger Umberto Giunti and dated to the 1920s. In this section are also works that while not originally intended to deceive, have fallen prey to unscrupulous dealers, later ‘restorers’ and gullible connoisseurs.

‘Mistakes’ tackles the potentially embarrassing territory of works that have proved not quite what they were thought to be at the time of acquisition. All gallery collections contain such ‘mistakes’ (more than many are willing to admit publically), and galleries take a risk when they expose their own ‘duds’ in this way. Most prefer to consign them to the storeroom. But here, there are no apologies or mea culpae. Instead, we are treated to the very latest discoveries of the conservation department. When terms like dendrochronology and infrared reflectograms are used in an exhibition, I usually run a mile. Here, however, the photographs of x-rays and all the scientific paraphernalia of the conservator’s laboratory are actually legible and compelling.

In ‘Discoveries’, the conservator’s art is put to the task of uncovering the original state of works in the gallery’s collection. Almost all Old Master paintings have been altered in some way since their original creation. Some alterations are subtle, but sometimes they are so dramatic that they completely change the appearance and meaning of the work. As art historians we need to know about these changes if we are to interpret the work correctly. Using some impressive technical wizardry, we are shown how selected works looked before later hands got to work on them to make them more appealing to the prevailing taste.

As this brief overview implies, this exhibition has resulted from the close collaboration of the National Gallery’s curators, conservators and educators. To an extent, this is true of all exhibitions, but here their individual talents have been combined to great effect. The visitor, specialist and non-specialist alike, is taken on a series of journeys beneath the surface of the panel or canvas where secrets, conundrums and discoveries abound.

There is an excellent on-line resource with links to scholarly case studies of works in the exhibition that is well worth a visit and there is a small but instructive and affordable hard copy publication. Bravo National Gallery! http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/research/close-examination/

© David Maskill 2010

]]> http://melbourneartnetwork.com.au/2010/08/27/david-maskill-close-examination-fakes-mistakes-and-discoveries/feed/ 0 http://melbourneartnetwork.com.au/2010/08/26/call-for-papers-something-or-nothing-pictorial-and-material-austerity-in-the-visual-arts-of-the-middle-ages/ http://melbourneartnetwork.com.au/2010/08/26/call-for-papers-something-or-nothing-pictorial-and-material-austerity-in-the-visual-arts-of-the-middle-ages/#comments Thu, 26 Aug 2010 06:47:31 +0000 admin http://melbourneartnetwork.com.au/?p=1684 Call for papers – International Medieval Congress, Leeds, 11-14 July, 2011

Something for Nothing: Pictorial and Material Austerity in the Visual Arts of the Middle Ages

The use of lavish materials to manifest invisible spiritual truths has long been a prominent theme in discussions of medieval art, but medieval artists and patrons also turned to visual austerity and representations of poverty in order to convey their spiritual ideals, and an emphasis on forsaking worldly goods for the greater riches of salvation played a significant role in defining the subject matter and shaping the pictorial strategies of the visual arts. Objects, paintings and other visual arts were skillfully used to promote ideals of poverty, to mediate tensions between earthly and spiritual wealth, or to manipulate the perception of wealth. The papers in this session will offer new perspectives on how artists, patrons and viewers understood and used austerity as a tool in visual communication.

Please send abstracts of not more 250 words to Kathryn Gerry by Monday, 13 September, 2010.

email (preferred): kbgerry@gmail.com

Or post:K. Gerry, Dept. Medieval Art, The Walters Art Museum, 600 North Charles Street, Baltimore, Maryland, 21218 USA.

Papers should be 20 minutes in length, to be delivered in English.

Ernst Gombrich

Richard Woodfield, Honorary Senior Research Fellow in Art History at the University of Glasgow, will lead a seminar discussion on the subject of art historiography, particularly within the context of the Vienna School of Art History. Please download the dossier of material (link below) relating to Ernst Gombrich, one of the most well known of art historians to have emerged from the Vienna School.  The dossier will provide the stimulus for further discussion on the role of historiography within the discipline of Art History today.

Dossier - WoodfieldSources (word doc)

You may also wish to have a look at the Gombrich Archive.

Date: Monday 30 August 2010 6:30 pm

Venue: Room 150 Elisabeth Murdoch Building, University of Melbourne, Parkville

All Welcome

Drinks and nibbles provided (gold coin donation appreciated for snacks: wine generously donated by Eugene Barilo von Reisberg). The seminar will be followed by dinner in Lygon St. Please RSVP Mark Shepheard (shepm@unimelb.edu.au) if you plan to join us for dinner.