The
Impressionist friends of Gustave Caillebotte (see last week’s
column) were devastated when their generous benefactor and fellow
artist suddenly died. Even though the Impressionists themselves were
in disarray, they all felt the loss. Official France, however, soon
became aghast at the terms of Gustave’s will.
Caillebotte
was only 28 in 1876, scarcely two years since the first exhibition of
the Impressionists, when he drew up his first will.
“I
beg Renoir to be my testamentary executor and to accept a painting of
his choosing and that my inheritors insist that he choose an
important one.”
The
internal dispute among the artist that manifested itself in their
fourth exhibition, in 1877, became even more contentious with their
fifth showing in 1880. Gauguin participated for the second time, but
he was not the cause. Disputes became challenges, with exchanges of
explosive letters revealing the depth of the dissensions.
Monet
and Renoir preferred to show at the official Salon. Degas accused
them of treason, since it was Monet who had previously set down the
condition that the artists should not be allowed to show with the
Impressionists and the Salon at the same time.
It
got worse because Caillebotte’s hand was in the selection of
the artists whose names would be part of the show’s posters,
which were the most important advertising medium in Paris.
Caillebotte later wrote Pissarro, “Degas is responsible for our
disorganization.” He wrote, “What talent, but what
character.” He never hesitated to praise Degas’s art.
Without
Monet, Renoir, and Sisley, the work of Degas drew the most attention.
Caillebotte’s presence was eleven paintings.
Because
of continuing disputes with Degas, Caillebotte refused to participate
in the exposition of 1881. The American Mary Cassatt, one of Degas’s
few friends, was included.
For
the show the next year, Degas lead efforts to eliminate Caillebotte,
who said, “I will retire to my tent and wait better days.”
Nevertheless, he joined many of his friends for the show, including
Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Morisot, and Sisley. “The harmony
would have been perfect had there not been the disagreement of Degas,
caused by the exclusion of some of his friends, and the habitual
absence of Manet.” (Marie-Josèphe de Balanda, Gustave
Caillebotte)
Critically,
the exposition was the best ever. Public hostility had been overcome.
Time, the previous shows, and the support of dealer Durand-Ruel
contributed to the reversal. Although represented by 17 canvases,
Caillebotte, 34, was virtually ignored. It was his last large public
showing in France. Six years later he sent six paintings for a small
show at Durand-Ruel’s and eight to a show in Bruxelles. In both
he was again ignored.
Caillebotte,
living in a town down river on the Seine, continued to paint. He was
a member of the Cercle de Voile de Paris/Paris Sailing Circle,
and he spent a great deal of time designing, building, repairing, and
racing sailboats. He continued to help the other artists, offering to
support Pissarro. His home was constantly full of guests, and as the
Impressionists disbursed geographically, he made efforts to keep them
together. A local café became famous as their gathering point.
In
February, 1894, Caillebotte became chilled while working in his
garden. This lead to a cerebral congestion. He died of a pulmonary
embolism. He was 45. There was an unfinished landscape on his easel,
but he left behind about 500 finished paintings.
His
will created consternation and scandal in official circles.
An
1883 codicil to his 1876 will specified the disposition of his
collection of pictures painted by other artists. Twenty days after
Caillebotte’s death, his executor notified the Director of the
Academy of Beaux-Arts, Henri Roujon, of the collection: 67 paintings
by the masters of Impressionism, Manet, Monet, Renoir, Pissarro,
Sisley, Degas, and Cézanne.
What
a trove!
In
today’s market, it would be worth billions.
But
Caillebotte, distrusting Official France, imposed some restrictions.
The
collection could go only to the Luxembourg Museum (in the Luxembourg
Gardens, Paris), a museum used to exhibit living artists.
The
collection could not be given to the French State, which would
stow it in attics or disperse it to unimportant provincial museums.
Eventually,
after passage of sufficient time, it would go to the Louvre
Roujon
told his superiors that the bequest was “a delicate matter.”
These
66 paintings were entirely outside of the cultural politics of the
official establishment. The legacy was up against the same academism
that dominated the Paris Salon. A spokesman charged that showing the
collection at the Luxembourg would lower all of society and bring
about “the end of the nation, the end of France.”
Several
professors at the Beaux-Arts threatened to resign if the collection
were accepted.
The
heads of the Academy, the Luxembourg, and the National Museums were
called together to examine the terms of the will and the positions of
Renoir, the executor, and Martial Caillebotte, the artist’s
younger brother.
A
consultive committee representing the museums recommended that the
gift be accepted, but the Administration festered with tergiversation
(my favorite, seldom-used word, both in French and English, meaning
to beat around the bush). They argued there wasn’t sufficient
space in the Luxembourg, it would be years before there would be
enough money to make accommodations, some of the paintings weren’t
very good, only the best ones could be accepted.
These
noises upset the Impressionists. Monet wrote, “It is necessary
to obtain from the Administration of Beaux-Arts agreement that none
of these painting given by Caillebotte can be relegated to attics or
sent to the provinces.”
Martial
observed that from the beginning the head of the Luxembourg took the
position that the museum could not hang the show. The future director
said the collection would be accepted but could not be hung until two
years later. Then several days later the Government said only a part
of the collection could be shown. Renoir and Martial opposed the
offer, which did not conform to the will.
Not
until 1896 did a State Council authorize the Consultive Committee of
the National Museums to make an official choice: of the 67 paintings,
38 were accepted and 29 were refused and returned to the donor’s
inheritors. This compromise would take effect after the unanimous
consent of the artists represented.
The
refusals included 2 Manets, 8 Monets, 11 Pissarros, 2 Renoirs, 3
Sisleys, and 3 Cézannes.
Renoir
chose a Degas painting as his executor’s pay. Renoir originally
had selected one of his own paintings from the accepted group, for
which he had received a lucrative offer, but Martial convinced Renoir
he would be better served in the long run if the picture remained in
the public collection.
Pierre-Auguste Renoir, Bal de la Moulin Rouge,d’Orsay Museum, Paris, Caillebotte bequest
Instead,
Renoir chose a work by Degas, keeping that painting from being among
those which would be enshrined. Degas was furious. But they had never
been friends.
In
1904 and 1908, the family again tried to give the 28 rejected works
to the French government. Both offers were refused. Martial
Caillebotte instructed his wife and daughter to never deal with the
National Museums after his death.
In
1928, the French government had a change of heart and attempted to
claim the 28 rejected paintings. The request was repudiated by
Martial’s widow.
Most
of the rejected paintings were then sold to the irascible Dr. Albert
Barnes [see Moments in Art No. 48, “Where’s the Beef”].
The Barnes Collection can be seen a long way from Paris, in
Philadelphia.
The
Caillebotte Collection comprised some of the greatest paintings ever
created by the Impressionists. They became the nucleus around which
paintings by other modern French artists were assembled and
ultimately installed in the Jeu
de Paume museum at the end
of the Place de Concorde.
The collection grew and finally outgrew the small, elegant museum.
A
beaux-arts
unused railway station across the Seine from the Louvre, the Gare
d’Orsay, was
converted to show mainly French art created between 1848 and 1915.
(There is only one Mary Cassatt in the grandiose collection.)
Claude Monet, Gare St. Lazaire, d’Orsay Museum, Paris
The
Musée d’Orsay
was opened in 1986. The
upper-level floor showing a heart-stopping collection of
Impressionist and Post-Impressionist paintings is the highlight of
that vast museum. Among them is the Caillebotte bequest, some of the
greatest paintings among the great.
Lawrence Jeppson is an art consultant, organizer and curator of art exhibitions, writer, editor
and publisher, lecturer, art historian, and appraiser. He is America's leading authority on
modern, handwoven French tapestries. He is expert on the works of William Henry Clapp, Nat
Leeb, Tsing-fang Chen, and several French artists.
He is founding president of the non-profit Mathieu Matégot Foundation for Contemporary
Tapestry, whose purview encompasses all 20th-century tapestry, an interest that traces back to
1948. For many years he represented the Association des Peintres-Cartonniers de Tapisserie and
Arelis in America.
Through the Smithsonian Institution Traveling Exhibition Service, the American Federation of
Arts, the Museum of Modern Art, and his own Art Circuit Services he has been a contributor to
or organizer of more than 200 art exhibitions in the United States, Canada, Japan, and Taiwan.
He owns AcroEditions, which publishes and/or distributes multiple-original art. He was co-founder and artistic director of Collectors' Investment Fund.
He is the director of the Spring Arts Foundation; Utah Cultural Arts Foundation, and the Fine
Arts Legacy Foundation
Lawrence is an early-in-the-month home teacher, whose beat is by elevator. In addition, he has spent the past six years hosting and promoting reunions of the missionaries who served in the French Mission (France, Belgium, and Switzerland) during the decade after WWII.