Caillebotte's bequest - publié le 23/09/2014

Thèmes abordés

Caillebotte's bequest, Impressionist, Renoir, collector

Résumé du document

Gustave Caillebotte (Fig. 1) has long been considered as an odd man out in the circle of the French Impressionist. A wealthy amateur, a friend and a supporter of these artists, Caillebotte amassed a stunning collection of their work, which he bequeathed to the State at his death in 1894, and which was at the basis of the collections of Impressionist art in France.
The Impressionist painters created a revolution in the Art of late nineteenth century. Actually, they were supported by few devoted art lovers, such as Caillebotte, and dealers who played an important part in this aesthetic upheaval. Théodore Duret said that "the public that laughs so loudly while looking at the Impressionists is in for an even bigger surprise: their paintings sell!". They had a bad reception in the public and the Press, because people were used to academic paintings and art 'pompier', but the Impressionist market was an operation of speculation organized by merchant such as Durand-Ruel, Vollard and Tanguy, and therefore it was totally dissociated from the public. Impressionist was criticized of course, but their market was more and more flourishing. Important impressionist sale took place between 1875 and 1899, and Caillebotte was one of buyers.

France political system had changed and after many upheavals, the old monarchy was from then on, replaced by a new Republic. Despite the fact many politics tried to change the Beaux-Art system into a Republican organization, the State remained strongly influenced by the Academy. Therefore, in the National Museum, there were mostly official academic paintings and other tendencies were not truly represented. The official art of the Academy was in conflict with the independent art, defended by Impressionist.

Extraits

[...] VANDOE – P°199- www.oboolo.com Caillebotte's collection40. A first choice was done, excluded 42 canvases on the 69 of the collection. But finally, Bénédite decided to accept 13 more paintings even if Roujon disagreed. The new impressionist wing had open at the beginning of 1897; exhibiting forty impressionist canvases belonged to this collection41. This is not very surprising to see that, at first, people reacted unfavorably to the new Impressionist gallery, because the Press and the public grown accustomed to the style of the Academic Salon42. [...]

[...] That why, three solutions were proposed39. The first one was the construction of a new edifice in the Luxembourg to exhibit the Caillebotte's collection. The second and the third proposition involved to select paintings. The excluded paintings would be kept owing to the second solution, in the Compiegne museum, the Fontainebleau museum or in the Louvre's reserves. In the third solution envisaged, excluded paintings would remain in Martial's home. These two last solutions were both temporary owing to Léonce Bénédite. [...]

[...] Caillebotte said “Nobody want this? I take it”8. He had began his collection with paintings that didn't interest others collectors. He developed his own taste. His collection contain the most important Impressionist master pieces such as the Bal au Moulin de la galette by Renoir (Fig. La Gare St Lazare (Fig. by Monet and Café and Boulevard Montmartre by Pissaro9. He contributed a lot to the fame and success of the Impressionist, directly by giving them money, by buying their paintings or by exhibiting their work10. [...]

[...] It is nevertheless undeniable that the Caillebotte's bequest had a strong influence on the State and on the Impressionists. The Impressionist room, opened in 1897 with a large part of the Caillebotte's collection, had enabled the public to discover Impressionist works. The fact that these works were hung in a National Museum, accustomed the public and the Press to it, and participated to the raising of Impressionist art as a National French art as well as Academic paintings. This gallery housed in the Luxembourg would play an important role in inspiring future painters such as Matisse61. [...]

[...] Bénédite said that “the freedom of action that the curator of the Luxembourg will enjoy when, all tendencies being represented for the future in the Luxembourg, a curator will have only to give his attention to filling those most demanding gaps and will only need to request the State's financial intervention in order to acquired exceptional, undisputed works” 56. For him, every tendencies had to be equally represented. Roujon, accused of being responsible for the Affaire Caillebotte by Jeanne Laurent, wasn't nevertheless, opposed to the impressionist57. If he always tried to defend his own interest and his future academic career, he had never been against these painters. [...]