Dr. Gachet
John Haber
imagination and a lot of demons, but also a ruthlessly trustworthy
eye, and of course there really was a Dr. Gachet.
Somewhere between a humble, dedicated country doctor in the south of
France and a homeopathic crank, between one of the avant-garde's most
loyal backers and an esthete with an overblown idea of himself as
patron, Gachet treated and collected van Gogh in his last year, after
the painter sought freedom and refuge from the mental asylums and art
scene around Paris. With the same mix of incompetence and dedication
to art that characterized his entire life, Gachet in fact sketched van
Gogh on his deathbed.
Gachet bought extensively from Cezanne in 1872 and 1873, when I myself
have trouble seeing the great painter he was to come. He even
encouraged other students of art to copy Cezanne's "Modern Olympia," a
wild painting I thought was just a phase the poor 32-year-old from Aix
had to go through! He knew Pisarro, Monet, and Renoir as well,
although also a bit off their peak, and he heavily patronized
Cezanne's good friend Guillamin, who's otherwise a footnote in art
history.
I went to the Met's current show, all about Gachet, expecting a museum
of bad art, and I got it. I also thought it might be a bit more fun
on that account than it was, but that's the Met. The tourist crowds
were there, diligently soaking up Impressionism at one remove, along
with the overblown claims on the wall labels. It's an awfully big
show, including as many copies after the great ones as the curators
could find in Gachet's circle. A woman named Derousse actually made
me look forward to Gachet's and his son's own oils and etchings.
The Met sees this as a chance to recreate a circle of artists on the
make and a genius in crisis, plus the chance to claim a debt in both
to the man of the hour, Gachet. So it doesn't take the chance to give
a lesson in what made art of that time so great. It hangs the copies
on their own walls, clustering works by artist and perhaps maintaining
better the impact of the van Goghs, but forcing anyone interested in
the differences to take a lot of walks.
Are the lessons to be learned, other than about the Met? One is to go
to a show like this with an art teacher like Dik or Mark, someone who
can pick apart the bad art as much as praise the good. I missed them.
Another is that the d'Orsay never de-accessions ANYTHING! Certainly
another is the thrill of the finer works a couple of rooms away past
the gift shop, in the permanent collection. Gosh, wait just another
five years when Cezanne's backgrounds -- in the depth of a landscape
or the wall behind a still-life -- started to give the compositions a
whole new space and the foregrounds a new tactile reality. Yet
another is to keep one's sense of humor.
The last lesson is those copies and what goes wrong. One still tends
to see modernity through the eyes of formalists and anti-formalists.
The first still shout "flatness" while the latter shout "social
structure." One in fact sees how private these works were, moving
apart from Parisian society and the wide open spaces of the Provencal
countryside to hidden backyards, castaway fruit, and the twisted smile
of neighborhood children. As for flatness, matching the surface
patterning is exactly what the incompetent copyists did wrong. They
missed the texture of paint, the depth of shadow, and how objects in
van Gogh or Cezanne bounce off one another, like ideas flitting
through an overheated mind.
John
Erik A. Mattila
will be successful in creating a "Bad Art" movement in 1890s France. All
those bad paintings will be wonderful. How responsible is the Trocadero
for the creation of "Primitivism in Modern Art?"
Erik
John Haber
itself on its worst holdings. <grin>
I got into a fight about that with a friend last week. Why, I asked,
were they so touchy about their shows -- putting on lots of shows of
lesser works and then boasting about them, while things that mattered
so much to me skipped NY entirely? He said I should remember it's a
good thing that NY isn't the center of the university any longer, and
I decided not to argue back that this isn't a stellar defense of the
Met.
John
Dan Fox
Great to see you here! I haven't been lurking/posting much in the last
couple of weeks due to being swamped with daily chores - but I'll be back
in force soon.
There's an excellent recent book tracing the history of the Dr. Gachet
portrait. I have it, and have started reading it - but have put it aside
for the same reason I haven't been posting much - too busy. But I've read
enough to recommend it.
Again, it's great to see you.
Dan
<john's post snipped>
Quo Vadis
<jha...@haberarts.com> writes
>Remember that van Gogh portrait of Dr. Gachet? van Gogh had a teeming
>imagination and a lot of demons, but also a ruthlessly trustworthy
>eye, and of course there really was a Dr. Gachet.
did not know its whereabouts. A report says it was in the hands of a
Japanese collector last and that he had made it a condition on his death
that it was cremated with him. He died a year or two ago. Is this one of
those silly mythologies again ?
The Met sounds just like the Royal Academy in London. The annual Summer
Show is one - the usual predictable mix match of vases of flowers and
sunsets .. oh and a few Hockneys !Can't wait to see it and see if I
recognise any difference from the last ten years.
Cheers ! Alison.
Dan Fox
Scattered asides on Van Gogh - this Gachet thing reminded me of him --
The critic John Canaday wrote, 'Van Gogh is probably a lot more fun to
read about than he was to know.' I always liked that.
I thought the missing painting was the Irises; probably wishful thinking-
I could do more without the Irises than without the profound Dr. Gachet.
One thing that defines the post-impressionist movement is that most of
the artists didn't live very long. Wonder what would've happened if they'd
all lived to be as old as Monet, Renoir, and company.
Back to work!
--
Dan
'The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom.' - Blake
www.danfoxart.com
John Haber
>did not know its whereabouts. A report says it was in the hands of a
>Japanese collector last and that he had made it a condition on his death
>that it was cremated with him. He died a year or two ago. Is this one of
>those silly mythologies again ?
I haven't done my homework, so I just don't know. But there is at
least one version in existence, and I know that van Gogh had this way
of turning out more than one. Maybe I should think of it as his
turning Monet's love of observation and repetition into the mental
patient's obsession? Sorry, that's pretty vacuous speculation.
The Japanese are said to have had lousy taste, too, in sorting out bad
copies from originals.
>The Met sounds just like the Royal Academy in London. The annual Summer
>Show is one - the usual predictable mix match of vases of flowers and
>sunsets .. oh and a few Hockneys !Can't wait to see it and see if I
>recognise any difference from the last ten years.
Oh, well, I guess I should admit it's modern institutional politics.
When postmodernists say museum institutions and corporate power are
tied up with modern art, it feels narrow to me, but then I guess I'm
still an idealist.
John
John Haber
>read about than he was to know.' I always liked that.
Giggles.
jh
Quo Vadis
<jha...@haberarts.com> writes
>I haven't done my homework, so I just don't know. But there is at
>least one version in existence, and I know that van Gogh had this way
>of turning out more than one. Maybe I should think of it as his
>turning Monet's love of observation and repetition into the mental
>patient's obsession? Sorry, that's pretty vacuous speculation.
The news is out then !
In article <379D528C...@inow.com>, Mark Starr <st...@inow.com>
writes
>It was reported tonight that Van Gogh's "Portrait of Paul
>Ferdinand Gachet," which was purchased several years
>ago for $82 million by a Japanese businessman, was
>apparently burned on instructions from its owner when
>he was recently cremated.
>
>The permanent loss to the world of one of Van Gogh's
>greatest painting poses the most profound moral challenge
>to the buying and selling of art.
>
>Regards,
>Mark Starr
>
Glenn Geist
immense price, but I remember reading at the time of the sale that
there were at least 6 versions and that at least one, the authenticity
of which has been questioned, may have been done by Gachet himself in
the style of Vincent. I think one resides in the Louvre.
GLenn
jha...@haberarts.com (John Haber) wrote:
>>isn't this painting missing ? I though the Met had admitted they
>>did not know its whereabouts. A report says it was in the hands of a
>>Japanese collector last and that he had made it a condition on his death
>>that it was cremated with him. He died a year or two ago. Is this one of
>>those silly mythologies again ?
>
>I haven't done my homework, so I just don't know. But there is at
>least one version in existence, and I know that van Gogh had this way
>of turning out more than one. Maybe I should think of it as his
>turning Monet's love of observation and repetition into the mental
>patient's obsession? Sorry, that's pretty vacuous speculation.
>
Erik A. Mattila
movie set for "Dreams"/
Hi Glenn, nice to hear your e-voice.
Erik
Glenn Geist
his stuff. Somehow the story has the smell of legend on it - I can't
concieve of someone burning up a 50 million dollar painting for ego's
sake. So many of those monster sales were part of arcane schemes to
transfer monies between corporations or to launder money - I wouldn't
be surprised if there were some slight of hand involved.
Glenn
Dan Fox
maybe the different versions will be mentioned. (I'm only on page 144)
I'll let you know. Also, what do Vincent's letters say about the
painting(s)? I've read and reread them over the years, but can't remember.
The version of the letters I have is the 'edited for the popular press'
version anyway.
--
Dan
'The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom.' - Blake
Erik A. Mattila
I'm certain you would find it fascinating. Extreme surrealism. The one episode
I am refering to (the movie is composed of eight or nine episodes) was a man who
walked into Van Gogh's Cornfields and wandered around there. It was rather
thrilling, and it does make me think that some of the Japanese interest in Van
Gogh is aesthetic, not just an investment sort of thing.
I can't imagine burning a Van Gogh either. But I once met a Maidu Indian named
Henry Azbill who showed me a remarkable eagle feather headdress and cape, all
made of Golden Eagle pin feathers. When you put it on your head, the feathers
wrapped around your shoulders and trailed down to the floor. There must have
been 500 feathers there. When Henry passed away this cloak was buried with
him. But this was for religious reasons -- Mr. Azbill was about the most
'ungreedy' person you would ever meet.
Erik
Glenn Geist
I'll put "dreams" on my shopping list!