Whistler in Dublin, 1884

Author(s): Ronald Anderson

Source: Irish Arts Review (1984-1987) , Autumn, 1986, Vol. 3, No. 3 (Autumn, 1986), pp.
45-51
Published by: Irish Arts Review

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20491906

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Irish Arts Review (1984-
1987)

This content downloaded from

188.141.36.177 on Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:02:57 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 IRISH ARTS REVIEW

WHISTLER IN DUBLIN, 1884

Traditionally, the history of art in Ronald Anderson, a research the widely read Freeman's Journal.
Ireland, particularly in the latter Indeed, such was the reputation of the
scholar in the Department of
half of the nineteenth century, is seen club that in one of the Joumal's notices
Art History, University of
and accepted to be the sum total of two it ranked the Club as, ".... next to the
fundamental themes: those artists who St. Andrews, Scotland, recalls Royal Hibernian Academy in the art
stayed at home in Ireland and established the exhibition of Whistler's work world of Dublin ... ".5 In retrospect,
themselves with the Royal Hibernian brought to Ireland in 1884 by however, and as the catalogues and
Academy, and those who left to seek The Dublin Sketching Club and reviews of the Club's annual exhibitions
fame and fortune elsewhere.1 When make clear, while the Club was fairly
explains its importance in the
viewed from this dual perspective, how adventurous in the works of such mem
ever, there is a tendency to get a some development of art appreciation bers as Hone, Yeats, Osborne and Pur
what distorted assessment of the growth in Ireland. ser (all of whom had trained to various
and development of Irish art as a whole degrees outside Ireland) it was in all
in this period. All too often the role DU BLI N reality, rather conservative.
and achievement of the numerous 'pri SKETCHING CLUB. This apparently inbuilt conservatism,
vate' art clubs and societies is dismissed which was to run through almost every
as unimportant, or indeed, simply stratum of native Irish art in the
1 X 11 I I; 1 'L I () N
unknown; one such club in the nine nineteenth century, was rather aptly
teenth century was The Dublin Sketch summed up by one of the Club's found
SKETCHES, PICTURES, AND PHOTOGRAPHY,
ing Club. ing members, Dr. Todhunter, who,
In 1884, despite the internal dissen
HELI) .,T
whilst never holding office in the Club,
sion it would cause, the Club was to THE LEINSTEIt HALL,
clearly exercised a considerable influence
stake its place firmly in the history of :35 if1OLES 301SRT1I STR/;ElT,
over its artistic direction. In 1876,
Irish art by bringing to Dublin the first On the lst December and following day Todhunter, Professor of English at
truly 'modern' loan exhibition of paint Trinity College, gave a lecture entitled,
ings by that most controversial of A LOAN COLLECTION "The Theory of the Beautiful".6 Of the
artists, James McNeill Whistler (1834 oF
essential difference between true and
PICTURES BY MR. WHISTLER IS ALSO ON VIEW.
1903). Indeed the enormity of the Club's false beauty, he wrote, " ... any French
achievement can be gauged from the sensation picture - such as the one of
fact that along with Whistler's work the the slave exhibited last year in London
Club was a 'hair's breadth' from staging - will serve as an example of the horr
in Dublin undoubtedly the biggest coup DUBLIN: ible . . . ". It was, therefore, perhaps no
R. D. WEBB & SON, PRINTERS, ABBEY STRM.
in British art in the nineteenth century 1884.
surprise that when the Whistler paint
- Whistler's legendary 10 o'clock Lec ings came to Dublin in 1884, one of the
The front-piece of the Dublin
ture. But, as this article will describe, loudest objectors to their presence was
Sketching Club's exhibition catalogue of 1884.
unforeseen circumstances in the shape of Dr. Todhunter.
Oscar Wilde, would intervene. Notwith The key figure in the initial idea of
and participated in the weekly
standing, the 1884 exhibition of Whistler the'sketch
Whistler exhibition and lecture was
paintings would in consequence, " . the (183
ing outings' was Nathaniel Hone Hon. Frederick
1 Lawless, an Irish
set Dublin by the ears . . . 11.2 1917), who had recently returned to hardly remembered. Dur
sculptor now
The Club under whose auspices the Ireland after working in the Barbizon
ing a period in London in the 1880's,
Lawless
exhibition was held was formed on with Jean-Francois Millet and Henrybecame a close associate of
October 20th, 1874, when, " . . . a Harpignies. Whistler's before returning to Dublin in
dozen good gentlemen of Dublin met in The next year, 1876, the Club accept February, 1884. The other organizers
the Westland Row home of Dr. Tod ed the membership of such notable with Lawless were John Butler Yeats
hunter and decided to form the Dublin local painters as the gifted Belfast and William Booth-Pearsall, a Dublin
Sketching Club ... ".3 Among the amateur, Dr. James Moore, a future Pre dental surgeon.
founder members was Bram Stoker, bet sident of the Royal Hibernian Academy, On Wednesday, November 1 Oth, 1884,
ter known today as the author of Sir Thomas Jones, and John Butler an 'official' invitation was sent to Whist
Dracula. Yeats. Between 1876 and 1884 the club ler in London. The artist responded
For the first year of the existence of membership continued to rise and among immediately with a generosity which
the club, membership was restricted to the more notable painters who join surprised even the organizers. Writing
founder members, and from the archive ed (and interestingly enough, those of to William Booth-Pearsall before the
material of this period it can be fairly the younger generation) were Richard opening of the exhibition on December
deduced that it was a rather mundane Orpen, older brother of William, 1st, Whistler explained that the twenty
affair. The members, perhaps realizing Walter Osborne, Percy French and six paintings he sent to Dublin repre
this, unanimously agreed the following Sarah Purser. sented:
year to make the membership open, By 1884, the Club was sufficiently ". ... the largest collection I have sent to any
"..to the genltlemen painters of the well established in Dublin to merit a gallery in the United Kingdom, out of
city."4 Among those who then joined weekly paragraph about its activities in London ... " 7

-45

This content downloaded from

188.141.36.177 on Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:02:57 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 +t }. I . I I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A

0.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-:'7e . L
''it's'~ ~ ~ ~ t~ -kR

::, '''':'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l

:: ~ ~ ~ 4 :

This content downloaded from

188.141.36.177 on Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:02:57 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 :3

.j~~~~~~~~~*

.3.l l. 2tt#t

-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ . ,.";?73.

*~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ I Ii
e F _ ?-~~~~~~~S

_fi_~~~0.

This content downloaded from

188.141.36.177 on Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:02:57 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

V8HSTE IN D'ULIN -1884l\
The generosity of Whistler's response
must, however, be viewed within the
context of his close affinity with the
Irish. To the man who claimed through
out his life that "on his father's side he
was Irish, a Highlander on his mother's,
and had not a drop of Anglo-Saxon
blood in his veins" the idea of an
exhibition in Ireland was immensely
appealing.8
Of the twenty-six paintings which left
London for Dublin on November 17th,9
eight were small water-colours remain
ing from Whistler's one-man exhibition
in London earlier that year;10 the other
eighteen included such specific requests
as Whistler's famous pair of portraits,
'The Artist's Mother' and 'Thomas Car
lyle', called Arrangements in Grey and
Black No. 1 and No. 2 respectively. At
one point it appears that Whistler had
thought seriously of sending across his
recently finished portrait of 'Sefior
Pablo de Sarasate'll but evidently
decided against it, and instead sent his
'Portrait of Lady Meux'.
By the 21st of November, all the
Whistler exhibits had arrived safely in
Dublin; in fact, they had arrived four
days early thus allowing Lawless, Yeats
and Booth-Pearsall to hang them long
before the Club members could hang
their own, a point that became an issue
of serious internal contention before
the exhibition closed some three weeks
later.
As to the actual hanging of his work,
Whistler left the trio in total control. In
an undated letter, he informed Booth
Pearsall:
"... the arrangement and hanging of the
pictures, I am sure you can manage
perfectly - and upon the whole it is just as
well that I could not find the drapery from
Bond St. (where it is still in use at Messrs.
Dowdeswells) for it might have only inter
fered with the assembly of your room too
much . . . "12
The three large portraits, Mother,
No. 244, Carlyle, No. 242, and Lady
Meux, No. 243, occupied the central
position on what was considered the
most prestigious wall; on either side
were the smaller works: 231 to 241 on
the right, and 245 to 256 on the left.
Thus, the twenty-six works by Whistler
took up a full wall normally reserved for
a section of Club work entitled:
"Pictures and Studies from Nature",
adjudged by the Club's Hanging Com
mittee as "especially meritorious"
188.141.36.177 on Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:02:57 +00:00
IRISH ARTS REVIEW
repute in the world of art, but the blame,
or, if you will, the credit, for this belongs
entirely to those who have wandered so far
(LeCa ~ ej S"LV afield in the search for works to fill up the
blank spaces upon the walls of the
exhibition . . . It ought to be a loan
collection pure and simple, or, an exhibi
tion of the year's club work, and it is not
VJ4e Aet i , an encouraging sign to discover a tendency
to merge the usefulness of the latter in the
attractiveness of the former . . . ".16
t1Aw vtl') 1 4/t -0S The Dublin Daily Express of the same
day, however, maintained no such
caution. Under the title, "The Private
View at the Dublin Sketching Club",
the reviewer launched into a whole
i b 49 Y tb leS a hearted defence of the exhibition and
the artist, noting that the View was
"wonderfully successful" and that "the
audience was larger than anything he
had ever seen before ... "17. The
author went on:
The letter from the Dublin Sketching Club Mr. Whistler's pictures were, as might
inforing Whistler that he had been elected be expected, the chief centre of interest,
an Honorary Member. The letter and it was highly amusing to hear the
was found in Whistler's studio on his death, different opinions passed upon them,
,nearly twenty years later in 1903. ranging from the philistines (the untuned
(Letter by kind permission of Glasgow University).
and uninstructed in art) to the more
generous and appreciative estimates of his
admirers and devotees. The freshness and
The exhibition hail in Molesworth
originality was as startling as it was novel.
Street opened on the evening On
ofthe small drawings - caprices,
November 23rd to receive the work of
nocturnes, notes in pink and red - the
critical wrath of the uneducated and
the Club members. By the'end of the
inexperienced waxed hot, and such
evening the Dublin Sketching Club
membership was divided for the complimentary
first remarks as "rubbish",
"daubs", "unfinished", "has to be looked
time in its ten year history. On the
at from a long way off", were as plentiful
one side, irate members led by Dr.as blackberries, but as time passed on and
Todhunter, demanded that the Whistler
the real skill and genius of the painter
paintings should be taken down, or at
were pointed out ... . the ferocity -abated
least," ... the eccentricities should be
and a more generous and rational estimate
hung in a less conspicuous area was taken. The fact is Mr. Whistler
On the other, rooth-Pearsall, Lawless sees nature in his own way . .. Those
and Yeats, together with unidentified interested in this exciting art must go to
members, replied that as members and Molesworth Street, and judge for them
supporters of the Hanging Committee selves ... "18
The following day the implications of
their decision, as laid down by the Club
rules, was final.'4 the Whistler exhibition moved to the
editorial of The Irish Times, in which,
Despite the brewing internal trouble
the 'Private View' day went ahead the on
editor was to note:
Saturday, November, 29th. On Monday, ". . . We publish today a letter from Dr.
even before the Dublin public had a Booth-Pearsall in which he
William
sntudes bytAericns1 Boftmorearal orwless
chance to see for themselves what all
angrily complains of our critic's recent
the fuss was about, the first public
comments upon the Dublin Sketching
broadsides were fired in the first
Club's exhibition. In that criticism, it will
be remembered, a most friendly spirit was
editions of the Dublin newspapers. The
manifested towards the club, and there
Irish Times began by attacking the very
was sufficient recognition of its enterprises
idea of the 'loan exhibition':
...it may be somewhat surprising", the
in affording lo-cal artists, and the public at
large, an opportunity of studying some of
reviewer wrote, "that a notice under this the masterpieces of English and American
aintgle should de chief with c r and workers . . .There was no suggestion that
a loan collection should be made, but, on
-48
This content downloaded from
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 IRISH ARTS REVIEW

WHISTLER IN DUBLIN, 1884

the contrary . . . To call such criticisms It ... I fear Mr. Pearsall that if you once He did not, as he pointed out, "...
"iscoffing" is a mischievous misrepresenta take up the cudgels for Whistler, you will want to enter into the relative merits
tion of candid and honest opinion. . ."19 spend the rest of your days in STRIFE! I of Whistler's work, but to endeavour
Pearsall's lengthy letter to The Irish LIKE FIGHTING - but do not wish to to support your art critic who has
involve all my friends, among whom I trust been most injudiciously found fault
Times was a strenuous defence of the
I may count you - in my battles . .. ". 21
Club's (or, rather the Hanging Com with for the remarks he thought it his
mittee's) decision to bring the Whistler Nevertheless, Whistler, it appears was duty to make in his critique of the
paintings to Dublin. It was also an enjoying every moment of this, yet exhibition . . . ". "Surely", he went on;
equally staunch defence of Whistler's another, controversy. And, as he was to ". . . when we have in our midst the Royal
art. As he pointed out in his letter; point out to Booth-Pearsall, he was Hibernian Academy and its members
".. . no other club or society, except the keen to read for himself all the reviews; willing and anxious to exhibit current art
Dublin Sketching Club, takes any trouble to ". . . I should very much like to see all the of the day upon its walls, it might be
show their members and the public any of articles that have been written about my safely left to the members of that
the current art of the day ... And in regard institution, to place there, ... work by
paintings - especially the scurrilous ones,
to the merits of the paintings themselves ... greater and more artistic minds than our
for it is a joy to me to see the loutish
I have received many letters of thanks and underbred method of mine enemies, who
own ... "23
congratulations from artists, literary men, tare (sic) their hair and blunder ... and Apart from The Irish Times, Booth
musicians, and others in Dublin, from whom touch me never. It is my pleasure to watch
Pearsall, Lawless and Yeats continued to
commendation is an honour at any success them in their agonies of infectious daze.
in affording them an opportunity of enjoying
receive public support in the sympathetic
Do send me at once all that they have
this great artist's work in Dublin.... 20 said, these gentlemen (and your own
Dublin Daily Express and Freeman's
members?), I should be so pleased . . .}22 Joumal. Indeed, this line was followed
Soon after Booth-Pearsall's letter by the Dublin press in general. On
appeared in The Irish Times, he wrote to Despite the public furore being caused December 3rd the Dublin Evening Mail
Whistler in London to report upon the by the Whistler exhibits, the private concluded its review of the exhibition
controversy in Dublin and his part in dissent within the Club soon too be in praise of Whistler's work because;
Whistler's defence. Whistler wrote back came a public affair. On December 3rd It... he had struck a path for himself wider
to Booth-Pearsall with a word of an anonymous member of the Club and broader than that which convention
caution; voiced his opinion in The Irish Times. allows without resentment . . . His pictures

Photograph of James McNeill Whistler (sitting back, right) and the Hon. Frederick Lawless (standing, back)
taken in Whistler's studio in 1881.
Original photograph in the Pennell Collection, Library of Congress, Washingtion.

-49

This content downloaded from

188.141.36.177 on Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:02:57 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 IRISH ARTS REVIEW

WHISTLER IN DUBLIN, 1884

came at the beginning of the aesthetic of the fact that despite the traditional the opportunity to examine 'modern'
craze and augmented it. As Edison and belief that the substance and circum art at close quarters, many of them, for
Fulton experimented in the sciences, so
stance of Irish art in this period was the first time.31 One young Dublin
Whistler does in painting. His method is
merely "a mirror image" of its English painter, Walter Osborne (1859-1903),
strange and new ... His effects are con
sequently striking, and arrest attention . . .
counterpart, the evidence tends to certainly took full advantage of his
His tones are delicate"24 suggest otherwise. Unlike the English recently acquired membership of the
press in general, the Irish media con Club to examine the exhibits in
The anger felt by some Club members
sistently, throughout the three-week depth.32 Years later, Osborne gave his
had not abated. On Thursday, Decem
exhibition, presented a receptive and lifelong friend, Stephen Gwynn, a copy,
ber 4th, another anonymous letter enlightened case for the controversial perhaps made in 1884, of Whistler's
appeared in The Irish Times. While the
Whistler. 'Carlyle', saying, "... it was a picture he
earlier letter from "a club member" had On another level, the circumstances loved ... ".33
obviously been written in a tone of of the exhibition almost certainly high Financially, the exhibition was a
restraint and reason, this letter went
lighted, perhaps for the first time, the resounding success for the Dublin
straight to the heart of the matter, "...
serious structural defects in the accessi Sketching Club. So much so, in fact,
the manner, by which the members'
bility and display of art in Ireland in that the prestigious Pall Mall Gazette
work has been sacrificed to make room
the nineteenth century. The "official" which normally only reported on the
for Mr. Whistler's unintelligible repro
structure was archaic, making no allow Royal Hibernian Academy in Ireland
ductions . .. ."25
ance for what was happening outside of was moved to remark, ". . . the Sketching
The letter, in effect, set the tone for a
the United Kingdom, a situation unfor Club exhibition was a great success and
confrontation in the exhibition hall, in
tunately not remedied by the Whistler a very credible enterprise . . . ". The
Molesworth Street, on the evening of
show of 1884. Indeed, as long after the report continued, ". .. the numbers to
Monday, December 8th, when a group
exhibition as 1904, Sir Hugh Lane, the the exhibition was unusually large, and
of dissident members, led by Todhunter,
man behind the creation of a gallery of the sales amounted to ?224, nearly
drew up a resolution calling for the
Modern Art, in Dublin, was still able to double of last year. This state of affairs
resignation of Pearsall, Yeats and Law
lament the fact that; speaks well for the educated taste of the
less. As part of their evidence they
.... even if our students are expected to city ... 9.34
attempted to photograph the Whistler
work without ever seeing or being stimul However, despite his precise instruct
paintings in the context of the room. At
ated by the sight of a Corot, a Watts, a ions to Booth-Pearsall as to how any
this point several members, including at Whistler or a Sargent we still allow the potential sale should be conducted,
least Lawless and Booth-Pearsall, inter pictures of men who belong to us by birth Whistler made little financial gain from
vened and attempted to remove them. or blood to be hung everywhere but in the exhibition.35 An offer was made by
As Booth-Pearsall was to inform the Ireland - it is an injustice that must be a Club member, the Rt. Hon. Jonathan
Pennells, Whistler's biographers, some done away with . ... 28
Hogg, for the purchase of 'Arrangement
twenty years later, "... a terrible In more immediate terms, the 1884 in Grey and Black - Portrait of the
convulsion (then) took place.. ".26 exhibition made the young William Painter's Mother', but Whistler ada
As a result of "the terrible convul Butler Yeats, ". . . happy for days ... "29 mantly refused to sell.36 The painting is
sion", an emergency meeting was arrang The attraction of Whistler to the young now in the Louvre, Paris. Instead,
ed for the following Wednesday. At that poet derived from the fact that, like the however, Hogg purchased two small
meeting a motion of "no confidence" artist, Yeats did not care for the "repre water-colours, 'Yellow and Grey' (No.
in the Hanging Committee was put to sentation of mere reality" but favoured 233), and 'Nocturne in Grey and Gold,
the members. The motion was defeat instead deliberate and artistic creation. Piccadilly' (No. 251). Both paintings,
ed. Booth-Pearsall then proposed the Indeed, as Yeats refined his poetic the only two sold by Whistler at the
motion, seconded by Lawless, ".... that symbolism in the years following the exhibition, were bequeathed by Hogg to
Mr. Whistler should be made an Hon 1884 exhibition, he would always the National Gallery of Ireland in
orary Member of the Dublin Sketching acknowledge the part he perceived 1930.37
Club". This was carried despite resist Whistler as playing in the emergence of What would have been the crowning
ance from the dissidents. On hearing "symbolic" art. In 1895, the poet wrote, glory in the club's achievement, Whist
the news from Dublin a few days later, ler's first public lecture on his art, was
Whistler informed Booth-Pearsall that "... Pattern and rhythm are the roads to
open Symbolism, and the arts have finally lost to the opportunism of Oscar
he was, ".... greatly pleased with my Wilde. Whistler, who had been invited
already become full of pattern and
elevation in the Club . . . "27 by the organizers to come to Dublin
rhythm. Subject pictures no longer interest
The 1884 Dublin Sketching Club us, while pictures with pattern and and lecture on his art, was initially
exhibition was unique, in that it rhythm, . .. like Mr. Whistler's ... interest uncertain;
was the first one-man-loan-exhibition us greatly. Mr. Whistler has sometimes
of "modern" paintings to be staged in thought so greatly of these patterns and .... as to the lecture question I must think
Dublin in the nineteenth century. It is rhythms, that the images of human life it over and I will write soon for I am not
more difficult to put into perspective its have faded almost perfectly, and yet we sure if I have time for engagements ... "38
broader significance. On one level, local have not lost interest .. .".3 Before long, however, the artist
reviews, apart from the inherently The 1884 exhibition also allowed consented; it is possible that he wanted
conservative rish Times, are ind icative many young Irish artists and students to be in Dublin to welcome home from

-50

This content downloaded from

188.141.36.177 on Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:02:57 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 IRISH ARTS REVIEW

WHISTLER IN DUBLIN, 1884

exile his good friend, the Fenian leader, relation to the contentious plagiarism Whistler's art was unforgiveable. When,
John O'Leary. Whistler wrote to Booth charge made against each man by the on February 20th, 1885 Whistler finally
Pearsall that he might then undertake to other, but also in the extent of Wilde's gave his first public lecture to a packed
give one or maybe two lectures.39 apparent audacity. Despite his "friend audience at the Prince's Hall, Piccadilly,
As the subsequent letters between ship" with Whistler, and the fact that with Wilde in attendance, his anger and
London and Dublin indicate, Whistler he was from Dublin, Wilde was not in frustration towards the "amateur" aes
was very keen to give a lecture, not volved in any way with the organization thete was obvious. Whistler's sheer
merely to the club members, but to the of the Whistler Loan exhibition, though vehemence and blatant reference to
general public. In the meantime he he was almost certainly aware of it. Wilde's plagiarism, - "... nothing have
insisted that the plan should be kept Likewise, Whistler's planned lecture in they invented ... " almost certainly
private, writing Dublin was certainly known to Wilde. marked Dublin as the final straw.
". . . Tell Lawless to say nothing about the But the conspicuous absence of any Nothing of a comparable nature to
possible lectures ... ".40 notice in the Dublin press about the 1884 exhibition was to take place in
However, before the first week of Wilde's lecture (which is accounted for Ireland for nearly fifteen years. Then,
January, 1885, was over there was no by "the scant audience" as reported by and only with the combined institutional
need for Whistler to bother. Oscar The Irish Times) gives rise to the strong weight of many interested parties and
Wilde got there first. On the afternoon suspicion that his lecture was not the driving force of Hugh Percy Lane,
of Tuesday, January 6th, before "a scant planned in advance. It appears to have the process to create a gallery of
audience"41 in the Gaiety Theatre, been a case of one-up-man-ship on modern art in Ireland, initiated in 1899,
Dublin, Wilde gave a lecture on 'The Wilde's part. Returning to Ireland after an exhibition entitled, "A Loan Collec
Value of Art in Modern Life', subtitled, Christmas, and hearing of the contro tion of Modern Paintings". Like the
'The Meaning of the Aesthetic Move versy caused by the Whistler paintings a 'trail-blazer' all those years before, it too
ment'. few weeks earlier, Wilde took it upon "... set Dublin by the ears . . . ".
That hitherto undocumented lecture himself to deliver the lecture. His Ronald Anderson
in Dublin42 is not only interesting in its audacity in speaking on behalf of

1. The duality apparent in Irish art in the latter
half of the nineteenth century is high-lighted
in Julian Campbell's Ph.D. thesis: Irish Artists
in France and Belgium 1850-1914, Trinity
College, Dublin, 1980; see also Campbell's
exhibition catalogue, The Irish Impressionists,
Dublin 1984; see also Jeanne Sheehy's article,
'Irish Painters in France', Hibemia, 14th July,
1972.
2. The quote is Jeanne Sheehy's: see
her excellent exhibition catalogue, Walter
Osborne, National Gallery of Ireland, 1983, p.
27.
3. Unless otherwise specified, material relating to
the chronology of the Dublin Sketching Club,
is by courtesy of the Club. The archival
material is in the possession of the Club's
President. At this point I would like to extend
my grateful thanks to Mr. Bill Spencer.
4. op. cit., Dublin Sketching Club assorted
archive material (hereafter DSC arch.).
5. Freeman's Journal, 16th July, 1881.
6. The Theory of the Beautiful - A Saturday
Lecture, by Professor John Todhunter,
(Reprinted Transcript, National Library of
Ireland).
7. Letter in the Whistler/Pennell Collection,
Library of Congress, Washington DC, Ref.
No. 2/1186-7, (hereafter, W/P,LC).
8. For Whistler's "Irish Connection" see the
author's article, "Whistler: An Irish Rebel and
Ireland - Implications of an Undocumented
Friendship". Apollo Magazine, April, 1986.
9. Confirmed in a letter written by Whistler to
Walter Graves: ms. Birnie-Philip Collection,
Glasgow University Library, Ref. No. G183
(hereafter, BP/GUL).
_NOTES_
10. The exhibition was entitled; Notes, Harmonies
? Nocturnes, and opened on 17th May, 1884.
11. Confirmed in an undated letter from Whistler
to Graves: ms. Harvard University.
12. From a letter written between 26th-30th
November, 1884, W/P, LC Ref. No. 2/1185.
13. Described by William Booth-Pearsall in a
letter dated 4th September, 1907 to Whist
ler's biographers, the Pennells, W/P,LC.
14. op. cit above.
15. Along with Whistler's exhibits there were
three other examples of work by American
artists. All three were lent to the exhibition by
Lawless. They were; 'The Sevres Bridge, nr.
Paris', by Julian Story (No. 206); 'Bead
Stringers of Venice', by John Singer Sargent
(No. 226); 'Venezia', by Ralph Curtis (No.
257).
16. The Irish Times, 1st December, 1884.
17. Dublin Daily Express, 1st December, 1884.
18. op. cit. above.
19. The Irish Times, 2nd December, 1884.
20. op. cit. above.
21. Undated letter, Ref. No. 2/1192-3, W/P, LC.
22. op. cit. above.
23. The Irish Times, 3rd December, 1884.
24. Dublin Evening Mail, 3rd December, 1884.
25. The Irish Times, 4th December, 1884.
26. From a letter to the Pennells from Booth
Pearsall and reprinted in The Life of James
McNeill Whistler (2 vols) by E.R. & J. Pennell,
Philadelphia and London, 1908, p. 36.
Original letter in W/P, LC.
27. Undated letter, Ref. No. 2/1190-1, W/P, LC.
28. From the introduction to an exhibition
catalogue, Irish Painting, Guildhall, London,
1904.
29. Autobiographies, William Butler Yeats,
London (1955), p. 81.
30. A Symbolic Artist and the coming of Symbolic
Art, William Butler Yeats, The Dome, (New
series), Vol. I, December, 1898, pp. 233-7.
31. So great was the interest in the exhibition a
morning was set aside for students from The
Metropolitan School of Art to visit the
Exhibition privately; DSC arch.
32. Osborne was admitted to the Club as a
member in January, 1884, DSC arch.
33. Quote from Stephen Gwynn's Garden
Wisdom, Dublin, 1921, p. 33.
34. Pall Mall Gazette, 20th December, 1884.
35. The instructions to Booth-Pearsall are con
tained in a letter, Ref. No. 2/1192, W/P, LC.
36. In reply to the request for the sale of the
'Mother' portrait, Whistler commented, "...
it was never other than lent!". Letter Ref. No.
2/1193 W/P, LC.
37. 'Yellow and Grey', is now known as 'Evening'
(Nat. Gallery of Ireland, Acquisition No.
2915). 'Nocturne in Grey and Gold, Picca
dilly,' is now known as 'Piccadilly in a Fog'
(Nat. Gallery of Ireland, Acquisition No.
2916).
38. Undated letter, Ref. No. 2/1193 W/P, LC.
39. Undated letter, Ref. No. 2/1186-7, W/P, LC.
40. Undated letter, Ref. No. 2/1194, W/P, LC.
41. Quote from The Irish Times, 7th January, 1885.
42. None of the Wilde literature appears to
include the Dublin lecture of 1885, though he
himself mentions it in a letter: see, The Letters
of Oscar Wilde, Hart-Davis, ed, London, 1962.
43. Mr. Whistler's 10 o'Clock Lecture, reprinted in,
The Gentle Art of Making Enemies, Dover
Edition, London, 1967, pp. 135-159.

-51

This content downloaded from

188.141.36.177 on Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:02:57 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms