Francesco Mazzaferro. Gustav Friedrich Waagen and his Two Reviews of the 'Artists' Letters' by Ernst Karl Guhl. Part Three

CLICK HERE FOR ITALIAN VERSION

Francesco Mazzaferro
Gustav Friedrich Waagen and his Two Reviews of the Artists’ Letters by Ernst Karl Guhl
Part Three

Fig. 39)

This is an English translation of the second part of a book review published by Gustav Friedrich Waagen, dated 1857. He discussed the second volume of Ernst Karl Guhl's anthology 'Artists' Letters' from the second half of 1500 to 1600. 

For the first part of the review click here. 

Waagen also reviewed Guhl’s first volume. For reading the review of the first volume, please click here.

***

As known, the combination of the best qualities of the different masters notoriously became conversely (and excessively) the key principle of painting for the Carraccis, as explained by the famous sonnet by Agostino. If such a principle was bound to have a paralyzing effect on the school's productions, luckily for them the practical implementation of the theory was, however, much less uniform, irrespective of whether certain characteristics (for example the representation of Michelangelo's form and the representation of Titian’s colour) were deemed to cancel one another, at least to a certain degree. And anyway, a work of art that may also include features of Raphael, Correggio, Primaticcio, Tibaldi and Parmigianino would deprive every artist of any ease, so that the result would only be a caput mortuum, i.e. a residue, composed by the painter combining characteristics extraneous to him. In the works of the Carracci and their followers, however, we become aware that sometimes the one, sometimes the other direction have served as a model. Likewise, Ludovico Carracci is inspired by the realism of the Venetian school in his painting The multiplication of bread and fish in this museum (number 371 [translator's note: in the 1826 catalogue of the art collections of Berlin]), while in his Virgin and child (number 361) and in his Venus with Love (number 382) also in Berlin, he follows resolutely Correggio. In general, the [Carracci] school has generally accepted the contribution of the Venetians in the execution. However, to the great detriment of the clarity of their paintings, the artists of the school very much curtailed the use of veiled colours; as to the composition and the motifs, they instead revealed a clear preference for Correggio. In the best paintings of the school this aspect of conscious imitation is much less present, while the role of the natural individual art of painters like the three Carraccis, Domenichino and Guido [Reni] becomes very significant. 

Fig. 40) Giuseppe Vermiglio or Domenico Fiasella, said Sarzana, The multiplication of bread and fish (number 371 of the 1826 catalogue of the Berlin art collections, then attributed to Ludovico Carracci). The painting went lost during the Second World War. See: http://web.fu-berlin.de/giove/english/material/verl10.htm

Fig. 41) Ludovico Carracci, Maria with the Child and a lamb, ca. 1608 (number 371 of the 1826 catalogue of the Berlin art collections). See: http://web.fu-berlin.de/giove/collect/carrac5.htm

Fig. 42) Ludovico Carracci (school of), Venus and Love, (number 382 of the catalog of Berlin of 1826 museums).
See: http://web.fu-berlin.de/giove/collect/carrac4.htm

The great importance of the Dutch art of this era is also fully recognized by the author, who speaks with passion on it. Guhl does very well to emphasize the contrast between the imposing religious paintings by Rubens (characterized by their extravagant and brilliant representation, but without any deep religious spirit) and the religious paintings by Rembrandt, where he embodies in art the biblical Christianity of the Protestants: he does it using simple and in most case ugly forms, but without any pride and at the same time with sincere feelings.

Fig. 43) Peter Paul Rubens, The Raising of Lazarus, 1611-1612 (Painting lost in Berlin during World War II.
See: http://www.lostart.de/DE/Verlust/92394)

Fig. 44) Rembrandt van Rijn, The Raising of Lazarus, 1630-1632

As for the letters and related comments, I must limit myself to a few observations on a small number of them. Among the most fortunate pages of the author is the comment on the Carraccis. With good reason, the author dwells on their role of teachers and their prestigious social position. The dark side (Annibale’s envy for his brother Agostino, which caused over the years that the latter would end up dying of a broken heart; the way in which the Farnese family caused Annibale’s ruin, and the bitterness he suffered because he was denied the payment of the appropriate sum for his masterpiece, the famous frescoes in their palace; the sorrow of the poor Ludovico for the untimely death of his best disciples) is only hinted at.

Fig. 45) Annibale Carracci, The Loves of the Gods, 1597

The two letters of Annibale to Lodovico from Parma, where he saw for the first time Correggio’s works, are absolutely fascinating as a naive and enthusiastic expression of a true and enthusiastic artistic soul. Domenichino, who in that school was the one who came the closest to Raphael in his works, for example in his frescoes on the Legend of Santa Agnese [translator's note: actually, Santa Cecilia] in the Church of San Luigi dei Francesi in Rome, never benefited of the recognition that would have been owed to him, because of his introverted and insecure character. He was a too pure and noble soul for those times, in which the surest way to achieve a visible success was that of empty arrogance combined with low intrigue. His statements of praise on the work of his fellow disciple and loyal competitor Guido Reni in the letter he addressed from Bologna to Cardinal Poli are really touching. They read: "This is art which came down from the sky and was painted by an angel".

Fig. 46) Domenichino, St. Cecily before the judge, 1614

Guhl’s comment on Guido himself is excellent: and, in fact, the magnificent success that he had in his day is rightly described. In part, it was explained by the fact that his artworks, besides the notable grace and a certain elegance of the faces, stood out for the brilliant performance and the extraordinary efficacy. These features are typical of the time and Guido had full control of them. For the same reason, there is no artist of the school who had so an important influence on later art. Specifically, he was the one who came closest to what we call today the “mood of modern feeling”. The best side of his character is the rare combination of modesty and true self-esteem as artist; the downside was his addiction to gambling, which led him to dishonourable behaviour towards customers. The letters that we have received of him are unfortunately not very significant.

Albani’s mean personality fits well with the limited nature of his talent. While his kindest paintings are drawn from the world of ancient mythology, I find in them – due to the atmosphere dominating in the pictures - a greater proximity to the bucolic texts by Torquato Tasso and Guarini. In a letter on old masters he also appears as a very inconsistent thinker, assigning primacy to Michelangelo for the greatness of its forms; however, he also explains (and certainly with good reason) that invention is always the main factor of art, and praises Raphael as the best inventor. Quite typical for the decorative and deliberately flattering tone that dominates in this period is a letter written on the painting The expulsion of Adam and Eve from Paradise, sent to a very satisfied customer, where Albani among others says: "I would swear that the praise that you dedicated to my painting, thereby hiding the original sin of Adam and Eve, might return them the original innocence again." I must, however, say that this painting (made in his sixty-ninth year of life) makes absolutely honour to him. I saw it for the first time one year ago at Lord Wensleydale’s (previously Baron Parke). 

Fig. 47) Guido Reni, Sibyl, 1636

Fig. 48) Francesco Albani, Expulsion of Adam and Eve from Paradise, with no indication of date
Source: Zeri Foundation

Lanfranco, which follows immediately afterwards, is rightly judged a reprehensible man by the author; however, in my opinion, he is overrated as an artist. In fact, I cannot agree with the author when he says that his paintings in the dome of the church of S. Andrea della Valle reveal unprecedented boldness and craftsmanship. Instead, I believe that the composition is a failed imitation of Correggio and that the execution is very decorative. The inclusion of five letters in the collection is an excessive honour paid to him. With Guercino, on the contrary, we rather come across with an absolutely worthy and lovable person, and even a painter with top talent. The author assigns to him an intermediate ranking between Caravaggio and Guido Reni. One could agree as to the natural attitude and the colour effects. For the representation of feelings – which is a bit cold – it seems to me that he should be ranked between Guido Reni and Lanfranco. One of his letters to the Jesuit father Ottonelli offers the opportunity to the author to discuss art at the time of fanaticism, especially when the representation of any female nude was doomed. Also the representation of Pagan subjects, and in particular of those with an heretic subject, was condemned.

Fig. 49) Lanfranco, The Annunciation of the Virgin, Rome, Church of Sant'Andrea della Valle, 1621-1625

Fig. 50) Guercino, Jacob, Ephraim and Manasseh, before 1666

Very interesting is the section on the great Rubens. Since I have already amply expressed myself earlier on this artist [23], and the author followed my essay in many respects, I would like to confine myself here only to those matters which concern aspects which are less known about him. Despite his incredible productivity, he found time, in his fully independent position, not only to educate himself on all the interests of a general nature creating passions in those years but also to take part directly, as it is well known, to politics. With reason, the author has therefore excluded the ninety letters in the Gachet collection that do not treat art. From the statements contained in a letter signed by Peiresc à Gevaerts, man of the highest degree of culture in his time, we can learn how valued he was by the most experienced among his contemporaries in every aspect. The letter contains enthusiastic comments about his integrity, his erudition, his deep knowledge of classical antiquity, his experience in world issues, his art and the grace of his companionship.

Fig. 51) Peter Paul Rubens, Giovanni Carlo Doria on horseback, 1606

Although he certainly was a good Catholic, Rubens was still very far from the fanaticism of his time. He uses strong language to criticize the brutality of Tilly and Wallenstein; in the case of serious personal misfortunes he accepts with gratitude words of comfort or expresses solidarity to others, showing the sincere solidarity of a humanist of great culture. So, after the death of his first wife, Elisabeth Brand, he wrote in a letter to Pierre Dupuy: "Your Lordship does well to refer me to the necessity of fate, which does not bend to our passions ..." ; similarly he turns to his friend [Jan Gaspard] Gevaerts, after the disappearance of his wife: "If you can expect some consolation from philosophy, then you have at your disposal a rich wealth of it which you generated yourself. I refer to your Antoninus ... "

Fig. 52) Peter Paul Rubens, The Apotheosis of James I and other studies.
Sketches for the ceiling of the banqueting hall, Whitehall, about 1628-1630

The statements of so a cultivated man as Rubens on the condition of England at the time are really interesting. In fact, he knew everything that Italy, Spain, France and the Netherlands had to offer. He writes in a letter to Pierre Dupuy: "This island seems like a place worthy of the curiosity of every man of culture, and not only because of the grace of the country and the beauty of the people, or for the glory and splendour of public life, which seems to have been set at the highest level by a rich people, dedicated to enjoy the pleasures of peace, but above all because of the incredible amount of beautiful paintings, statues and ancient inscriptions, which are found in this court..." Similar statements are found in a letter to Peiresc. Very representative of that time is the admiration that is paid, in verse and prose, for the sophisticated - but also overcrowded and tasteless - allegories in the paintings depicting the life of Maria de' Medici. To appreciate the breadth of his erudition (in some respects, however, complex and quirky), it is worth to consider some of the critical statements he sent to Pierre Dupuy on the poetry which [Claude Barthelemy] Morisot had written to celebrate his picture on the birth of the queen. "He called Cupids and Zeffiri the figures representing the happy hours of the birth of the queen, which - as is shown by the butterfly wings - are female."

Fig. 53) Peter Paul Rubens, The birth of Maria de' Medici in Florence, 1622-1625

Although the letters by Van Dyck and Rembrandt are not significant, their presence seems justified, taking account of their rarity and the greatness of the artists. On the contrary, we could have spared ourselves, without being exposed to any negative consequences, the letters by [Jacques] Callot, Simon Bouet, Jacques Stella, Claude Vignon. As for Rembrandt, the author follows [Eduard] Kolloff’s rich monograph and rightly notes that he owned a certain conception inspired by the Old Testament, which played such an important role among the Protestants due to their broad knowledge of the Bible. While I think he is right in all other comparisons between Rembrandt and Rubens, I cannot agree with him when he says that in his view the first was an idealist, while Rubens a realist. To the contrary, I concur with the author when he argues that most likely the misfortunes that befell Rembrandt at the end of his life (and forced him to sell off all his assets at auctions) were largely caused by the high price that he had paid, as a passionate collector, for some artworks.

Fig. 54) Rembrandt van Rijn, Self-portrait, 1669

Both the letters by Nicolas Poussin as well as the author's considerations represent one of the most attractive and effective moments of the volume. Today, he is interpreted too one-sidedly as the "painter of rationality and cultivated men" in the words of [Pierre-Marie] Gault de St. Germain. Although for Poussin is crucial to achieve a careful balance between all the elements of art, it should not be forgotten that his idea of art drew from a noble and ardent feeling. His landscapes are dominated by a so exalted poetry of feeling, such a great taste for composition, that he is certainly the greatest master in the historical landscape, whom neither Claude [Lorrain] nor Caspar Poussin [actually: Gaspard Dughet] could ever match. Even some of his historical paintings, like his Arcadian Shepherds in the Louvre, breathe a genteel atmosphere. On many other [critics and artists], particularly in religious art circles, the specialization of Poussin in the enthusiastic study of ancient sculptures has, first of all, the effect of creating a sense of cold distance. In fact, by virtue of his personality and his entire nobility of spirit, and in total opposition to the spirit of his times, he focused more on the essentials and instead disdained appearances. For those who, in limited numbers, were in tune with him in his days, his acquaintance must have offered a sense of rich and noble spirituality. With good reason, the author draws particular attention among his patrons to the Cavalier Cassiano del Pozzo, a lovable man with talent for art. It is to him that those among the posterity who love art must be forever grateful about Poussin's work, because when the artist's genius threatened to succumb to external necessities, he not only threw himself wholeheartedly to his side, but also morally supported him with worthy commissions. Furthermore, his closest friends in Rome included the famous sculptor Du Quesnoy, Claude Lorrain and Joachim Sandrart. Despite strong differences in the overall course of his art, Poussin had in common with Rubens the rejection of religious ecstasy. He clearly took position against the sentimental and sickly representations of Christ, at that time highly appreciated, arguing that Christ was represented as if it were a crook or a hypocrite. Poussin belongs to the rare artists who wanted to express themselves in writing about the essence of art. For him, art consisted solely of the high sphere of history painting, which he calls magnificent manner. It consisted of four aspects: a worthy subject (i.e. heroic deeds and things that have a divine reference), an idea (or the interpretation mode), a composition and a style, which for him means a way of suitably drawing and painting the idea.

Fig. 55) Nicolas Poussin, Arcadian Shepherds, 1640

Fig. 56) Nicolas Poussin, Orpheus and Eurydice, 1649-1651

The author has really done well to reproduce, among his many letters with a serious content, also one (no. 69) where he (thanking his chief protector in France, Mr. [Paul Fréart] de Chantelou, the Secretary of Sublet de Noyers, the Minister of war, for a wine barrel), takes on a cheerful tone and jokes amiably. As for the numerous paintings of Poussin mentioned in the letters, I must be content to note that the first series of the Seven Sacraments, which he painted for the Cavalier Del Pozzo, is currently in the beautiful collection of the Duke of Rutland in the country estate at the Belvoir Castle; the second series, which was painted for the Lord of Chantelou, is not in the Louvre, as reported by the author, but in the rich collection of the Earl of Ellesmere in London. The comparison between the two series is of great interest. The first series is less balanced and rich in the compositions, but has warmer feelings, is slender in relationships and especially more beautiful and clearer in colours, while in the second series the colour becomes very dark, as the layer of bole is expanded.

Fig. 57) Nicolas Poussin, The Seven Sacraments: Baptism, 1640-1642

Fig. 58) Nicolas Poussin, The Sacrament of Baptism, 1646

The moral force of Poussin did not abandon him when the decrease of the physical forces let him portend the approach of death. "It is said – he writes on December 24, 1637 [sic] to the Lord of Chantelou - that the swan songs in a more gentle way when it is close to death. I will try to imitate him, and I will make an effort to achieve the best that I have ever made." I am pleased to announce to the admirers of this outstanding personality that his letters, which had suffered from some changes and omissions in the edition by Quatremère de Quincy, will be forthcoming in a faithful version of the original manuscript that I could browse last year with great interest in Paris with my friend, Mr. Charles Lenormant.

Fig. 59) Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Bust of Cardinal Richelieu, 1640-41

In complete opposition to these letters is Bernini’s letter n. 81 to Richelieu, accompanying the bust of Cardinal, which also reveals a completely different personality than Poussin. Bernini's letter is so full of effusive flattery, that one reads that he was sure that "The blessed God - whose grace the cardinal was able to secure thanks to his virtues - will assist me to ensure that the bust of His Eminence is of sufficient quality." Rightly, the author recognizes the mode of expression as one of the essential characteristics of the art of Bernini. In both [art and writing] he accomodated all fashions of his time and it is therefore obvious that he was filled with commissions, honours and riches.

Salvator Rosa, the last character of some importance that the author proposes, is also a true child of his time, therefore excessive in his passions. After a childhood spent in a severe economic hardship, he became an embittered man: he was addicted to outrage, and with an absolutely plebeian nature. And yet he had a very bright talent, not only in painting, but also as an actor able to improvise. This ability to improvise is also a feature in his paintings and explains their remarkable inequality. Some of his landscapes are so original and personal that they could stand alongside the best works of Claude Lorrain or Caspar Poussin, and indeed they surpass them as to the exuberance of nature. Others are really unrefined. In his historical paintings, to which he famously attributed more weight, he is however much inferior. The incision made by him with the Death of Regulus is now in the collection of Lord Darnley in his country estate in Cobham Hall. Finally, I should mention a writing dedicated to the price-electors by the excellent Joachim von Sandrart, as an example of a true virtuous attitude, different from the otherwise pedantic and tasteless manner of expression of that time. I hope that this second part [of the Artist’s Letters] will receive the same due recognition as the one which the first part obtained universally. And I then hope to soon have under my eyes the third part, in which the author promises to offer us the letters of the sixteenth century German artists [note of the translator: this third part was never published].

Fig. 60) Salvator Rosa, Landscape with Apollo and the Cumaean Sibyl, 1650-1660

NOTES

[23] In Historisches Taschenbuch, published by Friedrich von Raumer in the year 1833, and in an English edition with modifications and completions from the year 1840, published by Saunders and Otley London, translated by Robert R. Noel.