Max Liebermann. Briefe [Letters] 1902-1906. Collected, annotated and edited by Ernst Braun. Part One.

CLICK HERE FOR ITALIAN VERSION

German Artists' Writings in the XX Century - 13

Max Liebermann
Briefe [Letters]
Collected, annotated and edited by Ernst Braun
Volume Three (1902-1906)

2013, 651 pages, Baden-Baden, Deutscher Wissenschaftlicher-Verlag (DWV)

Review by Francesco Mazzaferro - Part One

[Original Version: March 2017 - New Version: April 2019]

Fig. 1 - The third volume of letters by Max Liebermann

We are continuing to review the volumes of the correspondence of Max Liebermann (1847-1935), edited by Ernst Braun and published by Deutscher Wissenschafts-Verlag in 2011. This review is dedicated to the third volume, covering the years 1902-1906.

There was no peace among the artists

In united Germany, a young country existing only since 1871, the controversy about art was a part of the political discussion, even before being an expression of a collective discourse on what was beautiful and what was ugly. It was the Emperor Wilhelm II, in December 1901, to give a fiery speech on "The true art" in the occasion of completion of the frieze of the Siegessäule (Victory Column) in Berlin. Good art - the emperor said in his speech, with a frontal attack against the Secessions – should not be based on the creations of groups and factions of artists creating separate committees to ensure that their works be more easily selected for exhibitions, but on the direct contact between the client (in this case, the emperor) and the artists. The latter should be allowed full freedom of implementation, but in compliance with directives of beauty, harmony and decorum. "An art that is opposed to laws and limits placed by me, is not art: it is factory work, it is business, but you can never make it an art" [1]. True art needed therefore to have an educational and celebratory task, and it was even its task to "give a chance to the classes of workers and labourers to rise to beautiful, and to free themselves from - and overcome - the usual concerns” [2].

It is obvious that the Berlin Secession, founded in 1898, and Max Liebermann, its president, were among the main recipients of the attack. In fact, Arthur Kampf, another painter famous at that time in Berlin, recalled in his memoirs that in 1906, when the Emperor visited the Grosse Berliner Kunstausstellung (the Great Berlin Art Exhibition), i.e. the only occasion when academics and secessionists exhibited together in Berlin, he refused to visit the room reserved for the latter. "You are right to show that art, but I do not want to see it” [3].

Three months after the Emperor's speech on "The true art", Liebermann took the hit and wrote to the publicist Maximilian Harden on March 7, 1902: "The emperor's discourse on art resounded like a violin romance to the ears of 44 million Germans, and this is what is most sad” [4]. The painter was aware to represent a minority of the population. At the same time, however, he believed that this was his own true strength: "We have to run ahead and detach the good bourgeois, distancing him by at least two nose-lengths (and we Jews are well suited for this purpose)” [5].

With this in mind, it is obvious that the letters became, above all, an instrument to manage a conflict: Liebermann used his correspondence as the preferred way to make alliances, strengthen friendships, enforce compliance within the artist associations, but also to weave true plots. In the immediately preceding years, when the cycle of the Secession exhibitions had started, we witnessed the transformation of the artist into a veritable art manager and we saw him welcoming the profits made through the auctions of the works displayed at the exhibitions. Between 1902 and 1906, Liebermann was instead exonerated from most concerns about money and rights. To solve these matters had become the task of Paul Cassirer, the secretary of Secession. The references to the commercial success of the exhibitions, previously included in the letters to his regular correspondents (the directors of major museums), disappeared. Liebermann had therefore time to fully devote himself to his institutional functions: to create links between artists, critics, publicists, writers and other members of culture and society, in favour of his creature, the Berlin Secession. When Liebermann realized that the core of Berlin artists was too small to withstand a political attack of first magnitude, he promoted a 'national' response, crossing the borders of Berlin and establishing the Deutscher Kuenstlerbund, the League of the German artists, set up in Weimar in 1903.

After the formation of the League, i.e. of a national initiative, the theme of art animated German politics, with a two-day parliamentary debate in the Reichstag on 15 and 16 February 1904. It became an opportunity for the political forces to express a condemnation of imperial opinions, showing that in Germany there were institutions capable of countering Wilhelm II. In preparation for the debate, Liebermann, von Kalckreuth, Count Kessler and Leistikow (today we would say: the lobbyists of the Secession) met some members of the Reichtstag (in particular, politicians of the conservative political party [6], i.e. the policy area that could have more easily shown, at least in theory, reserves against contemporary art) to convince them of their arguments. Possibly, the choice of the members of the parliament also reflected the political preferences of the four (none of them must have been social democratic).

The main scholar of the Berlin Secession, the American academic Peter Paret (1924-), provided us with a detailed analysis of the parliamentary debate in his monograph "The Berlin Secession. Modernism and its enemies in Imperial Germany", published in 1980 [7]. The government was on the defensive: the state secretary of the Ministry of the Interior (the part of government in charge of art at those times) just said that nobody could prevent the Emperor to have an opinion. Wilhelm von Kardorff (1828-1907) – a long-time politician and follower of Bismarck, but also the father of Konrad von Kardorff (1877-1945), a minor painter of the Secession – surprised everyone and stated: "We are not in an absolute state and even not in Prussia, but in a federal state, in the German Empire [editor's note: Deutsches Reich was the name of the united Germany], and here the will of one person cannot dictate the line. And how much the taste of even the most brilliant of the monarchs could be wrong in some circumstances is shown by the judgment of Frederick the Great about Shakespeare” [8]. Von Kardorff belonged to the political majority in Parliament. Among the parliamentarians close to the government, also the liberal nationalist Waldemar von Oriola (1854-1910) took a position in favour of the Secessions. It was less surprising that the President of the Social Democrats, Paul Singer (1844-1911) and the young Social Democratic Member of the Reichtstag Albert Südekum (1871-1944) took the same position. In addition to supporting the freedom of artistic expression, parliamentarians discussed realism and impressionism, manifesting different aesthetic opinions. Singer, the leader of the left-wing opposition in parliament, stated that the Emperor wanted to suppress the Secession because he was afraid of an art representing reality with all its problems; Mr Südekum instead intervened in favour of Manet and French impressionism from a stylistic point of view. Count von Oriola, finally, expressed many reservations on secessionist painting as such, which did not prevent him, however, to refuse the Emperor's interference in principle. The parliamentary debate was one of the rare cases in that time when members of the parliamentary majority (nationalist liberals and conservatives) and minority (socialists and radicals) expressed common positions. The debate was also documented by articles of The Times in London and the New York Times in the United States.

On February 17, Liebermann wrote to his friend Jan Veth, Dutch painter with whom he was in contact for years, and wrote proudly: "All Berlin is still under the impression of yesterday’s debates on art at the Reichstag. I do not think there has ever been any other parliament in the world, which discussed about Manet. We won brilliantly and even the 'old guard' cannot recall ever having experienced so a solid unanimity in Parliament. We have been celebrated on every side, as commanders after victory in battle. Even the Centre and the Conservatives have sung our praises” [9].

So the lobbying action by Liebermann was not in vain: the parliamentary majority and opposition forces in the national parliament supported the Secessions. But to show how intricate the political dialectic can be in any polity, which is structured at multiple levels of powers, the Prussian parliament also discussed specifically the Berlin Secession (within its competence, because it was based in the Prussian territory), just a few months later (on 14 and 15 April 1904) and expressed more conservative opinions than the Reichstag, though not totally negative. However, in 1905 the Berlin Secession was so well established, from an economic point of view, that it could move from the Kantstrasse, where it had held exhibitions since 1899, to the the Kurfürstendamm, still today one of the capital's main streets. The Letters documented how the Secession acquired land there in June 1904, established a limited liability company [10], launched an architectural competition [11] and held, only a year after, the inauguration of the new headquarters designed by architect Bruno Jautschus (from today’s perspective, it is amazing how in those days it was possible to start and complete certain things in such a short time). These were therefore years of battle for aesthetic consensus in a capital city (and country) that was modernizing at great speed: it was documented by the fact that, as of April 1902, Liebermann began to refer to the use of the phone in his letters. A curiosity: in some cases, letters were used to announce phone calls and to agree to hold them on the following day, a sign that mail service, in Berlin and in the big cities, worked very well [12].

The exhibitions of the Berlin Secession between 1902 and 1906

Obviously, the first form of resistance against the imperial power was to organize exhibitions that would attract audiences with a high quality product. The goal of the Secession was indeed to offer member artists a privileged instrument to present their works and make sure that they would be sold at market price. The competitor was the "Great Berlin Art Exhibition" (Grosse Berliner Kunstausstellung), the official exhibition of academic art; the latter had much larger financial resources and especially more capacious exhibition spaces, since their performance was held at the Glaspalast (Crystal Palace) in Berlin. For Liebermann and the Secession, the selection of the works to be exhibited thus became crucial: not being able to count on quantity, they had to guarantee quality.

Paret defined the aesthetic success of the Secession primarily as the outcome of the entry of Lovis Corinth and Max Slevogt in its board [13]. According to Paret, the first Secession of 1899, based on the collaboration between Max Liebermann - actually a conservative in terms of aesthetics - and Walter Leistikow - a major cultural animator, but not a great artist – did not have the potential to make any lasting impact. Always in Paret’s view, the greatest merit of Liebermann (in historical perspective) was to overcome the resistance of his colleagues (who, at the beginning of the Secession, intended to organize an exhibition of only German artists, even better if confined to Berlin) and to open it to the art of the rest of Europe [14]. For the rest, Liebermann would have been a secondary player in the development of German modern art.

In fact, the third volume of the collection of letters shows that Liebermann worked full-time at the preparation of the Secession exhibitions, which took place in the form of two events a year: one for painting and sculpture (spring-summer) and one for drawing and graphical art (winter). Here I would like to briefly explain how one artist could manage to be chosen to exhibit paintings, sculptures or graphics in one of the rooms of the Secession: he either went through a competition and was chosen by the official jury, or was invited by the President (and was not been subjected to the mechanism of jury). The same rule applied to German and foreign artists. Liebermann - as President - thus had the opportunity to influence/correct the direction of the exhibitions, through his special power of invitation. This was not a formal and bureaucratic task: he was, very often, the one taking initiatives, and choosing the interlocutors personally. In many cases, Liebermann wrote to the artists in person, in others addressed collectors and trade intermediaries, in search of new works that had never been exhibited in Berlin before (that was the chief rule of the Secession). Certainly, Liebermann was not the only agent of the evolution of artistic taste in the capital; yet the letters show that he never had a secondary role.

In the previous review, we took care of the first four exhibitions. The third volume of Letters covered eight others, from the fifth to the twelfth one. We read the correspondence especially being careful to look for evidence of how the President influenced the preparation of the shows, and therefore the taste of the public in Berlin. At least to our knowledge, there is no other description of Liebermann’s role in organizing the exhibitions of the Secession, which would be based on an accurate reading of his correspondence.

The fifth exhibition (April-October 1902)

The fifth exhibition of the Berlin Secession was held between April 26 and October 5, 1902. With it - Liebermann noted – the Secession made a further quality leap [15].

The goal was to present a superior exhibition to all those organized in Germany so far, both by academics and secessionists. Paret informed us, in fact, that "an increasingly strict jury reduced by a quarter the size of the annual show. The number of artists from Berlin now matched the number of artists from the rest of Germany, and foreign artists represented now a fifth. Among the sensations of the 1902 exhibition, there were 22 pictures of the "Frieze of Life" by Munch. Other foreign exhibitors were Kandinsky, Monet and Manet, whose five paintings were hanging from a 'wall of honour' ” [16].

Liebermann exposed his Samson and Delilah, one of his most monumental paintings, who he had just finished [17], but at which he had actually worked for ten years (the first sketches were dated 1901). The composition with two naked bodies in the foreground, in a combined pose that could be compared to that of a classical representation, generated endless discussions in the German world [18]. In fact, in his Letters the artist never entered the theme of the reasons of the composition. However, he confided to the Dutchman painter and friend Jan Veth: "I fear that the public might not like Samson and Delilah. It seems to be the fate of my works that they are valued only 10 or 15 years after their first appearance” [19]. Disputes continued even after the end of the exhibition, as evidenced by a letter sent to Franz Servaes on November 12 [20].

The Letters also cleared that, with the fifth exhibition, Max Slevogt (1868-1932) and Lovis Corinth (1858-1925), once active in Munich, (in the Volume II of the letters we noticed that Liebermann did not know them yet well) were now playing a central role in Berlin, where they had moved, becoming members of the Secession’s Board. The public admired how Slevogt portrayed on the stage the opera singer Francisco D'Andrade, a Portuguese baritone who was one of the most famous opera singers of all times, still one of the most famous paintings by Slevogt today [21]. Visitors also discovered here many still very well-known paintings of Corinth today, including the Self-portrait with his naked wife Charlotte and a glass of champagne and the Three Graces. According to German art historians (especially after the war), Slevogt, Corinth and Liebermann formed the stainless "triad of German impressionism" (according to Paret, the expression was coined by Cassirer) [22].

Obviously artists, who were not members of the Berlin Secession, were also invited to be part of the fifth exhibition. In those years, many believed that Max Klinger (1857 -1920) was the greatest living German artist (and even someone believed that he was the greatest German artist ever). Klinger created that year the Beethoven statue for the exhibition on Beethoven at the Vienna Secession (the same event, for which Klimt painted the frieze of Beethoven). The statue was also exposed in Düsseldorf, at the exhibition of national art, getting great attention (for better or for worse). For the Berlin Secession, Klinger did not send the original, but a scale model. Liebermann wrote to him on March 29 and also thanked him for the bust of Elsa Asenijeff and for another model of a statue of Franz Liszt [23]. Visitors to the Kantstrasse that year were thus kept in step with the times.

Liebermann obtained by Auguste Rodin (1840 -1917) the Temptation of St. Anthony, also only recently finalised [24]; it was a subject on which many artists of that generation struggled, after Flaubert had published La Tentation de saint Antoine in 1874. Liebermann also demanded the director of the Gemäldegalerie in Berlin, Wilhelm von Bode, to receive on loan the bust that the sculptor Adolf von Hildebrand (1847-1921) had just finished, portraying Bode himself [25]. He asked Lichtwark to lend him five paintings by Leopold von Kalckreuth (1855-1928), exhibited at the Kunsthalle in Hamburg [26]. The letters show that he was the one who got the five aforementioned Manet's canvases from the Parisian collectors Duret and Durand-Ruel and his friend Max Linde [27]. He also organised a selection of Dutch symbolists, such as Jan Toorop [28].

The younger avant-garde art was present, as already mentioned, with Edvard Munch (1863-1944), enfant terrible of the Berlin art world for a decade now, and Wassily  Kandinsky (1866-1944), who worked in those years in Munich as co-founder of the Phalanx group. In fact, Liebermann did not like at all Munch: the volume cites passages in Gustav Schiefler’s diary, in which the latter tried in vain to convince the painter about the good reasons of the Norwegian artist. The Berlin painter replied: "With his ideas! He does not understand anything!" [29]. In fact, it had been Leistikow to discover Munch and to further liaise with him. To the contrary, the relationship between Liebermann and Kandinsky was not occasional: in 1904 Liebermann advised him personally to Leopold von Kalckreuth [30]. A comparison between the bust of Hildebrand and the painting by Kandinsky is however sufficient to appreciate the ample variety of proposed artists.

The sixth exhibition (November 1902)

The sixth exhibition opened on November 29, 1902 as a show of graphic art (and, in addition, as always for winter exhibitions, small sculptures too). It was the second exhibition of graphic artwork, after that above mentioned of December 1901, The highlight was represented by sixty works of Otto Greiner (1869-1916), the favourite pupil of Max Klinger.

The letters tell us that several foreign artists were also hosted, including the Swedish Anders Zorn (1860-1920) and Carl Larsson (1853-1919), the English John Macallan Swan (1847-1910) [31], the Swiss Théophile Steinlen (1859–1923) [32] and obviously many Dutch artists [33]. Liebermann commented that the international nature of the exhibition was also emphasized by the press [34]. Liebermann himself presented for the occasion drawings and pastels of his six-week travel to Florence and Rome in the autumn of 1902 (to which we will devote a few pages below), along with the Hamburg-based graphical environment. Reading the letters of those days, the success of the graphic displays was superior to all expectations [35].

The seventh exhibition (from April to August 1903)

The seventh exhibition [36] was held at the time of maximum tensions between the secessionists in Munich and Berlin. Just because he risked isolation within Germany, Lieberman wanted to produce an event going beyond the Berlin world. This was the reason why, in March 1903, he wrote to the Munich Secessionist Hermann Schlittgen (1859-1930), with whom he still had a good relationship, asking for advice on whom else he could invite to attend from Southern Germany [37]. He addressed von Kalckreuth, the painter from Stuttgart, asking he would please send many works [38]. Then he accentuated his openness to all the avant-gardes which were in open dispute with the Munich leader von Lenbach, confirming Kandinsky [39], and imposing the presence of new groups that would bring new accents, such as the symbolist group of the "Clod" (Die Scholle) [40] in Munich. Hans Rosenhagen’s review [41] on the exhibition referred to a "revolutionary spirit" and an exhibition that was aimed primarily "to an audience of connoisseurs".

Among the artists who by now had become stable part of the Berlin world, the exhibition hosted Corinth, Slevogt [42], Tuaillon [43] and Trübner [44]. The first was present with "The fight between Ulysses and the beggar" and "Girl with bull". Liebermann presented "Man of parrots", one of his paintings with a strongest coloristic characterization.

Peder Severin Krøyer, an artist from Denmark, sent two new works; he had already been successful in Berlin with a solo exhibition and had said in the past to be interested to participate in the Secession [45]. The two paintings – documenting the travel of the Danish to South Tyrol – had great success. This immediately urged Liebermann to ask the same painter to arrange the sending of 12-15 works by contemporary Danish artists for the following year. In parallel, he made the same request to Anders Zorn for Sweden [46]. As we have seen also commenting the writings of Corinth, the interest in the Scandinavian world was growing in Berlin. Krøyer answered by return mail to Liebermann’s request, proposing a detailed list of artists to be contacted to request their new works [47], list immediately accepted by Liebermann [48].

The eighth exhibition (November 1903)

The exhibition of graphics and small sculpture was held in the days when Liebermann was completely absorbed by the launch of the "League of German artists" (Deutscher Künstlerbund), the association bringing together all groups of German artists, who were hostile to academia. The catalogue [49] reveals that it was a demanding performance with more than one thousand pieces, three hundred of which were drawings, watercolours and lithographs by Rodin (they were displayed in rotation, since there was not enough space for all of them [50]); there was also an important collection of drawings by Aubrey Beardsley.

In the days before the opening, Liebermann wrote to Count Kessler, one of the great supporters of German modern art, asking he would liaise with Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche to ensure that the bust of his brother, a work by Max Klinger, would arrive in time for the opening [51]. The German philosopher had died in 1900 and was obviously still an extremely prestigious personality. On the opening day of the exhibition, Liebermann telegraphed to Rodin to celebrate a "huge success” [52] of his graphic collection. A letter followed, the same day, signalling to the French sculptor the enthusiasm of the other artists for their discovery of Rodin as a draftsman and watercolourist [53] of great quality. He asked for a second dispatch, so that he could organize a solo exhibition in February 1904, exclusively dedicated to Rodin's drawings. Only one week passed, and he sent a letter again to the French sculptor, to thank him for having accepted [54]. On December 5, he confirmed to Rodin the arrival of the second consignation of graphic works [55].

The ninth exhibition (3 May to 15 September 1904)

Preparations for the ninth Secession exhibition had already started in the previous year, with the above mentioned correspondence with the Danish Krøyer and the Swedish Zorn, which eventually led to the presence of a special section of Scandinavian works [56]. Once again, Liebermann put his faith on Rodin, with a letter of 14 February. Liebermann wanted absolutely to have him at his side in the Berlin battle: "You do not ignore the difficulties and obstacles that come from the Emperor. The case of von Tschudi is the proof. Only you can overcome resistance, your genius is the strongest weapon in the fight against the antiquated prejudices” [57]. The same week he also wrote, as usual, to Jan Veth to collect works of Dutch artists [58].

But it was domestically, in Germany, that new events occurred. The ninth exhibition was held in an atmosphere of renewed unity between German secessions, which had all joined the League of German artists. So Liebermann wrote to Hugo von Habermann (1849-1929) on February 7, 1904, as representative of all Munich secessionists, to ensure their participation: he asked, as a minimum, the presence of von Habermann himself, Franz Stuck (1863-1928) and Fritz von Uhde (1848-1911) [59]. In the same days, he made the same request to Leopold von Kalckreuth, to be sure that also south-western Germany would be present [60]. It was also new the interest in a participation of the symbolist sculptor Ignatius Taschner (1871-1913) [61], who however decided not to send any work for the occasion (he however participated in the following exhibition).

The tenth exhibition of the Berlin Secession (and the second national exhibition of the League of German Artists) (19 May to 31 October 1905)

The tenth exhibition of the Berlin Secession, held in the new headquarters on the Kurfürstendamm, coincided with the second national exhibition of the Deutscher Künstlerbund [62] (the first was held last year in Munich). Quite obviously, Liebermann prepared it, since December of the previous year, in close coordination with Leopold von Kalckreuth, the president of the League, while also exploring new ideas. As for the Berliners, Liebermann was concerned about the lack of new works by Slevogt and Leistikow [63], who had exhibited all their latest works in previous exhibitions. It grew instead the role of Max Klinger, to whom Liebermann proposed to dedicate an entire room (with a series of sculptures). In line with his strong classical orientation, Klinger also suggested to combine some modern and old masters, although the proposal had not follow-up [64]. Klinger was also the promoter of a new initiative: he purchased in April 1905, with the support of the Secession, a villa in Florence (the Villa Romana) [65], and he made it the place where the winners of an annual competition sponsored by the League could stay for a year or six months [66]. The award became crucial to select the best artists of the younger generation (the winners of the first years included Gustav Klimt, Max Beckmann, Georg Kolbe, Fritz Mackensen, Fritz Erler and Käthe Kollwitz) [67]. Villa Romana is still today an active institution in Florence (http://www.villaromana.org/front_content.php).

Among the members of other secessions, Liebermann intended to reserve much space to Uhde and Stuck, besides the same president of the League, von Kalckreuth [68]. One month ahead of the opening of the exhibition, he wrote with some concerns to Hugo von Habermann: the contribution of Munich's secession was not yet clear, and this made impossible to print the catalogue [69]. In the last few weeks before the opening of the exhibition, Liebermann obtained a large number of sculptures by Adolf von Hildebrand [70], including a bust of Wagner provided by the latter's wife, Cosima [71]. As for his own paintings, he exhibited paintings made in Hamburg in the summer of 1902, which had not yet left the Hanseatic city (The polo players at the Jenisch park and the Terrace of the Restaurant Jacob in Nienstedten on the Elbe) along with canvases of the previous summer made in the Netherlands in the area of Edam, and some works of 1904 (the portrait of von Bode).

It must be said that - despite the extensive effort - the show did not encounter the expected success. Putting together the Secessions of the various art centres and the other German anti-academic groups was equivalent to creating a potpourri without a clear direction. Liebermann learned that von Bode, the director general of the Berlin art collections, was preparing to publish a harsh criticism and implored him from Amsterdam (on August 27) to give up publishing the article. "I would not like that you are understood in the wrong way, as if you were our enemy. I too find that much of what we hang in our exhibition is not nice at all and I have sometimes to close both eyes (Are you not doing the same too? Does it not happen to any of us who are in a managerial position to depend on others?). I am also not stupid enough to ask you to magnify our exhibition. You would not do that, because it would be against your conventions. And, Thank God, I am not compelled to ask you to take that step, otherwise I would be forced to resign from the presidency of the Secession tomorrow” [72].

The eleventh exhibition (21 April to 7 October 1906)

In 1905 the usual winter exhibition of graphics was not organized, and thus the eleventh exhibition of the Berlin Secession was held between April and October 1906 [73]. It was a crucial year for the German art: the Brücke (Bridge), i.e. the first Expressionist group, was set up in Dresden on that year. The Secession did not take them into account, even if the catalogue included for the first time a painting by Emil Nolde (1867-1956), or the Harvest day (however, a canvas of still impressionist taste). It was the first time that the fate of the two painters, Nolde and Liebermann met; eventually, they were deemed to become mortal enemies later on. The letters did not include any reference to Nolde’s work, but Ernst Braun attached as an appendix a passage from the diary of the judge Gustav Schiefler (one of the promoters of the graphic art of both Liebermann and Nolde), in which the former assessed negatively the second, "He is half crazy. (...) He suffered a lot. The one who helps him to sell something, does a good work (...) His etchings are too capricious [74].”

Perhaps mindful of the problems encountered in the previous year, when he risked the publication of an harsh criticism by von Bode, Liebermann decided to make an opening to contemporary artists, and wrote to the pointillist painter Curt Herrmann (1854-1929) to offer him the direction of "a hall dedicated to the neo-impressionist" to be chosen by him without having to go through the jury [75]. They were mostly French painters of the Nabis group.

To be able to put together a good exhibition of neo-impressionists, Liebermann contacted the Count Harry Kessler; he asked him to put pressure on French and Belgian contemporary artists [76], whom Kessler knew well. Indirectly, it was an admission that Liebermann no longer had direct contacts with the artists of Paris and Brussels, except with the French sculptor Aristide Maillol [77] (1861–1944), who was present with some figures in wood and plaster, and obviously with Rodin, whom he invited again invited (but did not contribute on this occasion). The correspondence shows that, thanks to Kessler [78] it was possible to include in the exhibition works by Paul Gauguin (1848-1903) [79], Pierre Bonnard (1867-1947) [80], Édouard Vuillard (1868-1940) [81] and Maurice Denis (1870-1943) [82]. The Letters also showed that Liebermann was once again able to convince German collectors to lend him two works of Manet, the artist who he called his "dear maestro” [83]. Finally, he got twenty paintings by the father of the Belgian Henri Evenepoel (1872-1899) [84].

To ensure the presence of works by routinely present German artists, Liebermann of course wrote to Klinger [85], von Kalckreuth [86], von Habermann [87], Trübner [88], Slevogt [89]. He asked Gustav Pauli, director of the Kunsthalle Bremen, whether he could receive a work by Böcklin [90] (indeed, an artist whom he also did not like at all), but this was not granted. As for his own works, Liebermann presented three portraits to which he had devoted a lot of energy (prince Lichnowsky, Berger and Strebel) and a painting with a for him quite unusual historical theme (Leo XIII blesses foreign pilgrims in the Sistine Chapel).

The twelfth exhibition (1 December 1906)

In the 1906 letters, there was only one brief mention to the graphics exhibition starting that month [91].

End of Part One

Go to Part Two 

NOTES

[1] For the whole text of the speeche by the Emperor. See: 
http://www.projekte.kunstgeschichte.uni-muenchen.de/dt_frz_malerei/41-dt-franz-malerei/studieneinheiten/doc/volltexte/vt_8b_q2.doc

[2] Ibidem.

[3] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben (From my life), Introduction by August Gotzes, Aachen, Verlag Museumsverein Aachen, 1950, 64 pages and 16 black and white pictures. Quotation at page 30

[4] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, zusammengetragen, kommentiert und herausgegeben von Ernst Braun. (Letters. Collected, annotated and edited by Ernst Braun), Baden-Baden, Deutscher Wissenschaftlicher-Verlag (DWV), Third volume - (1902-1906), 2013, 651 pages, quotation at page 32.

[5] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 76

[6] They were the Members of the Reichstag Ernst Müller-Meiningen from Munich (p. 172) and Arthur von Posadowsky-Wehner from Prussia (pages 172 and 180)

[7] Paret, Peter, The Berlin Secession. Modernism and Its Enemies in Imperial Germany, Harvard University Press, 1980, 269 pages. Consulted in the German version dated 1981: Paret, Peter - Die Berliner Secession : moderne Kunst und ihre Feinde im Kaiserlichen Deutschland, Berlin, Severin und Siedler, 1981, 351 pages. Quotation at the pages 204-212.

[8] Paret, Peter - Die Berliner Secession (quoted), p. 204

[9] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 181

[10] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 240.

[11] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 208

[12] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 58.

[13] Paret, Peter - Die Berliner Secession (quoted), p. 139.

[14] Paret, Peter - Die Berliner Secession (quoted), p. 137.

[15] See the highly interesting review by Hans Rosenhagen in “Die Kunst für alle” at the web address 
(http://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/kfa1902/0462).

[16] Paret, Peter - Die Berliner Secession (quoted), p. 138.

[17] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 44.

[18] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 47.

[19] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 48.

[20] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 75.

[21] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 49. The picture raised the interest of Tschudi for the National Gallery, but the commission which had to approved it refused the purchase.

[22] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 150.

[23] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 39.

[24] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), pp. 43 and 46.

[25] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 19.

[26] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 41.

[27] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), pp. 42 and 44.

[28] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 24.

[29] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), pp. 503-504.

[30] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 241.

[31] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 80.

[32] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 77.

[33] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 72.

[34] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 79.

[35] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), pp. 79-80.

[36] The catalogue is available at https://archive.org/details/katalogderausste07berl.

[37] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 106.

[38] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 95.

[39] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 106.

[40] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 106.

[41] Hans Rosenhagen’s review for Die Kunst für alle is available at:
http://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/kfa1902_1903/0419?sid=85bbcde781eaf6150bbde7a6ed0050f7 .

[42] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 111.

[43] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 111.

[44] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906),  p.,111.

[45] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 107.

[46] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 112.

[47] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 113.

[48] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 115.

[49] The catalogue is available on the internet at the address: 
https://archive.org/details/katalogderausste08berl.

[50] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 140.

[51] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 136.

[52] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 139.

[53] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 140.

[54] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 142.

[55] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 159.

[56] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 114.

[57] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 178.

[58] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 181.

[59] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 182.

[60] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 184.

[61] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 175.

[62] The catalogue is available on the internet at the address: 
https://archive.org/details/katalogderzweite00deut. 
The review by Hans Rosenhagen is available at 
http://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/kfa1904_1905/0526?sid=ba60c8699814ce2209b12da61685e063 (part one) and
http://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/kfa1904_1905/0550?sid=ba60c8699814ce2209b12da61685e063 (part two)

[63] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 249.

[64] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 249.

[65] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 282.
See also http://www.villaromana.org/upload/Texte/Archivtext1.pdf.

[66] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), pp. 271 and 273.

[67] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 308.

[68] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 249.

[69] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 287.

[70] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 299.

[71] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 301.

[72] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 342.

[73] The catalogue is available on the internet at the address: 
https://archive.org/details/katalogderzweite00deuthttps://archive.org/details/katalogderausste11berl.

[74] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 537.

[75] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 383.

[77] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 382.

[78] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 393.

[79] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 392.

[80] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 393.

[81] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 393.

[82] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 390.

[83] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 417.

[84] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 433.

[85] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 388.

[86] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 404.

[87] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 408.

[88] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 418.

[89] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 418.

[90] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 403.

[91] Liebermann, Max – Briefe, (…), Third volume - (1902-1906), p. 477.