<\/p>\n In 1867,\u00a0Fr\u00e9d\u00e9ric Bazille\u00a0wrote to his parents that he and a group of fellow painters had failed to fulfil their dream of launching an independent art exhibition. They simply couldn\u2019t raise the funds. \u2018We\u2019ll have to re-enter the bosom of the administration whose milk we have not sucked,\u2019 he said ruefully, referring to the all-powerful Acad\u00e9mie des Beaux-Arts.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Bazille and his young friends \u2014\u00a0Claude Monet,\u00a0Auguste Renoir\u00a0and\u00a0Camille Pissarro\u00a0among them \u2014 disliked the way that, to succeed as an artist in mid-19th-century France, one had to have work shown at the official Acad\u00e9mie-run exhibition, the Salon. He dubbed the situation \u2018ridiculous\u2019, on grounds that the Salon\u2019s selection panel was stuffy and consistently favoured academic art over anything innovative.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Tragically, Bazille would die on a battlefield three years later, shortly after enlisting in a light infantry regiment at the start of the Franco-Prussian War. He was 28. The war ended in ignominious defeat for the French, culminating in a victory march through the streets of Paris by enemy forces and an indemnity payment of five billion francs (due to the Germans within five years).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Remarkably, belying such a context, Monet, Pissarro and Renoir soon helped launch the independent exhibition that they and Bazille had craved. It opened on 15 April 1874 in Paris, in the erstwhile studio of the photographer Nadar, at 35 Boulevard des Capucines. The exhibition, perhaps the most momentous in art history, featured work by 30 artists who went under the collective name of the\u00a0Soci\u00e9t\u00e9 Anonyme des artistes peintres, sculpteurs, graveurs, etc<\/em>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n We know them better today as the Impressionists.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n This year marks the 150th anniversary of the first Impressionist show \u2014 there were eight in total, the last of which took place in 1886. A number of celebratory events are planned, including\u00a0a whole festival\u00a0dedicated to the movement in Normandy. Exhibitions will also be held in cities such as Strasbourg, Bordeaux and Nantes. In Paris, the Mus\u00e9e d\u2019Orsay is hosting the biggest show of all,\u00a0Paris 1874: Inventing Impressionism<\/em>, focusing on the movement\u2019s advent. (This later transfers to the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C.)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Nowadays, the Impressionist painters \u2014 collectively and individually \u2014 are beloved worldwide, their names all but guaranteed to attract huge crowds. The challenge for any curator in 2024, though, is how to recreate a sense of the sheer radicalism of the work when it first appeared \u2014 not just the aesthetic, but also the way the artists staged the whole debut show themselves and engaged directly with their audiences. A look at the reviews from 150 years ago may help.<\/p>\n Some were positive, some were negative, with very few neither one nor the other. Ernest d\u2019Hervilly, writing in the newspaper\u00a0Le Rappel<\/em>, called the works \u2018fresh and gripping\u2019, adding that \u2018one cannot encourage this daring undertaking too much\u2019.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n A critic who went by the name of A.L.T., by contrast, wrote in the conservative newspaper\u00a0La Patrie<\/em>\u00a0that seeing the show left \u2018you sorry you didn\u2019t give the franc you paid to enter to some poor beggar\u2019.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n It was an exhibition review, in fact, that gave the movement we now know as Impressionism its name. The critic in question, Louis Leroy, was distinctly underwhelmed by what he saw. Aiming particular barbs at Monet\u2019s painting of the port of Le Havre,\u00a0Impression, soleil levant (Impression, Sunrise)<\/em>, he claimed (among other things) that \u2018a preliminary drawing for a wallpaper pattern is more finished than this\u2019. Appearing in the satirical magazine\u00a0Le Charivari<\/em>, Leroy\u2019s review ran with the disparaging headline: \u2018The Exhibition of the Impressionists\u2019.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n That name ended up sticking, and the artists themselves even came to adopt it by the time of their third exhibition in 1877.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n It\u2019s worth saying that the Impressionists didn\u2019t emerge out of a vacuum. Influences on them included\u00a0Edouard Manet; the Realist master\u00a0Gustave Courbet; painters of the\u00a0Barbizon school, such as\u00a0Charles-Fran\u00e7ois Daubigny; and the Englishman\u00a0J.M.W. Turner. That said, there were a whole host of ways in which Impressionism proved groundbreaking \u2014 and, as such, polarising.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n There were the short, broken brushstrokes, for a start, which barely conveyed forms, instead capturing an overall impression of subjects and emphasesing the effects of light in a fleeting moment. This was a far cry from the smooth surfaces, careful finish and fully developed forms associated with the Acad\u00e9mie.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The Impressionists also adopted a brighter palette than viewers were used to, thanks in part to the recent development of synthetic pigments. They even chose to render shadows in colour rather than, as had hitherto been usual, grey or black.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The advent of squeezable metal paint tubes in the mid-19th century proved significant, too. They were more portable and resilient than pigs\u2019 bladders \u2014 which had previously been used to store paints \u2014 and facilitated the Impressionist practice of painting pictures\u00a0en plein air<\/em>. Light effects could now be captured in situ, in an unprecedentedly faithful manner. (Artists had long painted outdoors, but before the 19th century tended to create preparatory sketches in this manner and produce finished paintings in the studio.)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Another innovation was the dramatic cropping that certain Impressionists adopted \u2014\u00a0Edgar Degas\u00a0most notably, in his off-centre pictures of ballet classes. This was a technique borrowed from photography and\u00a0ukiyo-e<\/em>\u00a0prints, which had recently been introduced into the West from Japan.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Impressionists, then, responded to the modern world in numerous ways, and this extended to their subject matter. Rather than produce history painting \u2014 a genre long favoured at the Salon and inspired by biblical, mythological or historical episodes \u2014 they depicted modern life. Which is to say, scenes taking place amid the wide boulevards, public gardens and grand buildings that newly characterised Paris, thanks to Baron Haussmann\u2019s drastic renovation of the city in the 1850s and 1860s. Everyday people were portrayed going about everyday activities, often in burgeoning new spaces of recreation such as caf\u00e9s and theatres. A famous example is Renoir\u2019s 1876 painting,\u00a0Bal du moulin de la Galette<\/em>, a portrayal of Parisians enjoying themselves on a Sunday afternoon at a popular dance spot on the Butte Montmartre.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n With good reason, Impressionism is remembered as a movement that revolutionised painting. That revolution took a while to catch on, though. Some 3,500 people visited the debut exhibition during its month-long run, significantly fewer than attended the 1874 Salon on an average\u00a0day<\/em>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n What they saw was an eclectic mix of works in different media: not just paintings but also prints, pastels and watercolours, as well as sculptures in marble, terracotta and plaster. It\u2019s true that the big names we associate with Impressionism showed the most works: Degas with 10, Monet and\u00a0Berthe Morisot\u00a0with nine apiece. However, several artists featured whose work was much more traditional in style, and who in some cases had even shown at the Salon before, such as Auguste de Molins and Louis Debras, both of whom were in their fifties.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Their inclusion was the source of disagreement. Pissarro, arguing that it compromised the group\u2019s integrity, eventually lost out to Degas, who felt that established artists would attract more visitors. As Anne Robbins, the co-curator of\u00a0Paris 1874: Inventing Impressionism<\/em>, points out, \u2018the movement was not born fully formed\u2019 \u2014 and there \u2018wasn\u2019t a common aesthetic that bound the artists\u2019 at first, so much as \u2018a common desire to show away from the Salon\u2019.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n There would be other \u2018in-house\u2019 disagreements in the years ahead. The ever-combative Degas, for example, disdained his comrades\u2019 fondness for working\u00a0en<\/em>\u00a0plein air<\/em>. He quipped that \u2018if I were the government I would have a special brigade of gendarmes to keep an eye on artists who paint landscapes from nature\u2019.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n On the plus side, the Impressionists now had something of the financial security that had been lacking in 1867. This came partly courtesy of dealer\u00a0Paul Durand-Ruel, who paid the artists stipends and bought hundreds of their paintings. \u2018We Impressionists would all have died of hunger without him,\u2019 said Monet (with perhaps some exaggeration) late in life.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n When we think of Impressionism today, a group of core figures comes to mind \u2014 Degas, Monet, Morisot, Pissarro, Renoir and\u00a0Alfred Sisley\u00a0\u2014 painters who expounded all or most of the Impressionist traits outlined above. It\u2019s worth noting, though, that a total of 58 artists showed work across the eight exhibitions, with only Pissarro featuring in every one.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Monet actually opted against participating in the fifth exhibition, in April 1880, and showed at that year\u2019s Salon instead.\u00a0Le Gaulois\u00a0<\/em>newspaper reported the news with dark humour, informing readers of the \u2018painful loss\u2019 of \u2018one of [Impressionism\u2019s] revered masters\u2019 \u2014 and announcing that \u2018the funeral of Monsieur Claude Monet will be celebrated on 1 May [the opening day of the Salon]\u2019.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n All of which is to say that Impressionism was a less homogeneous movement than is sometimes believed, with its aims continually being negotiated. Indeed, although the 1886 exhibition is \u2014 for obvious reasons \u2014 deemed a last hurrah, one might see it instead as a further example of evolution.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Included in that show was\u00a0George Seurat\u2019s painting\u00a0A Sunday on La Grande Jatte \u2014 1884<\/em>,<\/em>\u00a0the founding masterpiece of Neo-Impressionism. As its name makes clear, this was a movement born out of Impressionism, the key development being a more systematic application of brushstrokes. Alongside Seurat and\u00a0Paul Signac, Pissarro would become a chief exponent.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Credit: Christie\u2019s Online Magazine<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" As France gears up to celebrate one of the most momentous exhibitions in art history, Alastair Smart traces the genesis and growth of a movement synonymous with the world\u2019s favourite artists, from Monet to Renoir, Pissarro to Morisot Auguste Renoir (1841-1919),\u00a0Bal du moulin de la Galette, 1876 (detail). Oil on canvas. 131.5 x 176.5 cm.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":4103,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[63,57],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/vygallery.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/z5293211454064_9880519c366e01c8f44a019d70595eca.jpg\")
Auguste Renoir (1841-1919),\u00a0Bal du moulin de la Galette, 1876 (detail). Oil on canvas. 131.5 x 176.5 cm. Paris, Mus\u00e9e d\u2019Orsay. Photo: Bridgeman Images<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/vygallery.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/z5293218818940_6962ab67a4cfe946abc7e507c4b9b17f.jpg\")
A photograph by F\u00e9lix Tournachon, known as Nadar, of his studio at 35 Boulevard des Capucines in Paris, which in 1874 became the site of the first Impressionist exhibition. Paris, Biblioth\u00e8que nationale de France, D\u00e9partement des estampes et de la photographie, EO-15(1)-FOL. Photo: Biblioth\u00e8que nationale de France<\/em><\/p>\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/vygallery.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/z5293220864856_3458d013584ab601fd61b0ecd75c2b8f.jpg\")
Claude Monet (1840-1926),\u00a0Impression, soleil levant, 1872. Oil on canvas. 50 x 65 cm. Paris, Mus\u00e9e Marmottan Monet. Photo: \u00a9 Mus\u00e9e Marmottan Monet, Paris \/ Studio Baraja SLB<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/vygallery.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/z5293222665018_b9a32c7e2953cacefd6135ed8e1bea99.jpg\")
Berthe Morisot (1841-1895), Reading, 1873. Oil on fabric. 18\u215b x 28\u00bc in (46 x 71.8 cm). Gift of the Hanna Fund 1950.89. The Cleveland Museum of Art<\/em><\/p>\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/vygallery.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/z5293224271826_3b31515b2c9b55d5dd141c99460caaa5.jpg\")
Edgar Degas (1834-1917),\u00a0The Dance Class, 1874. Oil on canvas. 32\u215e x 30\u215c in (83.5 x 77.2 cm). Bequest of Mrs Harry Payne Bingham, 1986. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\nAuguste Renoir (1841-1919), Bal du moulin de la Galette, 1876. Oil on canvas. 131.5 x 176.5 cm. Paris, Mus\u00e9e d\u2019Orsay. Photo: Bridgeman Images<\/em><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/vygallery.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/z5293229628688_e7d49c94548ba45ab18a796b0b17a5b7.jpg\")
Camille Pissarro (1830-1903), The Public Garden at Pontoise, 1874. Oil on canvas. 23\u215d x 28\u00be in (60 x 73 cm). Gift of Mr and Mrs Arthur Murray, 1964. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York<\/em><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/vygallery.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/z5293214902138_88d72c25ea57bb294d146800d9631ccc.jpg\")
Georges Seurat (1859-1891), A Sunday on La Grande Jatte \u2014 1884, 1884-86. Oil on canvas. 81\u00be x 121\u00bc in (207.5 x 308.1 cm). Helen Birch Bartlett Memorial Collection. The Art Institute of Chicago<\/em><\/p>\n