Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:08:15.446Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Galleries of modern art in nineteenth-century Paris and London: their location and urban influence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 February 2009

Jesús-Pedro Lorente
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Museums of contemporary art tend to be exclusive landmarks of great capitals. We are used to finding art galleries in the most prominent of locations, either in old palaces, or in purpose-built museum buildings. For the special case of galleries of contemporary art, however, it is also a common policy to provide space at the middle of an out-of-town park, or else into the heart of an urban renewal area, using modern arts as ‘flagships’ of city regeneration. This article strives to show that today's dilemmas and choices about the siting of galleries of art are a legacy of the nineteenth century, recalling the lively controversies concerning the urban setting of the Parisian Musée des Artistes Vivants and its London equivalents. The different national cases are explored, to reveal several distinct models of gallery formation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Urban History , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , August 1995 , pp. 187 - 204
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 With outstanding exceptions, as for example Anthony Sutcliffe's studies on architecture and city planning in Paris, London and other capitals. Cf. Sutcliffe, A., Towards the Planned City. Germany, Britain, the United States and France 1780–1914 (Oxford, 1981)Google Scholar; Sutcliffe, A., London and Paris: Capitals of the Nineteenth Century (Leicester, 1983)Google Scholar; Sutcliffe, A., Paris: An Architectural History (New Haven, 1993).Google Scholar

2 Monnier, G., ‘Mobilité des architectes et approche du contexte: Norman Foster à Nîmes’, Öculum. Revista universitária de arquitetura, urbanismo e cultura, 4 (1993), 6–15.Google Scholar

3 Olsen, D J., ‘The city as a work of art’, in Fraser, D. and Sutcliffe, A. (eds), The Pursuit of Urban History (London, 1983), 264–85Google Scholar; Olsen, D.J., The City as a Work of Art: London, Paris, Vienna (New Haven, 1989).Google Scholar

4 Waterfield, G. (ed.), Palaces of Art. Art Galleries in Britain 1790–1990 (London, 1991)Google Scholar; Waterfield, G. (ed.), Art for the People. Culture in the Slums of Late Victorian Britain (London, 1994).Google Scholar

5 Berelowitz, J.A., ‘L.A. stories: of art, MOCA, myths and city building’ (unpublished University of California Ph.D. thesis, Los Angeles, 1991).Google Scholar

6 This paper derives from past research: Lorente, J.-P., ‘Museums for nineteenth century art? A socio-historical study of the creation of galleries of modern art before World War I and their legacy’ (unpublished University of Leicester Ph.D. thesis, 1993).Google Scholar

7 Pevsner, N., A History of Building Types (Princeton and London, 1976), 11–26 and 111–38Google Scholar; Bahns, J., ‘Kunst – und Kulturgeschichtliche Museen als Bauaufgabe des späten 19. Jahrhunderts’, in Deneke, B. and Kahsnitz, R. (eds), Das Kunst-und Kulturgeschictliche Museum im 19. Jahrhundert (Munich, 1977), 176–92Google Scholar; Miller-Lane, B., ‘Changing attitudes to monumentality: an interpretation of European architecture and urban form 1880–1914’, in Hammarström, I. and Hall, T., Growth and Transformation of the Modern City (Stockholm, 1979), 101–14Google Scholar; Monnier, G., ‘L'architecture monumentale contemporaine, une question d'histoire?’, Histoire de l'Art, 27 (1994), 7–17Google Scholar; Foucart, B., ‘Le musée du XIXe siècle: temple, palais, basilique’, in Georgel, C. (dir.), La Jeunesse des Musées. Les Musées de France au XIXe siècle (Paris, 1994), 122–35.Google Scholar

8 Wolff, J. and Seed, J., The Culture of Capital. Art Power and the Nineteenth-Century Middle Class (Manchester, 1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 A research project called Artists in the cities is currently under development at the Centre for Urban History, University of Leicester, and aims to create a database for artists in nineteenth- and twentieth-century Britain with information provided in population censuses and professional directories.

10 Tristan, F., Promenades dans Londres ou l'aristocratie et les prolétaires anglais (Paris, 1978Google Scholar critical edition by F. Bédarida of the 1840 original book), 296–7, 300. For a recent scholarly view of London's particular nature as an emerging art capital cf. Funnell, P., ‘The London art world and its institutions’, in Fox, C. (ed.), London: World City 1800–1840 (New Haven and London, 1992), 155–66.Google Scholar

11 Morrow, W.C., Bohemian Life in Paris Today (London, 1899)Google Scholar; Siegel, J.E., Bohemian Paris: Culture, Politics, and the Boundaries of Bourgeois Life, 1830–1930 (New York, 1986)Google Scholar; Olsen, , The City as a Work of Art, 233.Google Scholar

12 Walkley, G., Artists' Houses in London 1764–1914 (Aldershot and Brookfield, 1994).Google Scholar

13 Milner, J., The Studios of Paris. The Capital of Art in the Nineteenth Century (New Haven, 1988).Google Scholar

14 Mumford, L., The Culture of Cities (New York, 1958), 113Google Scholar; Fox, D.M., ‘Artists in the modern state: the nineteenth century background’, in Albrecht, M.C., Barnett, J. and Griff, M. (eds), The Sociology of Art and Literature (New York, 1976), 370–87Google Scholar; Martin-Fugier, A., La vie élégante ou la formation du Tout-Paris (Paris, 1990)Google Scholar; Keams, G. and Philo, C. (eds), Selling Places: The City as Cultural Capital, Past and Present (London, 1993).Google Scholar

15 An outstanding induction to the subject could be found in Meyer, K.E., The Art Museum. Power, Money, Ethics (New York, 1979), 128–30.Google Scholar

16 Meller, H.E., Leisure and the Changing City 1870–1914 (London, 1976), 120–1Google Scholar; Bailey, P., Leisure and Class in Victorian England. Rational Recreation and the Contest for Control 1830–1885 (London, 1978)Google Scholar; Clark, P., Sociability and Urbanity: Clubs and Societies in the Eighteenth-Century City (Leicester, 1986)Google Scholar; Green, N., The Spectacle of Nature. Landscape and Bourgeois Culture in Nineteenth-Century France (Manchester and New York, 1990).Google Scholar

17 Seling, H., ‘The genesis of the museum’, The Architectural Review, 141, 840 (1967), 103–14Google Scholar; Cantarel-Bresson, Y., La naissance du musée du Louvre: La politique muséologique sous la Révolution d'après les archives des musées nationaux (Paris, 1981)Google Scholar; Hooper-Greenhill, E., Museums and the Shaping of Knowledge (London and New York, 1992), 167–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Boylan, P.J., ‘Revolutionary France and the foundation of modern museum management and curatorial practice. Part 1: From the Revolution to the First Republic, 1789–92’, Museum Management and Curatorship, 11 (1992), 141–52Google Scholar; Poulot, D., ‘Naissance du monument historique’, Revue d'histoire moderne et contemporaine, 32 (1985), 418–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 de la V, G.., Notice sur le Palais de la Chambre des Pairs de France. Anciennement appelé Palais du Luxembourg ou d'Orléans (Paris, 1818)Google Scholar; Lacambre, G., Le Musée du Luxembourg (Paris, 1974)Google Scholar; Lacambre, G., ‘Les achats de l'Etat aux artistes vivants: le musée du Luxembourg’, in Georgel, C. (dir.), La Jeunesse des Musées. Les Musées de France au XIXe siècle (Paris, 1994), 269–77.Google Scholar

19 The chamber of senators of the Third Republic was initially housed in Versailles from 1876 to 1879, but it was ultimately transferred to the Luxembourg Palace – its definitive home up to the present. During 1871–79 the Préfecture and the Conseil Municipal of Paris were also lodged in the palace.

20 Reidelbach, H., König Ludwig I. von Bayem und seine Kunstschöpfungen (Munich, 1888)Google Scholar; Plagemann, V., ‘Die Bildprogramme der Münchener Museen Ludwigs I’, Alte und moderne Kunst, 15, 112 (1967), 16–27Google Scholar; Plagemann, V., Das Deutsche Kunstmuseum, 1790–1870 (Munich, 1967)Google Scholar; Mittlenmeier, W., Die Neue Pinakothek in München 1843–1854. Plannung, Baugeschichte und Fresken (Munich, 1977)Google Scholar; Steingräber, E., Die Neue Pinakothek in München (Munich, 1981)Google Scholar; Heilmann, C., Neue Pinakothek München (Munich and Zurich, 1984)Google Scholar; Lenz, C., Neue Pinakothek München (London, 1989).Google Scholar

21 Rave, P.O., Die Geschichte der Nationalgalerie Berlin (Berlin, n.d.)Google Scholar; Waetzoldt, S., ‘Berlin ville des musées’, Museums-Journal, SIME special issue (1992), 4–22Google Scholar; Friedrich, T., ‘Berlin-Mitte: topographic muséologique’Google Scholar, ibid., 41–50.

22 Champigneulle, B., Paris de Napoléon à nos jours (Paris, 1969)Google Scholar; Sutcliffe, A., The Autumn of Central Paris, The Defeat of Town Planning 1850–1970 (London, 1970)Google Scholar; Lavedan, P., Histoire de l'urbanisme á Paris (Paris, 1975)Google Scholar; Gaillard, J., Paris, la ville (1852–1870) (Paris, 1976)Google Scholar; Evenson, N., Paris: A Century of Change, 1878–1978 (New Haven and London, 1979)Google Scholar; Loyer, F., Paris XIXe siècle. L'immeuble et la rue (Paris, 1987)Google Scholar; Willms, J., Paris Hauptstadt Europas 1789–1914 (Munich, 1988)Google Scholar; Maneglier, H., Paris Impérial. La vie quotidienne sous le Second Empire (Paris, 1990).Google Scholar

23 For parliamentary criticism, between 1877 and 1903 cf. references provided in Sherman, D.J., Worthy Monuments: Art Museums and Politics of Culture in 19th Century France (Cambridge, Mass., 1989), 271, note 21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24 The surroundings of the universitary ‘Quartier Latin’ on the left bank were the artistic heart of Paris during most of the nineteenth century. The rive gauche, where cultural bustle still survives, has many souvenirs of its past artistic life: the Academie des Beaux Arts, the École des Beaux-Arts, and a few artists’ studios, sometimes transformed into museums, like the Musée Delacroix, or the Musée Hebert.

25 Varnedoe, K., ‘The Tuileries museum and the uses of art history in the early Third Republic’, in Haskell, F. (ed.), Saloni, gallerie, musei e loro influenza sullo sviluppo dell'arte dei secoli XIX e XX (Bologna, 1981), 65–6.Google Scholar

26 L. Bénédite, ‘Le Musée du Luxembourg, avec l'histoire du séminaire de St. Sulpice et les plans des aménagements future de ces locaux’, Figaro Illustré, numéro spécial juillet (1910).Google Scholar

27 Gonse, L., ‘Les remaniements du Musée du Luxembourg’, La chronique des arts et de la curiosité, 38 (1892), 299–300.Google Scholar

28 Bénédite, L., ‘Le Musée des artistes contemporains’, Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 3ème pèriode, VII (1892), 401–15Google Scholar; Ladoué, P., ‘Musée du Luxembourg: Le “nouveau musée” de 1886’, Bulletin des musées de France, 10 (12 1936), 184–9Google Scholar; Ladoué, P., ‘Le musée français des artistes vivants’, Gazette des Beaux-Arts (09 1948), 193–208Google Scholar; Delesalle, H., ‘Quelques vue de l'ancien musée du Luxembourg’, Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 57 (avril 1961), 237–48Google Scholar; Laureilhe, M.T., ‘Quelques lettres d'Etienne Arago, conservateur du Musée du Luxembourg, sur l'administration de ce musée (1881–1887)’, Archives de l'art français XXVI (1984), 267–9.Google Scholar

29 Simyan, J., ‘Rapport fait au nom de la Commission du Budget chargée d'examiner le projet de loi relatif aux travaux d'aménagement du Musée du Luxembourg dans l'ancien séminaire de Saint-Sulpice’, Chambre des Deputés, 2531 dixième législature (17 février 1913)Google Scholar; Fournol, M., ‘Avis presenté au nom de la Commission de l'Enseignement et des Beaux-Arts sur le projet de loi relatif aux travaux d'aménagement du musée du Luxembourg dans l'ancien séminaire de Saint-Sulpice’, Chambre des Deputés, 2596 dixième législature (10 mars 1913).Google Scholar

30 Vaisse, P., ‘La Troisième République et les peintres: Recherches sur les rapports des pouvoirs et de la peinture en France de 1870 á 1914’ (unpublished University of Paris IV Ph.D. thesis, 1980)Google Scholar; Sherman, , Worthy MonumentsGoogle Scholar; Georgel, C., La Jeunesse des musées. Les musées de France au XIXe siècle (Paris, 1994).Google Scholar Some files in the Archives Nationales of Paris also contain documentation relative to this subject: F/21/4505–4513.

31 Barker, F. and Hyde, R., London as It Might Have Been (London, 1982), 117, plate 90.Google Scholar

32 London, Archives of the Victoria and Albert Museum, Manuscript II.R. C.H. 14. John Sheepshanks' Deed of Gift.

33 Sir John Leicester's ‘Gallery of English Pictures’, sometimes also called ‘Gallery of Modern Art’, which was open free to the public in 1818, was an interesting precedent. But it was a private gallery, part of his London house in Hill Street and only an ephemeral example, for it had to be sold immediately after his death.

34 Reynolds, G. et al. , Victoria and Albert Museum. Handbook to the Departments of Prints and Drawings and Paintings (London, 1964)Google Scholar; Physick, J., The Victoria and Albert Museum: A History of its Building (Oxford, 1982), 33–9 and 39–45Google Scholar; Purbrick, L., ‘The South Kensington Museum: the building of the house of Henry Cole’, in Pointon, M. (ed.), Art Apart. Art Institutions and Ideology across England and North America (Manchester and New York, 1994), 69–86 (esp. 82).Google Scholar

35 Alexander, E.P., Museum Masters: their Museums and their Influence (Nashville, Tenn., 1983), 160–1.Google Scholar In 1899 the artistic and scientific collections were divided to establish two museums: the Victoria and Albert Museum and the Science Museum.

36 Cf. the introduction of Holroyd, C. et al. , The National Gallery of British Art (The Tate Gallery) (London, 1905), unpaginated.Google Scholar

37 London, Archives of the Tate Gallery, Box No. 321, file called ‘Tate Gift’.

38 But it had influential supporters as well. The dealer William Agnew offered to contribute £10,000 provided that the South Kensington site was selected (The Times, 22 July 1890).

39 Hansard, Lt. (ed.), Hansard's Parlamentary Debates (London, 1890)Google Scholar, 3rd series, CCCXL VIII, 8th vol., 6–18 August.

40 However, as a positive countermeasure to calm the protesters, it was announced that the National Portrait Gallery would find a definitive site at the rear of the National Gallery. A move which resulted in a considerable saving of investment, since a private benefactor, William Henry Alexander, paid four-fifths of the costs: the new edifice of the National Portrait Gallery was inaugurated in 1896.

41 Orrock, J., ‘A gallery of British Art’, in Transactions of the National Association for the Advancement of Art and its Application to Industry, Birmingham Meeting, 1890 (London, 1891), 191, 193, 195.Google Scholar

42 Rothenstein, J. and Chamot, M., The Tate Gallery. A Brief History and Guide (London, 1952)Google Scholar; Rothenstein, J., The Tate Gallery (London, 1958)Google Scholar; Reid, N., The Tate Gallery (London, 1969)Google Scholar; R. Hamlyn, ‘Tate Gallery’, in Waterfield, , Palaces of Art, 113–16.Google Scholar

43 B. Taylor, ‘From penitentiary to “temple of art”. Early metaphors of improvement at the Millbank Tate’, in Pointon, , Art Apart, 9–32.Google Scholar

44 Waterfield, , Art for the People, 31–63.Google Scholar For the historical context of these philanthropic initiatives see also: Officer, J., ‘Philosophy, curiosities and the almighty-learned societies of early 19th century provincial England and Wales’ (unpublished University of Leicester M.A. dissertation, 1974)Google Scholar; Harrison, B., Peaceable Kingdom (Oxford, 1982), 217–59Google Scholar; Lewis, G.D., ‘Museum growth and public benefaction’, in Thomson, J.M.A. et al. (eds), Manual of Curatorship. A Guide to Museum Practice (London, 1992), 31–3.Google Scholar

45 Smith, N., ‘A brief account of the origins of the South London Art Gallery’Google Scholar, in Waterfield, , Art for the People, 11–18Google Scholar; L. Ormond, ‘A Leighton memorial: Frederic Leighton and the South London Art Gallery’, ibid., 19–30.

46 Borzello, F., Civilising Caliban: The Misuse of Art 1875–1980 (London and New York, 1987)Google Scholar; S. Fronk, ‘Whitechapel Art Gallery, London’, in Waterfield, , Palaces of Art, 96.Google Scholar

47 Edmunds, J., ‘Art gallery and museum buildings in England, 1845–1945’ (unpublished University of Manchester M.A. dissertation, 1951)Google Scholar; Jones, J., ‘Museums and art gallery buildings in England, 1845–1914’, Museums Journal, 65,3 & 4 (1966), 271–80Google Scholar; Williams, R., Culture and Society 1780–1950 (London, 1963), 152Google Scholar; Harvie, C. et al. , Industrialisation and Culture: 1830–1914 (London and Basingstoke, 1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; MacLeod, D.S., ‘Art collecting and Victorian middle-class taste’, Art History, 10 (1987), 328–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar; G.D. Lewis, ‘Collections, collectors and museums in Britain to 1920’, in Thomson, et al. , Manual of Curatorship, 28–38.Google Scholar

48 Barnet, J., The Ruskin Gallery, Guild of St. George Collection (Sheffield, 1985), 12–27.Google Scholar

49 Tooby, M., In Perpetuity and Without Charge; the Mappin Art Gallery 1887–1987 (Sheffield, 1987).Google Scholar

50 Savioli, L. and Santi, P., Problemi di architettura contemporanea. L'architettura delle gallerie d'arte moderna (Florence, 1972)Google Scholar, Rivière, G.H. et al. , ‘Problems of the museum of contemporary art in the West’, Museum, 1 (1972), 4–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Goldberger, P., ‘What should a museum building be?’, Art News, 10 (1973), 33Google Scholar; Searing, H., ‘The development of museum typology’, in Stephens, S. (ed.), Building the New Museum (New York, 1986).Google Scholar