Morning morning and what a bright and sunny Monday morning it is. I am still recovering from the fact that it took me 55 minutes to do a 15 minute journey into work, much needed chain smoking session will alas have to wait til nearer lunch. This week everyone wanted a piece of my blog but alas, for them, they couldn’t have it. After the disaster that was last weeks pursuit this weekend I decided to treat myself to an exhibition I have been looking forward to for ages, and in order to get my enjoyment max I decided to go it alone, free from distractions or the pressure of rushing – in the end I was in there for over 2 hours which for me is very good, usually I can take about 45 minutes of art and I’m done for the day.Victoria and Albert Art and Love was even more amazing than I could have hoped. It was so amazing in fact that I’m not really sure I can face writing about it, it was just too good – what will I say? Other, maybe, than GOLD GOLD GOLD GOLD GOLD GOOOOLLLLLLLDDDDD!!!
Well, to start with the mundane, as always, I was v pleased with myself for my economising ways. I went to see an exhibition on Conversation Pieces at the same gallery a few months ago, in fact I believe it was my FIRST cultural pursuit, and paid about 6 quid to get in but as I remember commenting at the time that ticket entitled me to free entry to any of their exhibitions for the next year! I am very impressed with myself that I’ve actually managed to hold onto the ticket, which has been loitering in my rolling tray for the last 3 months, and was able to get in free to this exhibition even though it cost over £8!! Bargain!! Also their, excellent, audio guides are free unlike shits-ville V&A which charges for them on top of their exorbitant entry fees. And they would probably be crap there anyway.
So, as you may have worked out by now I rather like the Victorians, in fact, frankly I don’t think I’d mind that much if civilisation had just mysteriously bored of art post 1900 and just left it at that. So, an exhibition focussing on the trend setting art and objects collected by the royal couple is exactly my cup of tea. However, as much as I love Victoria, the star of this show is undoubtedly Albert, who it turns out was a bit of a dude! This exhibition really highlighted what an incredible, trend setting, enthusiastic and educated man he must have been. I knew, for example, that he was heavily involved in the Great Exhibition of 1851 (I didn’t even have to look that date up rock on GCSE History know-how), but what I didn’t realise was how completely and utterly it was his brain child, and how responsible he was for basically ever aspect of the show! I also didn’t realise he was one of the first to study the new academic discipline of art history and the exhibition had a small room focussing on the early art that he particularly enjoyed collecting before his marriage to Victoria. For example he had 2 beautiful Cranacks which he brought with him from Germany, an artist who I have always loved, and was in some way responsible for popularising his work during the 19th century. Albert’s influence seems to have stretched so far that I start to ponder where the world would be today without him. It was he after all who was mostly responsible
for building the cult of Christmas in Victorian England which affects not only the way we view yuletide to this day but impacts on concepts of the family, the home and childhood in general. Victoria was undoubtedly interested in art and collecting herself, she was it turns out a not untalented watercolourist, but it seems to have been Albert’s influence and tastes that really inspired her to commission and buy particular works of art. For example; she had this painting of Albert’s favourite dog painted for him by Landseer as a present, and it was through their patronage that his career really took off This was also the case for Leighton, who had one of his earliest works purchased by the royal couple (pictured below) and, of course, went on to be one of the biggest artists of the 19th century, no doubt partly due to their patronage. This work, and many others owned by the couple, was bought directly from the walls of the Royal Academy exhibition. How amazing to go to the summ
er show and just pick anything you wanted. Apparently Albert often had ‘useful’ advise for the artists he patronised, although who knows if he actually just got in the way and made stupid suggestions which they had to pretend were good because he was appointed by god etc? For example, there was one John Martin work in the exhibition which was commissioned after Albert had seen The Deluge, now in the Tate. He suggested Martin make this piece into a 3-parter with one piece set after the flood and one before called ‘the Eve of the Deluge’, probably just so Albert could then buy it at no doubt vast sums. I have to say though that in comparison to the Deluge it does somewhat suck.
Of course, according to the audio guide the couple did have to practise economy throughout their reign in terms of their patronage of the arts. In fact poor old Victoria had to limit herself to spending only 2 grand a year on art and a lot of her budget had to cover the pictures that Albert wanted to buy. In fact, when discussing the Leighton Victoria commented that Albert ‘simply had to have it so I bought it him’ (to paraphrase). It did make me think; this man was a massive patron of the arts needing to sustain a ferocious appetite for buying art, had to be gra
nted extra money from Parliament to be able to entertain on an ever grander scale, picked and styled his wife’s clothes and jewellery, LOVED costume balls, of which there were many throughout his time as Prince, had an important hand in the building and decorating of their various residences etc. Hate to be the one to say it but has anyone ever thought about just how gay this guy was??? Anyway, just something to chew on there…
His apparent gayness didn’t stop them squeezing out about 300 children of course and it is the family portraits that are really the focus of this exhibition. Entering the gallery they are the first paintings the visitor experiences and the central painting, curatorially and in terms of merchandise is Franz Xaver Winterhalters huge portrait of the couple surrounded by their children probably set in their new palace Osborne House on the Isle of White. This, along with Balmoral, was viewed as their retreat away from public life in London. Winterhalter enjoyed very favourable patronage under Victoria with a seemingly huge number of commissions gracing the walls. He was particularly favoured by Albert who liked the Northern European style domesticity of his paintings as opposed to the previous more formal type of official Royal portraiture. His popularity and success was due in part to this need for a new type of visual representation of the Monarch. Victoria was the first ruling female monarch since 1700 and something. In her depictions she needed to be represented as head of the state yet place Albert firmly as the head of the family. In this group portrait Albert’s head forms the pinnacle of the piece, yet it is Victoria next to him who is sheltering the future heir to the thrown, here we see the royal line safe and unaltered. It’s is also key that there are no crowns or outward sign of royalty in this piece, riches yes, but this is very much a scene of a family at home not on public display. Of course ironically on its completion it was immediately put on show to vast crowds in St James palace, Victoria as ever grasping the full potency of royal propaganda.
The exhibition dwells at length on Victoria and Albert’s love of Scotland and their newly built castle of Balmoral, where they felt that thy could retreat from the stiffness of public living. There are two FAB paintings which annoyingly I can’t find on Google showing ‘Morning in Balmoral’ and ‘After the Hunt’ (or something) which illustrate this idea of the family at rest in their private domestic space. I also like the fact that the first one has a dated title, placing the royal family firmly in the ‘real world’ as a modern, loving family. To continue the new theory about Albert it was, apparently, he who insisted when there the servants wore ‘traditional’ highland dress and apparently he was much ridiculed in London for his adoption of the costume, mainly because he looked so damn fine in it. On display was the broach set with an ENOURMOUS and highly sparkly semi-precious stone that he used to pin his kilt over his shoulder. Huhhum. There was also jewellery particularly designed for wearing at Balmoral on show which was made out of stags teeth!! UHHHHHH
An interesting little room to the side showcased pieces from some of Victoria’s personal albums. These were albums she kept as keep sakes to be used in conjunction with her personal diaries. She was either given them by foreign dignitaries etc or commissioned artists to represent important places or events that she witnessed in her travels. They were of a strictly uniform size so that they could be bound together in albums and taken with her when travelling round the country or continent. This interests me greatly as it
reminds me of my obsessive buying of postcards from every gallery I have ever been to and sticking them up on my wall, berating any establishment that doesn’t fit to the precise postcard dimensions as dictated by me. It also highlights the fashion for collecting and fetisising keepsakes, usually in a highly morbid way, during the Victorian era, possibly sparked by Victoria herself.
Some of the more interesting examples were of the Great Exhibition which apparently Victoria visited nearly every day for weeks. The exhibition also provided the couple with more opportunities to commission and buy work
The love of acquiring pieces that reminded
Victoria of things she had seen and places she had visited was, apparently, extended to works she saw at the Royal Academy, which the couple visited every year. Here she saw Friths Life at the Seaside – Ramsgate Sands. I LOVE Frith, the Where’s Wally of the 19th century, and I didn’t realise this piece was purchased by Victoria. Apparently the picture, which attracted such huge crowds at the Royal Academy that a bar had to be placed in front of it, was particularly admired by the queen due to her fond memories of visiting Ramsgate with her mother. The room they stayed in is visible as the round window at the very top of the painting. However, the painting had already been bought by a printing firm who intended to make no doubt highly lucrative copies of the painting. Not to be dissuaded Victoria pursued and eventually a deal was reached where the printers gave Victoria the painting in exchange for keeping the publication rights. Or whatever it was called.
Just quickly, as am going on too long and need to do some work - Other interesting aspects of the exhibition were the photography section; Victoria and Albert were the first big patrons of photography as an art form and without there influence it would have taken a damn site longer to establish photography as a valid form of artistic representation. Creepy points go to the selection of marble disembodied childs limbs that Victoria had cast from the legs, arms, hands and feet of her children when babies. The cult of childhood and death alive and well in the royal household clearly!
Anyway, I could go on and on about this exhibition as there was so much great stuff and will almost certainly have missed out the most interesting stuff here but go yourselves bug thumbs up from me!
nted extra money from Parliament to be able to entertain on an ever grander scale, picked and styled his wife’s clothes and jewellery, LOVED costume balls, of which there were many throughout his time as Prince, had an important hand in the building and decorating of their various residences etc. Hate to be the one to say it but has anyone ever thought about just how gay this guy was??? Anyway, just something to chew on there…His apparent gayness didn’t stop them squeezing out about 300 children of course and it is the family portraits that are really the focus of this exhibition. Entering the gallery they are the first paintings the visitor experiences and the central painting, curatorially and in terms of merchandise is Franz Xaver Winterhalters huge portrait of the couple surrounded by their children probably set in their new palace Osborne House on the Isle of White. This, along with Balmoral, was viewed as their retreat away from public life in London. Winterhalter enjoyed very favourable patronage under Victoria with a seemingly huge number of commissions gracing the walls. He was particularly favoured by Albert who liked the Northern European style domesticity of his paintings as opposed to the previous more formal type of official Royal portraiture. His popularity and success was due in part to this need for a new type of visual representation of the Monarch. Victoria was the first ruling female monarch since 1700 and something. In her depictions she needed to be represented as head of the state yet place Albert firmly as the head of the family. In this group portrait Albert’s head forms the pinnacle of the piece, yet it is Victoria next to him who is sheltering the future heir to the thrown, here we see the royal line safe and unaltered. It’s is also key that there are no crowns or outward sign of royalty in this piece, riches yes, but this is very much a scene of a family at home not on public display. Of course ironically on its completion it was immediately put on show to vast crowds in St James palace, Victoria as ever grasping the full potency of royal propaganda.
The exhibition dwells at length on Victoria and Albert’s love of Scotland and their newly built castle of Balmoral, where they felt that thy could retreat from the stiffness of public living. There are two FAB paintings which annoyingly I can’t find on Google showing ‘Morning in Balmoral’ and ‘After the Hunt’ (or something) which illustrate this idea of the family at rest in their private domestic space. I also like the fact that the first one has a dated title, placing the royal family firmly in the ‘real world’ as a modern, loving family. To continue the new theory about Albert it was, apparently, he who insisted when there the servants wore ‘traditional’ highland dress and apparently he was much ridiculed in London for his adoption of the costume, mainly because he looked so damn fine in it. On display was the broach set with an ENOURMOUS and highly sparkly semi-precious stone that he used to pin his kilt over his shoulder. Huhhum. There was also jewellery particularly designed for wearing at Balmoral on show which was made out of stags teeth!! UHHHHHH
An interesting little room to the side showcased pieces from some of Victoria’s personal albums. These were albums she kept as keep sakes to be used in conjunction with her personal diaries. She was either given them by foreign dignitaries etc or commissioned artists to represent important places or events that she witnessed in her travels. They were of a strictly uniform size so that they could be bound together in albums and taken with her when travelling round the country or continent. This interests me greatly as it
reminds me of my obsessive buying of postcards from every gallery I have ever been to and sticking them up on my wall, berating any establishment that doesn’t fit to the precise postcard dimensions as dictated by me. It also highlights the fashion for collecting and fetisising keepsakes, usually in a highly morbid way, during the Victorian era, possibly sparked by Victoria herself.Some of the more interesting examples were of the Great Exhibition which apparently Victoria visited nearly every day for weeks. The exhibition also provided the couple with more opportunities to commission and buy work
The love of acquiring pieces that reminded
Victoria of things she had seen and places she had visited was, apparently, extended to works she saw at the Royal Academy, which the couple visited every year. Here she saw Friths Life at the Seaside – Ramsgate Sands. I LOVE Frith, the Where’s Wally of the 19th century, and I didn’t realise this piece was purchased by Victoria. Apparently the picture, which attracted such huge crowds at the Royal Academy that a bar had to be placed in front of it, was particularly admired by the queen due to her fond memories of visiting Ramsgate with her mother. The room they stayed in is visible as the round window at the very top of the painting. However, the painting had already been bought by a printing firm who intended to make no doubt highly lucrative copies of the painting. Not to be dissuaded Victoria pursued and eventually a deal was reached where the printers gave Victoria the painting in exchange for keeping the publication rights. Or whatever it was called.Just quickly, as am going on too long and need to do some work - Other interesting aspects of the exhibition were the photography section; Victoria and Albert were the first big patrons of photography as an art form and without there influence it would have taken a damn site longer to establish photography as a valid form of artistic representation. Creepy points go to the selection of marble disembodied childs limbs that Victoria had cast from the legs, arms, hands and feet of her children when babies. The cult of childhood and death alive and well in the royal household clearly!
Anyway, I could go on and on about this exhibition as there was so much great stuff and will almost certainly have missed out the most interesting stuff here but go yourselves bug thumbs up from me!
