What is Art? - Southwestern Law School

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$S:\Externship Forms Revised May 2005\EXTERN POLICIES ...$

122 J. INT’L MEDIA &ENTERTAINMENT LAW VOL. 4,NO. 2How did courts respond to the ever-changing form and content ofwhat artists regarded as their art in the late 19th and early 20th century?Our starting point will be consideration of judgment of a work by anearly ‘modern’ artist, James Whistler. 521878 England: Whistler v. Ruskin 53Nocturne in Black and Gold: The Falling Rocket (1872–1875) 54 waspainted by Whistler in oils on canvas. The subject was a night-timefireworks display over Battersea Bridge in London. The small (23.7inches high by 18.3 inches wide) painting was executed in an impressionistic,rather than the (then) orthodox representational, style: it conveyeda sense of atmosphere, with glowing colours and drifting smokeagainst a dark sky over the River Thames. The work was first exhibitedat the prestigious Grosvenor Gallery in London, in a group showthat included paintings by Pre-Raphaelite artists such as EdwardBurne-Jones. The critic John Ruskin 55 published a review of theshow in one of his popular pamphlets, Fors Clavigera, on 2 July1877. He lauded Burne-Jones and others; but lambasted Whistler:“For Mr. Whistler’s own sake, no less than for the protection of thepurchaser, [the Grosvenor Gallery] ought not to have admitted worksinto the gallery in which the ill-educated conceit of the artist so nearlyapproached the aspect of wilful imposture. I have seen, and heard, muchof Cockney impudence before now; but never expected to hear a coxcombask two hundred guineas for flinging a pot of paint in the public’sface.” 56Whistler’s sales took a sharp downturn after Ruskin’s widely publishedattack. Whistler sued for libel, seeking £1,000 for damage to52. James Abbott McNeill Whistler (1834–1903) was an artist born in Lowell,Massachusetts, who relocated to Europe, Paris in particular, eventually settling inLondon. He became widely known through his close association in the 1860s withcontroversial “modern” artists such as the French Realist painter Gustave Courbetand the Impressionist Éduard Manet.53. Officially unreported. The case was tried at the Court of Exchequer Divisionof the High Court in London on 25 and 26 Nov.1978. Whistler v. Ruskin, THETIMES (LONDON), Nov. 27, 1878, at 9. See also LINDA MERRILL, APOT OF PAINT: AES-THETICS ON TRIAL IN WHISTLER V. RUSKIN (1992).54. It is now in the collection of the Detroit Institute of Arts, Detroit, Michigan.55. John Ruskin (1819–1900) was a pre-eminent and very influential British art criticof his generation, who professed that an artist’s core function was “truth and nature”. Hewas a staunch defender of then controversial “modern” paintings by J. M. W. Turneragainst fierce critics. He was greatly influenced Pre-Raphaelite painters such as WilliamHolman Hunt, John Everett Millais and Dante Gabriel Rossetti, and founded the RuskinSchool of Drawing at Oxford University.56. RONALD ANDERSON &ANNE KOVAL, JAMES MCNEILL WHISTLER: BEYOND THEMYTH 215.
WHAT IS ART? 123his artistic reputation. To do so, he and his lawyer had to convince thejury of his artistic abilities and standing.Study of Whistler’s cross-examination reveals the heart of Ruskin’sline of defence. Question: “What is the subject of Nocturne in Blackand Gold: The Falling Rocket?” Whistler: “It is a night piece and representsthe fireworks at Cremorne Gardens.” Question: “Not a view ofCremorne?” Answer: “If it were A View of Cremorne it would certainlybring about nothing but disappointment on the part of the beholders.It is an artistic arrangement. That is why I call it a nocturne.”Question: “Did it take you much time to paint the Nocturne in Blackand Gold? How soon did you knock it off?” Answer: “Oh, I ‘knockone off ’ possibly in a couple of days—one day to do the work and anotherto finish it ...”.Question: “The labour of two days is that forwhich you ask two hundred guineas?” Answer: “No, I ask it for theknowledge I have gained in the work of a lifetime.” 57Whistler was the David of the forensic set-piece, Ruskin the Goliath.Whistler’s many artist peers and supporters, who had promised to give evidence,failed to do so; Ruskin’s did, including Burne-Jones. The jury’stask was invidious: effectively, whether to recognise artistic merit inthe (then) unorthodox ‘modern’ painting style of so-called impressionism;and, if so, to place a monetary value on Ruskin’s damage to Whistler’sprofessional reputation. Ruskin was found guilty, and ordered topay one farthing 58 in damages. Costs were borne by each party. Such derisoryawards were commonplace at the time, whenever juries in civil trialswere faced with “a delicate and ultimately insoluble legal dilemma.” 59This is arguably the last time an artist sued a critic for defamation.The courtroom is clearly the wrong place for a forensic fight over aestheticmerit. Indeed, it has often been said over the intervening centurythat Whistler’s lawyers would have been wiser to claim (if at all) damageto Whistler’s sales of work (of which there was ample hard evidencefollowing Ruskin’s public attack), rather than damage to hisartistic competence.We now consider the landmark trial of art initiated by a progenitorof Modern Art, often referred to as the Patriarch of Modern Sculpture,Romanian artist Constantin Brâncuşi. 6057. PETRA TEN-DOESSCHATE CHU, NINETEENTH CENTURY EUROPEAN ART 349.58. This was the lowest value coin of the Realm.59. Francis L. Fennell, The Verdict in Whistler v. Ruskin, VICTORIAN NEWSLETTER,Fall 1971, at 17, 21.60. Constantin Brâncuşi (1876–1957) was an Abstract Expressionist sculptor, bornin Romania, who settled and remained in Paris, France from 1904.
Page 1 and 2: What is Art? A brief review ofinter
Page 4 and 5: 114 J. INT’L MEDIA &ENTERTAINMENT

What is Art? - Southwestern Law School

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?