New Insights into the Cleaning of Paintings

84 • smithsonian contributions to museum conservation
or rubbing with a silk cloth (Steele, pers. comm.; Hendriks, pers.
comm.; Hoenigswald, pers. comm.; P. Smithen, Tate, UK, personal
communications).
As varnish affords the surface of a painting physical protection
from dirt, the long- term consequences of displaying works
unvarnished need serious consideration. Glazing is a practical,
but not always aesthetically desirable, solution and is in keeping
with Impressionist practices (thought less desirable for modern
paintings). The developments in low- reflective laminated glass
technology offer a feasible compromise for the display of unvarnished
paintings.
CONCLUSIONS
The removal of nonoriginal varnish from paintings by Van
Gogh and contemporaries who valued the matte aesthetic may
be desirable as part of a conservation campaign. The results of
the present study highlight the changes in the grounds due to
varnish and some of the practical difficulties in recovering the
original appearance of the surface after varnish removal. The implications
of these findings for the appearance of the recovered
unvarnished painted surface present a significant challenge for
the conservator. It is clear, from both conservators’ accounts and
the results of the present study, that both the material composition
of the work and former treatments (such as wax- resin lining)
may influence the surface appearance and affect the ease of varnish
removal. This study investigated the color changes imparted
by varnishing and subsequent removal of varnish from prepared
samples based on grounds used by Van Gogh. The results will
also be relevant to the study of paintings by his contemporaries
who used similar commercially prepared canvases. The problems
with removing varnish from passages of paint of different composition
and texture that have been noted by conservators were
not investigated systematically but are clearly critical, particularly
where works are to be displayed unvarnished.
Acknowledgments
This paper would not have been possible without the work
done by Leslie Carlyle, Ella Hendriks, and Emily Nieder. The
authors also thank Klaas Jan van den Berg, Ann Hoeningswald,
Elizabeth Steele, Katja Lewerentz, Devi Ormond, Luuk van der
Loeff, Lance Mayer, Isabelle Duvernois, Patricia Smithen, and
Luuk Hoogsteder.
REFERENCES
Bruce- Gardner, R., G. Hedley, C. Villers.1987. Impressionist and Post- Impressionist
Masterpieces: The Courtauld Collection. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University
Press.
Callen, A. 1994. The Unvarnished Truth: Mattness, “Primitivism” and Modernity
in French Painting, c.1870–1907. The Burlington Magazine, 136(1100):738–
746.
———. 2000. The Art of Impressionism: Painting Techniques and the Making of
Modernity. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
Carlyle, L. 2005. HART Project Report. Tate Britain, London.
———. 2006. “Historically Accurate Reconstructions of Oil Painters’ Materials:
An Overview of the HART Project 2002–2005.” In Reporting Highlights of
the De Mayerne Programme, ed. J. J. Boon, and E. S. B. Ferreira, pp. 63–78.
The Hague: Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research.
Carlyle, L., J. J. Boon, R. Haswell, and M. Stols- Witlox. 2008. “Historically Accurate
Ground Reconstructions for Oil Paintings.” In Preparation for Painting,
ed. J. Townsend, T. Doherty, G. Heydenreich, and J. Ridge, pp.110–122.
London: Archetype.
Hendriks, E. 2008. Fluent Impasto in Van Gogh’s Paris Paintings (1886–1888):
A Strategic Effect? Zeitschrift fur Kunsttechnologie und Konservierung,
2:221–231.
Hendriks, E., and M. Geldof. 2007. Van Gogh’s Antwerp and Paris Picture Supports
(1885–1888): Reconstructing Choices. Art Matters: Netherlands Technical
Studies in Art, 2:39–74.
Hendriks, E., and L. van Tilborgh. 2006. New Views on Van Gogh’s Development
in Antwerp and Paris: An Integrated Art Historical and Technical Study of his
Paintings in the Van Gogh Museum. Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam,
Amsterdam.
Jirat- Wasiutynski, M., and H. Travers Newton Jr. 1998. “Absorbent Grounds and
the Matt Aesthetic in Post Impressionist Painting.” In Painting Techniques:
History, Materials and Studio Practice, Preprints of the Dublin IIC Congress,
ed. A. Roy and P. Smith, pp. 235–239. London: International Institute for
Conservation.
Miller, D. 1983. “Conservation of Neo- Impressionist Paintings.” In The Aura of
Neo- Impressionists: The W. J. Holliday Collection, ed. E. W. Lee, and T. E.
Smith, p. 29. Indianapolis, Indiana: Indianapolis Museum of Art.
Nieder, E. 2008. The Effects of Wax- resin Lining and Varnishing on Historically
Accurate Reconstructions of Van Gogh’s Grounds. Unpublished report. London:
Courtauld Institute of Art, Department of Conservation and Technology.
Nieder, E., E. Hendriks, and A. Burnstock. 2011. The Effects of Wax- Resin Lining
and Varnishing on Historically Accurate Reconstruction of van Gogh’s
Grounds. Studies in Conservation, 56(2):94–103.
Peres, C. 1990. “Vincent Van Gogh’s Triptych of Trees in Blossom, Arles (1888) Part
ii. On Egg White Varnishes.” In Cleaning, Retouching and Coatings: Technology
and Practice for Easel Paintings and Polychrome Sculpture, Proceedings
of the Brussels IIC Congress, ed. J. S. Mills and P. Smith, pp. 131–133. London:
International Institute for Conservation.
Schaefer, I., C. von Saint- George, and K. Lewerentz. 2009. Painting Light: The Hidden
Techniques of the Impressionists. Milan: Skira editore.
Swicklik, M. 1993. “French Painting and the Use of Varnish, 1750–1900.” In Conservation
Research, pp. 157–174. Studies in the History of Art Monograph
Series II, No. 41. Washington, D.C.: National Gallery of Art.
van Bommel, M., M. Geldof, and E. Hendriks. 2005. An Investigation of Organic
Red Pigments Used in Paintings by Vincent van Gogh. Art Matters: Netherlands
Technical Studies in Art, 3:129–153.