DOI issue:
Nr. 191 (February 1909)
DOI article:Studio-talk
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.20966#0099
Studio-Talk
by Robert Reid, Hugh Breckenridge, Mary Cassatt
and Childe Hassam. Mr. Reid’s paintings—one
of which, by the way, received the third prize
of $1,000—were extremely high-keyed, and
depended for charm solely upon their gently
modulated colour schemes. Mr. Breckenridge’s
works derived their interest primarily through
the cleverness of their solution of the problem set
by a figure seen by firelight. Miss Cassatt and
Mr. Hassam were both well represented.
Of the portraits, certainly the most notable,
though not the best, was that of President Roose-
“AN ANCESTOR” BY WALTER MACEWEN
velt, painted by Gari Melchers, on order from Charles
L. Freer, who purposed it as a gift to the nation.
There were five single portraits by John S. Sargent,
one of which (that of Miss Mathilde Townsend, of
Washington) was characteristically clever and engag-
ing. The rest, with, perhaps, the exception of one
of James Whitcomb Riley, the poet, were by no
means equal to his best. J. J. Shannon also was less
well represented than commonly, showing only his
portrait of Mrs. Guggenheim, which is rather faulty
in construction and painty in suggestion. Miss
Cecilia Beaux, on the other hand, never exhibited
a stronger painting than her portrait of Mr. Lewis,
President of the Pennsylvania Academy. R. E.
Clarkson, F. P. Vinton, E. C. Tarbell, Wm. M.
Chase, and Kenyon Cox likewise made in this
field notable contributions, the last named by his
memorable portrait of the late Augustus Saint
Gaudens, the sculptor, at work in his studio.
The first prize ($2,000), which carried with it
the Corcoran gold medal, was awarded to a
winter picture, one of a number by Edward W.
Redfield, to whom two years previously a medal
of the third class had been given. For vital
realism and breadth of effect this picture was
distinctly impressive, and doubtless it was its
truth, virility and skilful manipulation which
won it honour. Mr. Redfield’s works are not
dissimilar in style and character from those of
Mr. Schofield, who was represented in this
exhibition by two striking canvases.
Among the landscape painters, Williard Met-
calf probably touched the highest note, though
J. Francis Murphy, Emil Carlsen, D. W. Tryon,
Leonard Ochtman and half-a-dozen others ex-
hibited work of almost equally fine quality.
Almost without exception these landscapes were
not pictorial compositions, but subtle transcrip-
tions of bits of nature seen under peculiarly
pleasing conditions; not rampant fancies
indefinitely set forth, but lovely realities sympa-
thetically interpreted.
There was quite a good representation of the
American painters residing in Paris, and to one
of this number—Frederick C. Frieseke — the
fourth prize ($500) was awarded for a study
from the nude, entitled Marcelle. One other
feature calls for mention—the really brilliant
technical facility displayed by certain painters,
among whom may be named Emil Carlsen,
Walter Gay and Aline Solomons, in the inter-
77
by Robert Reid, Hugh Breckenridge, Mary Cassatt
and Childe Hassam. Mr. Reid’s paintings—one
of which, by the way, received the third prize
of $1,000—were extremely high-keyed, and
depended for charm solely upon their gently
modulated colour schemes. Mr. Breckenridge’s
works derived their interest primarily through
the cleverness of their solution of the problem set
by a figure seen by firelight. Miss Cassatt and
Mr. Hassam were both well represented.
Of the portraits, certainly the most notable,
though not the best, was that of President Roose-
“AN ANCESTOR” BY WALTER MACEWEN
velt, painted by Gari Melchers, on order from Charles
L. Freer, who purposed it as a gift to the nation.
There were five single portraits by John S. Sargent,
one of which (that of Miss Mathilde Townsend, of
Washington) was characteristically clever and engag-
ing. The rest, with, perhaps, the exception of one
of James Whitcomb Riley, the poet, were by no
means equal to his best. J. J. Shannon also was less
well represented than commonly, showing only his
portrait of Mrs. Guggenheim, which is rather faulty
in construction and painty in suggestion. Miss
Cecilia Beaux, on the other hand, never exhibited
a stronger painting than her portrait of Mr. Lewis,
President of the Pennsylvania Academy. R. E.
Clarkson, F. P. Vinton, E. C. Tarbell, Wm. M.
Chase, and Kenyon Cox likewise made in this
field notable contributions, the last named by his
memorable portrait of the late Augustus Saint
Gaudens, the sculptor, at work in his studio.
The first prize ($2,000), which carried with it
the Corcoran gold medal, was awarded to a
winter picture, one of a number by Edward W.
Redfield, to whom two years previously a medal
of the third class had been given. For vital
realism and breadth of effect this picture was
distinctly impressive, and doubtless it was its
truth, virility and skilful manipulation which
won it honour. Mr. Redfield’s works are not
dissimilar in style and character from those of
Mr. Schofield, who was represented in this
exhibition by two striking canvases.
Among the landscape painters, Williard Met-
calf probably touched the highest note, though
J. Francis Murphy, Emil Carlsen, D. W. Tryon,
Leonard Ochtman and half-a-dozen others ex-
hibited work of almost equally fine quality.
Almost without exception these landscapes were
not pictorial compositions, but subtle transcrip-
tions of bits of nature seen under peculiarly
pleasing conditions; not rampant fancies
indefinitely set forth, but lovely realities sympa-
thetically interpreted.
There was quite a good representation of the
American painters residing in Paris, and to one
of this number—Frederick C. Frieseke — the
fourth prize ($500) was awarded for a study
from the nude, entitled Marcelle. One other
feature calls for mention—the really brilliant
technical facility displayed by certain painters,
among whom may be named Emil Carlsen,
Walter Gay and Aline Solomons, in the inter-
77