Between Art Nouveau and the Avant-Garde: the Personal (Ego) Network of Ivan Meštrović and the Map of Critical Reception of His Work During the 1910S

Home , Frano Supilo, Guglielmo Pizzirani, Leonardo Bistolfi, Malvina Hoffman, Marino Tartaglia, Toma Rosandic

Between Art Nouveau and the Avant-Garde: The Personal (Ego) Network of Ivan Meštrović and the Map of Critical Reception of His Work during the 1910s

Prančević, Dalibor

Source / Izvornik: Modern and Contemporary Artists' Networks. An Inquiry into Digital History of Art and Architecture, 2018, 38 - 62

Book chapter / Poglavlje u knjizi

Publication status / Verzija rada: Published version / Objavljena verzija rada (izdavačev PDF) https://doi.org/10.31664/9789537875596.03

Permanent link / Trajna poveznica: https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:254:591141

Rights / Prava: In copyright

Download date / Datum preuzimanja: 2021-09-27

Repository / Repozitorij:

PODEST - Institute of Art History Repository Between Art Nouveau and the Avant-Garde: The Personal (Ego) Network of Ivan Introductory notes: an However, Meštrović is an extremely in- Meštrović and the Map of Critical Reception of His Work during the 1910s interpretation between teresting phenomenon not only from the the traditional and the perspective of the visual art production, DOI: https://doi.org/10.31664/9789537875596.03 digital art history but also from the perspective of setting up a wide network of acquaintances, espe- One of the most significant Croatian sculp- cially with prominent individuals from the tors in the 20th century, Ivan Meštrović cultural and political arena. His political (1883–1962), affirmed himself as a sculptor engagement was most pronounced during in the public eye mostly “ex-territorially”, i.e. the First World War, but his inclination to outside of his homeland (Ill. 1).58 His starting establish politically affiliated contacts was point was Vienna, the city with a distinctive a constant in the decades to come, until cultural climate where he completed his the end of his life. This political engage- formal academic education (a three-year ment was of great importance to the art- degree course in sculpture and a two-year ist, as attested in his first book of memoirs, degree course in architecture). He was also first published abroad, in Buenos Aires in a member of the Association of Visual Artists 1961, and then, posthumously, in his home- Austria – Secession and a very active partic- land in 1969. We are, of course, referring ipant in the exhibitions held by the Associa- to the book Memories of Political People tion.59 In this text, his solo-exhibition at the and Events (Uspomene na političke ljude i of Vienna Secession in 1910 is taken as the događaje), where he recounted the events starting point of the period under scrutiny, spanning from his move to Belgrade in 1904 which extends to the end of the First World to his move to the United States in 1947.60 It War and the artist’s return to his homeland, is interesting to note that there are almost Dalibor Prančević enveloped in a brand new socio-political no protagonists from the art world featured climate, at the beginning of the 1920s. in this book; Meštrović mentioned them – Wars always provide an interesting context at least some of them – on other occa- for observing and analysing artists’ behav- sions. This book represents an outstanding iours and creative outputs, and the same contribution to political history, provided applies to Ivan Meštrović in the context to via autobiographical records and notes. the Balkan Wars and the First World War, as However, Ivan Meštrović never considered well as to the Second World War at a later himself to be a professional politician – he point in time. adamantly refused to be classified as such – and he used to point out that his vocation was exclusively that of an artist. 58 The most comprehensive study on the This text attempts to approach the interpre- life and art of Ivan Meštrović was written tation of Ivan Meštrović’s activities by using by Duško Kečkemet, who dedicated a significant portion of his career to this artist entirely different tools than those usually and interpreting his works. See: Duško implemented in art historical practice. It Kečkemet, Život Ivana Meštrovića (1883 – will show how to implement a quantita- 1962 – 2002), vol. I and vol. II (Zagreb: tive analysis, more suitable – as hitherto Školska knjiga, 2009). perceived – to other disciplines, in the do- 59 About the period that Ivan Meštović main of art history research. The challenge spent in Vienna, see: Irena Kraševac, Ivan Meštrović i secesija: Beč – München – Prag 60 Ivan Meštrović, Uspomene na političke (Zagreb: Institut za povijest umjetnosti, ljude i događaje (Zagreb: Matica hrvatska, 38 39 Fundacija Ivana Meštrovića, 2002). 1969). is thus even greater because this kind of Ivan Meštrović’s personal research usually deals in texts and textual network. Network explications, that is, they are, in most re- analysis a fragment of gards, logocentric. Indeed, from the very linear storytelling beginning, the question arises of how to reconcile the reflexive nature and approach Right at the beginning, it should be noted to research in humanities – always verging that Ivan Meštrović’s social network was re- on ambiguity, fluid, floating – with the exact constructed herein based exclusively on his and measurable data which quantitative written correspondence, archived in Atelier analysis, as well as the new technology, Meštrović in Zagreb (Fig. 1). necessitate. Actually, how do we even in- This is a special archival fund, stored as troduce quantitative analysis – and digital the property of Mate Meštrović.62 A total tools – into the field of art history, mostly of 606 letters have been processed, with a perceived as being reflexive? Is there an focus on the period from 1910 to 1920. The antagonistic relationship between “tradi- basic information about the letters, as well tional” and “digital” art history? as content excerpts, have been entered Perhaps the answer to this and similar ques- into the digital database Croatian Artists tions can be found in an optimistic note in Networks Information System (CAN_IS) that the article “Debating Digital Art History”, stems from an intensive interdisciplinary where Anna Bentkowska-Kafel analyses this work on a five-year research project Mod- specific relationship.61 Namely, the author ern and Contemporary Artist Networks, Art claims that the attribute digital has a mere Groups and Art Associations: Organisation provisional and temporary character, and and Communication Models of Artist Col- that it will become completely irrelevant laborative Practices in the 20th and 21st and without any precise demarcation in the Century. Furthermore, the visual depiction near future. So, only the umbrella term of of Meštrović’s social network was created art history will remain, of course, with all the via software visualization tools which were changes and turns in the discipline ushered integrated into the database. in by technological advancements and the As to be expected, this type of a reconstruc- implementation of new techniques. Nobody tion is not ideal. Namely, a large portion will even think in terms of an antagonistic of the epistolary records lack a specified relationship but about the critical moment timeframe that cannot be inferred from its which will have marked the redefining point contents, so this analysis should not be tak- of transition, that is, the implementation en at face value. However, it certainly does of new methods in research defined by a pave the way for future interpretations and temporal format and technological con- will be complemented by each subsequent text. We will attempt to demonstrate such insight into the personal and official cor- a coexistence – or a hybrid – of traditional respondence of Ivan Meštrović, stored in and digital art history methods by interpret- institutional or private archives. Nonetheless, ing Ivan Meštrović’s oeuvre and worldviews,

that is, his global critical reception. 62 Meštrović’s Correspondence, Meštrović Atelier Archives, Archived letters (here- 61 Anna Bentkowska-Kafel, “Debating inafter: AAM, Zg, Pup). The letters are Ill. 1 Digital Art History,” International Journal in the property of Mate Meštrović who was Ivan and Ruža Meštrović in the company of his younger sister Danica (fare left) for Digital Art History, no. 1 (2015), 50– kind enough to grant his permission to us (Family Archive Kaštelančić, Klein, Kundi, courtesy of Sabina Kaštelančić) 40 41 6 4. http s://d oi.org /10.11588/d a h.2015.1.2163 4 to use and inspect them. Bruno Barilli Ivo Ćipiko Izložba Meštrović-Rački u Zagrebu 1910. Cecil Smith Veljko Petrović Hugo Ehrlich Lorenzo Viani Josip Kosor Andrija Milčinović Aleksandar Amﬁteatrov Kosta Strajnić Hugo von Habermann Ljubo Leontić Victoria lady Sackville-West Ljubo Karaman Karl Wittgenstein Claude Phillips Abdullah Yusuf Ali Julije Gazzari Ivo Vojnović Hilda Gertrude Cowham Alvin Langdon Coburn Giovanni Cena Prvislav Grisogono Ferruccio Ferrazzi Ljubomir Davidović Christian Brinton Nadežda Petrović Norah Dacre Fox Lukijan Bogdanović Guglielmo Pizzirani Viktor Kovačić Isidor Bajić Lazar Drljača Mateja Mata Bošković Miroslav Spalajković Giovanni Rosadi Nikola Bešević Sergei Pavlovich Diaghilev Milenko Vesnić Pascual Baburizza Soletić Paul George Konody Josip Smodlaka Arturo Lancellotti Milena Barilli-Pavlović Vladimir Becić Ermenegildo Anglada Camarasa Branko Gavella Adela Milčinović Mate Meštrović Antonín Dolenský Catherine D. Groth Henry Wickham Steed Marino Tartaglia Mary Hunter Ivo Giulli Rihard Jakopič Marko Murat Emanuel Vidović Vlaho Bukovac Ivan Meštrović Srđan Tucić Četvrta jugoslavenska umjetnička izložba u Beogradu 1912. Marija (Mara) Rosandić Nikola Bodrožić Tomislav Krizman Muirhead Bone Društvo hrvatskih umjetnika"Medulić" Sophie Magelssen Groth Božo Banac Izložba Nejunačkom vremenu u prkos u Zagrebu 1910. Eugenia Errázuriz Ettore Cozzani Milan Marjanović Evelyn St. George Filip Marušić Ananda Coomaraswamy Ivo Tartaglia Jean Milne Maud (Emerald) Cunnard Izložba jugoslavenskih umjetnika iz Dalmacije u Splitu 1919. Toma Rosandić Vladimir Čerina Vittorio Pica Pavle Popović Ruža Meštrović Izložba Društva hrvatskih umjetnika"Medulić" u Ljubljani 1909.-1910. Miodrag Ibrovac Agnes Gardner King Arthur Roessler Antonio Maraini José Antonio Gandarillas Alicia Little Giuseppe Prezzolini Helen Primrose Mihajlo Pupin Ante Katunarić Evelina Haverﬁeld Michael Ernest Sadler Virgil Meneghello Dinčić Anka Netty Trumbić Gladys Swaythling Ante Trumbić

Olga Resnevic Signorelli Jerolim Miše Milan Ćurčin Gertrude Bone Petar Pešo Meštrović Růžena Khvoshinsky Zátková Frank Rutter Margaret Morris Eric Maclagan Frano Supilo Leonardo Bistolﬁ Bogdan Popović Felice Carena Marija Račić Banac Sibilla Aleramo Stewart Carmichael

exhibitions Association of Croatian Artists "Medulić" based on this sample, we can clearly differ- network analysis means and how it sheds entiate the key layers of social protagonists light on certain issues related to art history. who are mutually intertwined and reflect the When we refer to social network analysis, character of Ivan Meštrović and his collab- this usually implies two basic approach- orative-communicative disposition. The art- es: the sociocentric and the egocentric. ist’s network is not one-dimensional – as they The egocentric approach anchors a so- rarely are! – and includes the protagonists cial network on an individual agent and not only from his intimate-familial and cul- observes the forms of social relations that tural-artistic surrounding, but also from the emphasize the personal nature of society. Bruno Barilli historical-political context since, during the The sociocentric approach, on the other Ivo Ćipiko Izložba Meštrović-Rački u Zagrebu 1910. Cecil Smith First World War, Meštrović became engaged hand, relies on the principles and structural Veljko Petrović Hugo Ehrlich Lorenzo Viani 64 Josip Kosor in a concrete – or we might even define it as connectivity of the network as a whole. It Andrija Milčinović Aleksandar Amfiteatrov Kosta Strajnić Hugo von Habermann Ljubo Leontić Victoria lady Sackville-West nation-building – political activism. is apparent that Ivan Meštrović’s social net- Ljubo Karaman Karl Wittgenstein Claude Phillips Abdullah Yusuf Ali Julije Gazzari Ivo Vojnović Hilda Gertrude Cowham Despite reconstructing the network based work is of a personal – or in other terms – of Alvin Langdon Coburn Giovanni Cena Prvislav Grisogono Ferruccio Ferrazzi Ljubomir Davidović Christian Brinton Nadežda Petrović solely on the archived correspondence from an egocentric type. It cannot be conceived Norah Dacre Fox Lukijan Bogdanović Guglielmo Pizzirani Viktor Kovačić Isidor Bajić Lazar Drljača Mateja Mata Bošković Miroslav Spalajković one source, many key relationships with in- as a spatially delineated structure, in the Giovanni Rosadi Nikola Bešević Sergei Pavlovich Diaghilev Milenko Vesnić Pascual Baburizza Soletić Paul George Konody dividuals whose letters were not contained sense of understanding the society itself as Josip Smodlaka Arturo Lancellotti Milena Barilli-Pavlović Vladimir Becić Ermenegildo Anglada Camarasa Branko Gavella within could be inferred. For example, es- a territorially defined entity, but rather as Adela Milčinović Mate Meštrović Antonín Dolenský Catherine D. Groth Henry Wickham Steed pecially important are the connections that a set of connections with the other actors Marino Tartaglia Mary Hunter Ivo Giulli Meštrović forged with the members of the who are part of the network. These are, of Rihard Jakopič Marko Murat Emanuel Vidović ruling political class, such as the members course, several kinds of connections (fa- Vlaho Bukovac Ivan Meštrović Srđan Tucić Četvrta jugoslavenska umjetnička izložba u Beogradu 1912. Marija (Mara) Rosandić of the Serbian royal family Karađorđević, milial, friendship-based, cooperative, etc.) Nikola Bodrožić since the very beginning of their rule in which belong to different geographical lon- Tomislav Krizman Muirhead Bone Društvo hrvatskih umjetnika"Medulić" 1903. In addition, by holding important gitudes and latitudes, that is, to different Sophie Magelssen Groth Božo Banac Izložba Nejunačkom vremenu u prkos u Zagrebu 1910. Eugenia Errázuriz Ettore Cozzani Milan Marjanović Evelyn St. George exhibitions and capturing the attention of socio-political and, in general, historical Filip Marušić Ananda Coomaraswamy Ivo Tartaglia Jean Milne Maud (Emerald) Cunnard Izložba jugoslavenskih umjetnika iz Dalmacije u Splitu 1919. experts and the wider public, Ivan Meštrović circumstances. Toma Rosandić also met other royalty to whom he acted Ivan Meštrović’s personal network – at Vladimir Čerina Vittorio Pica Pavle Popović Ruža Meštrović as a guide at the exhibitions, as he did for least when it comes to its cultural-artis- Izložba Društva hrvatskih umjetnika"Medulić" u Ljubljani 1909.-1910. Miodrag Ibrovac Agnes Gardner King Arthur Roessler Antonio Maraini José Antonio Gandarillas Alicia Little Giuseppe Prezzolini Helen Primrose the Italian King Victor Emmanuel III of Sa- tic and historical-political layer – is de- Mihajlo Pupin Ante Katunarić Evelina Haverfield Michael Ernest Sadler voy and his wife Jelena of Savoy, daughter cidedly pragmatically motivated, that is, Virgil Meneghello Dinčić Anka Netty Trumbić Gladys Swaythling Ante Trumbić of the king of Montenegro Nikola I Petro- it is structured around organizing several Olga Resnevic Signorelli vić-Njegoš, at the International Fine Arts key exhibitions, not just in regard to his Jerolim Miše Milan Ćurčin Gertrude Bone Petar Pešo Meštrović Růžena Khvoshinsky Zátková Frank Rutter Exhibition in Rome (1911).63 Furthermore, personal affirmation, but generally in re- Leonardo Bistolfi Margaret Morris Eric Maclagan Frano Supilo the Grafton Galleries exhibition held in Lon- gard to the art history of this region and Bogdan Popović Felice Carena Marija Račić Banac Sibilla Aleramo don in 1917, which he prepared with Mirko the political-ideological programme that Stewart Carmichael Rački and Toma Rosandić, was inaugurat- permeated these exhibitions. There is no ed by a member of the British royal family, doubt that Meštrović’s critical art narrative exhibitions Association of Croatian Artists "Medulić" Princess Patricia of Connaught. This omis- was directed against Austria and, in that sion, regarding domestic or international sense, he was a prominent ideologue of relations, also equally applies to numerous one art association very significant for the other protagonists from artistic and wider cultural circles. 64 More on the differences between First of all, we should address what social sociocentric and egocentric networks, Fig. 1 see: John Scott, Social Network Analysis: Personal social network of Ivan Meštrović between 1910 and 1920, network 63 Meštrović, Uspomene na političke ljude A Handbook (London: Sage Publications, visualization based upon data extracted from his personal correspondence 42 43 i događaje, 18–19. 2000), 69–81. socio-political and artistic context of the to an entirely different sphere, the one of period under scrutiny. We are, of course, propaganda and political activism (Ill. 2). referring to the Association of Croatian This dissident art-political programme Artists “Medulić”.65 would gain its momentum at the Interna- The association was founded in 1908 in tional Fine Arts Exhibition in Rome, in 1911. Split, and dissolved in 1919, when there This is how Meštrović recounts the begin- were no more justified – political or soci- nings of the entire event: etal – reasons to continue with its activities. This was one of the first important forms The International Fine Arts Exhibition of cooperative artistic undertakings which was to be held in Rome, in 1911. I aligned its exhibition narratives with the was invited by the Vienna Ministry anti-Austrian and anti-Hungarian political to participate with ‘the most abun- framework. It goes without saying that the dant number’ of exhibits. I refused, central actor in the Association – in regard prompted by the opinion that me, as to its founding, work and promotion – was a Croat, had no place there. After a Ivan Meštrović, so one part of the archived little while, the Head of religion and correspondence relates exactly to this seg- education, Milan Amruš, invited me ment of his engagement. to talk and said that the Government Although the programmatic axis of the had received an invitation, sent by Association was representing and pro- the joint Hungarian Government, for moting class interests and supporting its Croats to participate in the exhibi- members, one of its advocated narratives tion in Rome. The “Hungarian pavil- was, unquestionably, the ideology of South ion” was to have a separate Croatian Slavic unification. This was particularly pro- section, where all the Croats from nounced at the Association’s big exhibition the Triune would be able to partici- organized at the Art Pavilion in Zagreb, in pate. Pest would arrange it with Vi- 1910, under the slogan Despite the Unhe- enna not to run afoul of the Croats roic Times, coined by the poet Vojnović. It from Dalmatia, because they, the is worth mentioning that this exhibition was Hungarians, also believed that the preceded by Ivan Meštrović’s solo-exhi- territory belonged under the Crown bition at the Vienna Secession held in the of Saint Stephen. I laughed off the same year, that is, the exhibition Meštro- proposal and said that I wouldn’t vić–Rački in Zagreb, where the concept participate, while I could not speak of sculpture and architecture articulated for others.66 through the Vidovdan or the Kosovo cycle was first presented to the public. However, The conversation with Amruš spurred the complete cycle and the associated dis- Meštrović to write to Belgrade, asking play, which Meštrović had already begun to whether the Kingdom of Serbia would showcase in Vienna, launched these works have its exhibition pavilion where one could showcase his works “if the Croatian Gov-

65 More on the Association of Croatian ernment will not want or be able to stage 67 Artists “Medulić”, see: Sandi Bulimbašić, a Croatian pavilion.” As early as 31 May Ill. 2 Društvo hrvatskih umjetnika “Medulić” View of the XXXV. Vienna Secession exhibition, Vienna, 1910. (Ivan Meštrović (1908–1919):umjetnost i politika (Zagreb: 66 Meštrović, Uspomene na političke ljude Museum photo documentation, Gallery Meštrović, Split, FGM-3992, courtesy Društvo povjesničara umjetnosti Hrvatske, i događaje, 16. of Ivana Meštrović Museum) 44 45 2016). 67 I b i d, 17. 1910, Stevan Todorović, the president of inent art critic and the secretary general of possible enfants terribles, and often, the assassination in Sarajevo and the be- the Rome Exhibition Committee, informed the Venice Biennale, also coincides with the to gain an enemy, there is nothing ginning of the First World War. At the time Ivan Meštrović that his participation was exhibition in Rome. Many of them used to worse than, prompted by the burn- of the Sarajevo assassination, Meštrović approved, as well as the unrestricted exhi- meet at the home of Signorelli family. The ing power of friendship, to give them was in Venice. After a short stay in Split, bition space, while all the other artists that home of Olga Resnevic-Signorelli, a phy- what they ardently desire. Unfortu- Meštrović went to Italy again to avoid being Meštrović mentioned would have to apply sician, writer and translator of Russian ori- nately, I had a bitter experience with arrested. Namely, the Austrian authorities on their own with all the necessary informa- gin, and Angelo Signorelli, a distinguished Anglada and with some other art- had arrested a large number of politically tion.68 The greatest success was achieved by Roman pulmonologist and renowned col- ists, and I would not want the same to engaged individuals to halt their political Ivan Meštrović himself, winning the Grand lector, situated on the ground floor of the happen with my friend Meštrović…70 activities and circumvent any problems that Prix for Sculpture and participating, as the Villa Bonaparte on XX Setembre Street, was might have otherwise arisen. data extracted from the CAN_IS database the centre of artistic and intellectual circles The qualifier “friend” which defines the Not only Ivan Meštrović, but also Ante show, in all the segments of the exhibition’s during the first decades of the twentieth character of the relationship that Meštro- Trumbić and Frano Supilo lived abroad, and realization: maintaining correspondence century.69 Auguste Rodin, cellist Livio Boni, vić had with Pica and his wife Ana, whom this immigration enabled political activity. with the members on different committees, as well as actress Eleonora Duse, and, for he portrayed, is especially interesting. In Thus, the historian Norka Machiedo Mlad- cooperating with the architect Petar Baj- example, writer Maksim Gorki, were fre- any case, this collaboration turned out to inić points out that: “Ivan Meštrović’s first alović on devising and assembling the ex- quent quests at Signorelli’s salon. Meštrović be a success. contribution to the assembling of the expats hibition pavilion, undertaking motivational and Ruža encountered them at this inter- In addition to sculptures inspired by folk tra- at the beginning of the First World War con- activities in order to prompt the artists to esting Roman social salon, having the op- ditions and idea of Yugoslavism, at the 1914 sisted of encouraging our people to leave participate in the exhibition, and so on. portunity to socialize with them. Venice Biennale, the artist also exhibited their homeland and move to then neutral Of course, the consequences were After the International Fine Arts Exhibi- the wooden model of the Vidovdan Temple, Italy. Trumbić, Supilo and Meštrović met in far-reaching. The success in Rome had tion in Rome and his outstanding success, along with some other works inspired by Venice. The main focus of their efforts was also prompted the creation of the entire Ivan Meštrović would solidify his interna- religious motifs. The poet and prose writ- to achieve the liberation of Slovenes, Croats network of Ivan Meštrović’s acquaintances tional position by participating in the er Ettore Cozzani devoted an entire issue and Serbs from Austro-Hungary and their with protagonists from the art and wider Venice Biennale in 1914. Of course, the of L’Eroica magazine to Meštrović and his unification with Serbia and Montenegro in intellectual circles. It suffices to point out arrangements about the solo showroom work, which had a resounding effect in the one country.”71 Thus, it was at that time that the prominent individuals such as the sculp- went directly though Vittorio Pica. It is Italian and European intellectual circles. the idea of establishing a political body – the tor Leonardo Bistolfi, the sculptor Giovanni interesting to look into the correspond- Due to the archived letters, it is possible to Yugoslav Committee – in charge of carrying Prini and his wife Orazia Belpito Prini, Sibilla ence between Pica and Meštrović where, gain insight into the compelling network of out the project of the Yugoslav unification Aleramo (a famous writer who published a at one point, the secretary of the Venice Ivan Meštrović’s relationships with promi- was conceived.72 Numerous letters and data comprehensive article on Meštrović’s works Biennale expressed his exasperation be- nent protagonists from the Italian intellec- from CAN_IS database refer to the work of in the magazine Lettura), the poet Vincenzo cause Meštrović – probably preoccupied tual milieu at that time. These contacts were this entity and its actors, providing a detailed Cardarelli, and many others. It would not with organizing his participation in various largely epistolary in character, but there account of the historical-political layer of be deemed impertinent to mention that the significant exhibitions – did not respond were also meetings and conversations held Meštrović’s social network. real moderator of Meštrović’s social life was in a timely fashion to his enquiries, al- outside the confines of written correspond- It is important to note that not a lot of peo- his wife Ruža who, in part, managed the though Pica did everything in his power to ence. Although many of these contacts ple from the art circle were as exposed to correspondence due to her knowledge of respect all the artist’s wishes. So, in 1913, were prompted by the cultural and artistic the public as Ivan Meštrović was. That is several world languages. She, for example, visibly displeased Pica wrote to Meštrović context, some of them belong to a more why he was such a valuable asset in ini- exchanged letters with Sibilla Aleramo, who as follows: intimate and emotional sphere, in the sense tiating first contacts and conversations sent her the French translation of her ac- that close friendships had been maintained claimed novel A Woman at Bay (Una donna). Artists, even when they are good, kind throughout their lives and passed onto their 71 Norka Machiedo Mladinić, “Prilog The first contact with Vittorio Pica, that is, and intelligent as You, are always im- descendants, for example, the one with the proučavanju djelovanja Ivana Meštrovića u Ivan and Ruža’s correspondence with the Signorelli family. Jugoslavenskom odboru,” Časopis za suvre- director of the art journal Emporium, prom- 69 For more, see: Karmen Milačić, On the other hand, Ivan Meštrović’s political menu povijest, vol. 39, no. 1 (June 2007), Talijanska pisma Ivanu Meštroviću [Italian engagement would gain momentum after 135. 68 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Todorović, Letters to Ivan Meštrović] 1911 – 1921 72 The Yugoslav Committee was founded in Stefan, ident. 861 (AAM, Zg, Pup). (Zagreb: Globus, 1987). 46 47 70 Ibid, 6 6 – 69. Paris, on 30 April 1915. with various political entities and delega- The second exhibition was organized in the tions. For example, due to his connections, famous Grafton Galleries, which was also Meštrović was able to reach the Serbian marked by a pronounced political stigma emissary in Rome, Ljubomir Mihajlović, and but without an explicitly political narrative inform him about the intention to estab- footing, because the artist did not display lish the organization of Yugoslav expats. his, so-called, Heroic Cycle but works in- Consequently, via Mihajlović, the trio Su- spired by religious themes and portraits pilo-Trumbić-Meštrović were granted an that he made in London (Ill. 3). audience with the French (Camille Barrère), Both exhibits are very interesting because English (Sir James Rennell Rodd) and Rus- they attest to the extremely wide social cir- sian (Anatolij Nikolajevič Krupenski) em- cle that Ivan Meštrović established in the UK issaries to Rome, at the end September, at the time.75 His stay in the UK had resulted in 1914.73 They delegated the plan of the in the relationships forged with some of the South Slavic unification to their respective most prominent cultural and social protag- governments. However, their work could onists. The solo-exhibition in the Victoria not continue in Italy due to the Italian ter- and Albert Museum in London had ensured ritorial pretensions aimed towards the east Ivan Meštrović a prestigious position in Eng- coast of the Adriatic, so they relocated it lish society. The artist made a number of to London, the centre of Allied diploma- acquaintances and social connections with cy. In London, there was only a handful of high-profile individuals in London, whom he cultural workers and intellectuals familiar often portrayed. He made portraits of Lady with the programme: Robert Seton-Wat- Maud Cunard and Sir Thomas Beecham, son (a scholar in Slavic studies and Ivan who were associated with the avant-garde Meštrović’s close friend, who was portrayed theatre, in particular, with Sergei Diaghi- by the artist and gifted some of his works), lev’s Ballets Russes. He also made a portrait Wickham Steed (editor of the Foreign Policy of Eugenie Errázuriz, who was colloquially section in The Times, also portrayed by Ivan known as “Picasso’s Other Mother”, thus Meštrović) and Arthur Evans (a renowned succeeding Gertrude Stein. Furthermore, archaeologist who was a great admirer of he made a portrait of Tony Gandarillas, a Ivan Meštrović’s work). controversial diplomat, and his wife Juana One way or the other, the point of direct Edwards. Tony Gandarillas was the nephew contact between the political and the ar- & Albert Museum and its reception, see: tistic engagement were Meštrović’s exhibi- Elizabeth Clegg, “Meštrović, England and tions held primarily in London, during the the Great War,” The Burlington Magazine, First World War. The first one was held in the no. 144 (December 2002), 740–51; and Dalibor Victoria & Albert Museum in 1915 and had Prančević, “Odjek Ivana Meštrovića u Velikoj strong political implications affirming the Britaniji nakon izložbe u Victoria & Albert Anti-Austrian sentiment embodied through Museumu,” in Zbornik II. kongresa hrvatskih the staging of the Kosovo Cycle and dis- povjesničara umjetnosti (Zagreb: Institut za 74 playing the model of the Vidovdan Temple. povijest umjetnosti, 2007), 395–403. 75 More on the exhibition at the 73 Machiedo Mladinić, “Prilog prouča- Grafton Galleries in London, see: Dalibor Ill. 3 vanju djelovanja Ivana Meštrovića u Prančević, “Sculpture by Ivan Meštrović at Exhibition of Serbo-Croatian Artists: Meštrović-Rački-Rosandić, Grafton Gal- Jugoslavenskom odboru”, 135–36. the Grafton Galleries in 1917: critical and leries, London, 1917 (Ivan Meštrović Museum photo documentation - Galleries 74 For a comprehensive analysis of social contexts,” Sculpture Journal 25, Meštrović, Split, FGM-640, courtesy Ivan Meštrović Museum) 48 49 Meštrović’s exhibition in the Victoria no. 2 (2016), 177–192. of Eugenie Errazuriz and also associated husband’s correspondents, such as the writers the artist Muirhead Bone’s wife, Gertrude be delivered, that is, that the printing bill with the avant-garde circle of artists in Paris Ivo Ćipiko and Vice Iljadica. She could, there- Bone, who had just completed one of her was to be sent directly to him. and London. Meštrović was greatly aided fore, be a very interesting conversationalist children’s books, and who wrote to Ruža Indeed, this was just one of the event that by his wife Ruža in these social interactions. to various participants in the social sphere. Meštrović how she would gladly donate the contributed to the spreading of Ruža Ruža would soon begin to make her own social book’s profits to helping Serbian children, Meštrović’s ego network, as attested by Ruža Meštrović and connections from which arose her own social can be examined within the same contextu- the data from the CAN_IS database and her social capital ego network and social capital. al framework.79 Alice S. Green also offered the accompanying visualizations. In addi- In visualizing Ivan and Ruža Meštrović’s con- to help with the ticket sales and donated to tion, Ruža and Ivan were invited to social Of course, there is a strong network connec- tacts, it is evident that some names are only the cause.80 Based on the archived letters, gatherings by many prominent hostesses of tion between the two spouses, the one that is connected to Ruža. For instance, especially it is obvious that Ruža Meštrović put in a lot social salons in London, such as Lady Maud not based solely on emotional grounds, but interesting are her hitherto unexplored con- of effort in organizing this charitable event Cunard, Baroness Gladys Swaythling, Clara one that is also social, because it is evident tacts with the protagonists from the activist thus inviting the famous Vivian Edwards to C. Bergheim (who was connected with the that Ruža occupies a prominent position in and suffragist enclaves. In that regard, we perform her solos and recitals.81 Howev- pianist Arthur Rubinstein and the violinist the articulation of Meštrović’s social con- should mention Evelina Haverfield, who often er, Edwards was unable to participate due Eugene Ysaÿe), and many others. tacts. We should take note of one anecdote took part in the suffragette protests. During to her health, but expressed hopes that, The data collected in the CAN_IS data- which attests to Ruža Meštrović’s remarkable the First World War, Evelina participated in despite everything, she would be able to base – focusing on the correspondence resourcefulness and social competence, the the women’s humanitarian aid and relief visit Ruža’s “Serbian Tea Room”. Based on dated between 1915 and the first half of kind that promotes dialogue on equal terms efforts in Serbia, and closely cooperated the archived correspondence, it is evident the 1916 – and the accompanying visuali- and balances out the differences that arise with the Scottish suffragette and renowned that Vivian Edwards was on good terms with zation tools, make it possible to discern the from one’s social status or public recogni- doctor Elsie Inglis, spending some time with Ivan Meštrović and Dimitrije Mitrinović. Fur- value of social capital wielded by Ivan and tion, but also to her youthful vehemence. her in Serbia. Tellingly, Ivan Meštrović made thermore, Ruža’s cooperation with Anan- Ruža Meštrović, but also the physiognomy of a posthumous portrait of Elsie Inglis in 1918. da Coomaraswamy, the cultural worker Ruža’s distinct network that would become When Ruža and Ivan first went to Ruža Meštrović’s personal network became who ardently advocated for the reception increasingly emancipated in the years to meet Rodin, he returned the busi- notably emancipated through her engage- of Indian culture and art in the West, is come. Ruža mobilized that network, in its ness card on a plate with 5 francs, ment in humanitarian activities, for exam- particularly interesting.82 He was friends full capacity, when she started living alone, because he thought that the young ple, via a charity tea party, that is, a concert with prominent artists of the time, such as after a severe marriage crisis and divorce sculptor had come to ask him for that she organized in London in early 1916. sculptors Jacob Epstein and Eric Gill, as that ensued in the mid-1920s. something. Ruža found her bearings It was a multifaceted event with the aim to well as many others. He was also friends and return 10 francs to Rodin.76 present the richness of the cultural life and with the Countess Sybil of Rocksavage, to Ivan Meštrović and the folk traditions, predominantly related to whom Ruža sent an invite to the concert. spatial dimensions of Although, in the beginning, a large part of Serbia, for which voluntary donations were Coomaraswamy’s participation in the whole his critical fortune Ruža Meštrović’s social network was defined collected. Similar humanitarian events were event was undoubtedly important because by the artistic and social status of her husband also organized in Rome, for example in Villa he sent Ruža the draft of the programme for Ivan Meštrović is one of the few artists from and the general interest in his fine artworks Medici in November 1914, with Ivan Meštro- corrections. He noted that, upon printing this region whose presence on the Europe- that would soon change. Namely, Ruža was vić illustrating the programme’s cover.77 the programmes, Ruža should make a list an art and the cultural scene, in general, also engaged in creative artwork, producing Many high-profile protagonists from Lon- of addresses where the programme was to was particularly noted. The various con- a number of sculptural portraits at the time, don’s social life participated in preparing textual frameworks in which he embed- Helen, ident. 707 (AAM, Zg, Pup). and could discuss at length not only art in gen- and promoting Ruža’s event in London. For ded his art, especially the political one, eral but also the methodology of the sculpt- example, Lady Helen Primrose wrote in high 79 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Bone, articulated just before and during World ing process. For example, she portrayed her praise of the event’s organization and sent Gertrude, ident. 137 (AAM, Zg, Pup). War I, contributed to this public standing. the money she, herself, raised from tick- 80 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Green, At this point, we should also mention the 78 Alice, ident. 338 (AAM, Zg, Pup). 76 Vesna Barbić’s record of the conversa- et sales. The initiative of the writer and importance of large exhibition projects, tion with Tvrtko Meštrović (1925–1961), Ivan 81 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Edwards, organized in European cities, in which he Meštrović’s eldest son. See: University of 77 Milačić, Talijanska pisma Ivanu Vivian, ident. 270 (AAM, Zg, Pup). participated – either individually, or col- Notre Dame Archives, Notre Dame, Indiana Meštroviću, 6. 82 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Cooma- lectively. Even in those cases where he ex- 46556, Ivan Meštrović Papers, 1924–1962. 78 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Primrose, 50 51 raswamy, Ananda, ident. 205 (AAM, Zg, Pup). hibited his work alongside other artists, his dominance was without question, as can rials are exhibition catalogues, pamphlets, Several data sources were crucial in con- Place Account for Account Account be seen in the written reviews and critiques and expert texts in specialized magazines, ducting the analysis. First of all, an impor- 1910 -11 for for that followed these exhibitions. published books, or book chapters, crit- tant source was the Građa za bibliografiju 1912-15 1916-20 We should thereby focus on several exhi- ical articles and reviews in daily, weekly, Ivana Meštrovića od 1899. do 1993. [Ivan Boston / 3 / bition projects by Ivan Meštrović, within bi-weekly and monthly journals. Meštrović’s bibliography materials from Šibenik / 2 / the given timeframe, and which proved to 1988 to 1933], which holds an extreme- Venice / 2 / be important geographical markers and ly high number of the processed biblio- Place Account for Account Account La Spezia / 2 / platforms around which the written reviews graphic units.83 However, as valuable as 1910 -11 for for Amsterdam / 2 4 and newspaper articles about the author that bibliographic unit is, it is by no means 1912-15 1916-20 Nova Gradiška / 2 1 revolved: Vienna (XXXV Exhibition of the sufficient for conducting a more compre- Zagreb 220 75 126 Vinkovci / 1 / Vienna Secession, 1910), Zagreb (Meštro- hensive analysis. Therefore, it needed to Belgrade 69 43 20 Duluth / 1 / vić-Rački, 1910, and Despite the Unheroic be complemented by materials collected Split 63 28 45 Trieste / 1 2 Times, 1910), Rome (the International Fine during several years of fieldwork and re- Zadar 40 24 5 Varaždin / 1 / Arts Exhibition, 1911), Venice (Biennale, search in numerous cities, such as London, Vienna 22 2 3 Berlin / 1 / 1914), London (Solo-exhibition in the Vic- Leeds, Los Angeles, Prague, Venice, Rome, Rome 16 5 1 Kolkata / 1 / toria and Albert Museum, 1915, and Exhi- Zagreb, and Belgrade.84 A six-month stay Novi Sad 12 1 2 Aberdeen / 1 / bition of Serbo-Croatian Artists: Meštrović, in the USA and research in their archives Rijeka 11 4 / Cape Town / 1 / Rački, Rosandić in the Grafton Galleries, and museum institutions, as well as public Dubrovnik 10 4 1 Graz / 1 / 1917). Based on the cities where these ex- libraries, must also be added to the list.85 Sremski Karlovci 8 3 / Nottingham / 1 / hibitions were articulated, it is clear that The newly collected bibliographic units, with London 5 64 58 Liverpool / 1 / Meštrović’s immediate point of interest was the focus on the 1910–1920 period under Prague 5 3 / Budapest / 1 / the Old Continent. Despite the fact that scrutiny, significantly expanded the list Sarajevo 5 5 3 Rotterdam / 1 3 this part of the world was going through Leipzig 4 / / Madrid / / 4 an extremely difficult period of geopo- 83 Jasna Ivančić and Sanja Kreković- Milan 4 1 / Geneva / / 4 litical reconfigurations, accompanied Štefanović, eds., Građa za bibliografiju Saint Petersburg 3 / / Brighton / / 4 by numerous human and material loss- Ivana Meštrovića od 1899. do 1993. (Zagreb: Ljubljana 3 2 4 Bradford / / 3 es, demanding “sculpture” exhibitions – Fundacija Ivana Meštrovića, Nacionalna i Munich 3 2 2 Oruro - Bolivia / / 2 marked by Meštrović’s conspicuous activist sveučilišna biblioteka, 1993). Osijek 2 1 5 Odessa / / 1 nerve – were still being held. This political 84 Archival materials used in this Bergamo 2 3 / Valparaiso / / 1 nerve, already affirmed in Vienna, albeit research are stored in the following Darmstadt 2 / / Thessaloniki / / 1 in a somewhat contained form, became institutions: Henry Moore Archive, Leeds, Paris 1 1 21 Cambridge / / 1 clearly articulated in Rome, and finally in Malvina Hoffman Archive, Getty Research Nuremberg 1 / / Edinburgh / / 1 Institute, Los Angeles, National Art London, as it became completely attuned Florence 1 / / Chicago / / 1 Library Archive, Victoria & Albert Museum, with the artist’s participation in the Yugo- Turin 1 / / Melbourne / / 1 London, Archives of Yugoslavia, Belgrade, slav Committee. Stuttgart 1 / / Bizerta / / 1 Archivio storico delle arti contemporanee, Thus far, there were no attempts to use Leskovac 1 / / Moscow / / 1 Venice, Archivio Signorelli, Fondazione quantitative data analysis for examining Cetinje 1 / / Vršac / / 1 Giorgio Cini, Venice, National Galery, Ivan Meštrović’s specific period of life, Warsaw 1 / / Sussex / / 1 Prague, Galleria Nazionale d’Arte Moderna or his life in its entirety, nor was there an Nova Gorica 1 / / Marseille / / 1 e Contemporanea, Rome, Archive of Fine attempt made to analyse his reception Leeds / 13 6 Maribor / / 1 Arts – HAZU, Zagreb. through such a prism (Table1). Therefore, New York / 12 9 Subotica / / 1 85 Fulbright Schoolar Programme: Dalibor 1500 bibliographic units, which include Manchester / 7 1 Prančević, “Ivan Meštrović and the various published materials that contribut- Punta Arenas / 6 1 Anglophone Cultures (Example of Cross- ed to the dissemination of news about Ivan Table 1. Number of articles on Ivan Meštrović pub- Buenos Aires / 5 17 cutting of Various Cultural, Historic and Meštrović and his art during the 1910s, were lished between 1910 and 1920, and ordered according Artistic Experiences”, February – July Glasgow / 4 4 the location of the source publication gathered in one place. Among such mate- 52 53 2018 (Syracuse University). of texts published about Ivan Meštrović’s this cannot be examined separately from artistic activities, as well as about his life. the socio-political configurations present Furthermore, Duško Kečkmet’s unpublished during the 1910s, in the period of consol- manuscript, Ivan Meštrović: Bibliografija, idating the “New Course” policy, that is, was used as an important source which the political programme whose primary contributed greatly to this analysis.86 goal was to improve the constitutional sta- However, the aim of this analysis is not to tus of Croatian territories within the Aus- provide an exhaustive interpretation of Ivan tro-Hungarian Empire, i.e., their unification Meštrović’s individual exhibition projects. (Banovina of Croatia and Dalmatia). This Rather, it is to take note of and try to in- policy was promoted by Ante Trumbić, Fra- terpret certain interesting moments found no Supilo, and Pero Čingrija, all of whom through the application of procedures that Meštrović knew personally, maintained differ from the traditionally established correspondence with (especially later procedures in art history practice. This in- on), and even made portraits of some of cludes the use of digital tools which can them. That policy, through the adoption set in motion an inert assembly of data to of two documents, the Zadar and Rijeka recognize new discourse platforms which Resolutions, enacted the prerogative of enable us to examine one artist’s oeuvre forming a Croatian-Serbian alliance, that or life trajectory. is, the founding of the Coalition in 1906 – For instance, it is interesting to examine at first with Supilo at the head, and after where the largest frequency of texts on he stepped down, with Svetozar Pribičević. Ivan Meštrović, during 1910 and 1911, can All of these names are present in Meštro- be noted (Map. 1): Zagreb (220), Belgrade vić’s correspondence, and they constitute (69), Split (63) and Zadar (40). Unsurpris- important elements of his later “political” 1 ingly, Zagreb takes precedence, since networking. The conversion of the data into 50 there were two exhibitions held in that city a digital medium, and its processing, in 100 in 1910, where Ivan Meštrović became syn- fact, point to the overlapping of the crucial 150 220 onymous with artistic-political expression. locations of Meštrović’s critical fortune with Regardless, the numbers related solely to locations of important political activities, his name are truly impressive, which speaks with the ramifications thereof becoming volumes about the propulsive nature of most pronounced during the 1910s: Za- the artist who, at that time, had not even greb-Belgrade-Split-Zadar. turned thirty. His artistic talent was un- Nevertheless, the appearance of Saint Pe- questionable, which can be attested by the tersburg on the map of Meštrović’s recep- fact that he had already exhibited his work tion during these early years is definitely in important exhibitions, and received pos- surprising. It should be mentioned that the itive reviews. Even Auguste Rodin, himself, number of published texts is not large, but spoke highly of him.87 Nevertheless, all of it is more than sufficient to raise the question of Ivan Meštrović’s presence within the 86 Duško Kečkemet, Ivan Meštrović: artistic discourse of that city, but also Russia Bibliografija 1899 –2002 (Split: Filozofski in general. Most of the texts refer to Meštro- fakultet u Splitu, Duško Kečkemet, forth c o min g). Zagrebu, eds. Jasminka Poklečki Stošić 87 See more in: Barbara Vujanović, and Barbara Vujanović (Zagreb: Umjetnički Map 1. “Doticaji umjetnika: Auguste Rodin i paviljon, Muzeji Ivana Meštrovića, 2015), Spatial distribution of articles on Ivan Meštrović published in 1910 and 1911 Ivan Meštrović,” in Rodin u Meštrovićevu 60–84. 54 55 (data processed using Tablea software) vić’s success at the Rome exhibition.88 It is For example, in Argentina, the magazine especially interesting that one of the texts Jadran was launched in Buenos Aires, and was written by Alexandre Nikolayevich Be- it published texts about Meštrović and his nois, Russian artist and art critic known for European exhibitions. The texts were written his close collaboration with Sergei Diaghi- by Meštrović himself, his friend and Eng- lev. The domestic public also took notice lish critic, James Bone, and the prominent of that text and the “Russian opinion” on members of the Yugoslav Committee, Josip Meštrović.89 Indeed, Ivan Meštrović’s con- Jedlowsky, Ljubo Leontić, and Marjan Mar- nections with the Russian cultural circle of janović. Naturally, this geographic distribu- that time have not been particularly noted tion of critical texts is also accompanied by up to this point. A digital map, of sorts, rais- the respective Meštrović’s correspondence. es the question on the possibility to analyse For example, whereas Ljubo Leontić wrote

1 and reconstruct these connections, while very favourably to Meštrović about his life in 20 this text will later provide a “rough” sketch South America – Antofagasta in Chile, and 40 1 60 20 of their possible physiognomy. The following Buenos Aires in Argentina – expressing his 76 40 two maps clearly show the dissemination opinions on the Yugoslav question and the 60 76 of information on Meštrović’s work and his work of the Committee, Marjanović was not engagement as a sculptor, after successful overly satisfied with his stay in Valparaíso in exhibitions in Europe (Map 2 and Map 3). Chile, where he lived in 1918.90 After his successful London exhibition, he Furthermore, the maps show that Meštrović’s also toured other British cities, thus frequent success was recorded even in India, namely, written mentions of the artist were to be Kolkata. The direct connections between expected in the British cultural circle. How- the artist and India have not yet been es- ever, it is relatively surprising that there is a tablished – at least not in that period – but certain number of texts from South Amer- certain individuals linked to Meštrović were in ica that also referred to the artist. It is in- direct contact with the Indian cultural milieu. triguing that Meštrović also received letters In that regard, we should mention Ananda from South America, primarily due to the Coomaraswamy, whose efforts in promoting economically motivated immigration wave Indian art might have had a certain morpho- 1 1 from Croatia, starting at the end of the 19th logical effect on Meštrović’s art in 1917 or 50 50 100 century, but also due to the more recent 1918, which definitely requires further study 100 126 126 immigration waves. Immigrant communities and comparative analysis. Also worth men- disseminated information about cultural tioning is Abdullah Yusuf Ali, from Bombay events and political initiatives, especially by birth and part of the Islamic tradition, about the work of the Yugoslav Committee. who published a booklet on Meštrović’s art in London, in 1916, and who exchanged corre-

88 Yakov Tugehhol’d, “O Meštrovićevim spondence with and even met with the artist djelima na Rimskoj izložbi,” Apollon in London and Paris. (1911); Alexandre Nikolajevič Benois, “O Therefore, such a geographical dispersion Map 2 Meštroviću povodom Međunarodne izložbe u of texts about Meštrović, and their visuali- Spatial distribution of articles on Ivan Meštrović published between 1912 and 1915 Rimu”, Ryech (1911). zation, actually prompt the need to recon- (data processed using Tableau software) 89 “Rus o Meštroviću”, Srbobran, 4 April struct Meštrović’s presence in certain cul- 1911; “Ruski sud o Meštroviću”, Brankovo Map 3 kolo, 13 October 1911; “Ruski glas o 90 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Leontić, Spatial distribution of articles on Ivan Meštrović published between 1916 and 1920 M e štr o v ić u”, Narodni list, 9 September Ljubo, ident. 508 and Marjanović, Milan, (data processed using Tableau software) 56 57 1911. ident. 542 (AAM, Zg, Pup). tures or continents, which, in large part, has when the exhibition would open. However, not yet been addressed or emphasized in he already had the text translated into Rus- the interpretations of the artist’s work or life. sian and sent it to Gorki in Saint Petersburg This also applies to the African continent, for his chronicle. Kosor wrote to Meštrović where certain texts were also published, that the ambassador of the Kingdom of but which cannot be further explicated at Serbia in Russia, Miroslav Spalajković, would this point. However, with additional insights certainly support Meštrović’s exhibition and into the issue of the modernist heritage in help in its realization. Africa, this predicament is sure to change. Meštrović would soon receive a letter from university professor Pavle Popović, a re- Unrealised exhibitions nowned philologist and a politically active in Russia and America member of the Yugoslav Committee, urging him to cancel the exhibition in Russia, and The data on the reception of Ivan Meštro- reorient to Paris, due to financial obsta- vić’s work in Russia, i.e., Saint Petersburg, cles.92 This turn of events cannot really be were noted as early as 1911, and result from explained by one specific event, but it might Meštrović’s intense exhibition activities and have resulted from a discussion that cer- success at the International Fine Arts Exhi- tain political protagonists had in relation to bition in Rome. The connections with Rus- the question of the South Slavic unification, sian culture are not one-sided, and they which certain individuals in Russia did not were most certainly mediated by Signo- support.93 On 15 June 1916, Miroslav Spala- relli’s social salon in Rome because Olga jković sent an official telegraph to Meštro- was of Russian origin and many important vić, informing the artist that the committee cultural protagonists from Russia gathered in Saint Petersburg can only provide moral in her Salon. Furthermore, it is important to and not financial support for his exhibition. mention Meštrović’s exchange of letters with He furthermore suggested that the organ- writer and journalist, Alexander Amfiteatrov, isation of the exhibition be funded by the who had connections with Saint Petersburg Yugoslav Committee or the Government of and Sergei Diaghilev. the Kingdom of Serbia.94 However, the initiative for organizing an ex- During May 1916, Ivan Meštrović sent letters hibition in Saint Petersburg was undertaken to Ante Trumbić, inquiring about the exhi- at a somewhat later date in 1916. We should bition.95 Namely, he made all the necessary also mention a very interesting letter which arrangements for the transport of the art- was sent to Meštrović from Odessa, on 29 works, and it was his intention to also send March 1916, by writer Josip Kosor (Ill. 4).91 new artworks, religious in character, which Kosor had been truly excited that he would he created in Geneva. He pointed out that see Meštrović at the exhibition in Saint Pe- tersburg, and he informed Maksim Gorki of 92 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Popović, that occasion, so he expressed regret over Pavle, ident. 698 (AAM, Zg, Pup). postponing the exhibition till autumn. As he 93 Meštrović, Uspomene na političke ljude notes, he was asked to put off the publishing i događaje, 39–40. of his essay until the beginning of autumn 94 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Spalajković, Miroslav, ident. 799 (AAM, Zg, Ill. 4 91 Meštrović’s Correspondence: letter Pu p). The letter of Josip Kosor to Ivan Meštrović, Odessa, dated 29 March, from Josip Kosor to Ivan Meštrović, ident. 95 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Trumbić, 1916. (Letter from the Correspondence collection of Atelier Meštrović Archives, Zagreb; ident. 461 A1, courtesy of Mate Meštrović) 461 A1 (AAM, Zg, Pup). Ante, ident. 868 (AAM, Zg, Pup). 58 59 he only expected that which the Prime Min- Sage-Quinton, the director of the Buffalo ister of the Kingdom of Serbia, Nikola Pašić, Fine Art Academy – Albright Art Gallery in instructed to be done. In a letter sent at the Buffalo. Furthermore, it is indicative that on end of May, he broached the issue of insur- 30 June that same year, Christian Brinton ance, without which the artworks could not – who would conceive and curate the exhi- be transported, so it was necessary to issue bition in the Brooklyn Museum in New York an order from Saint Petersburg demanding in 1924 – sent Meštrović a letter, because procurement of the insurance either via the he saw some of his works in Europe, giving Russian or Serbian embassy. He also wrote special praise to the works exhibited in Mu- to Milenko Vesnić, ambassador of the King- nich, at the International Munich Secession dom of Serbia in Paris, concerning this issue, Exhibition.98 asking him to get in touch with Spalajković. Furthermore, Cornelia’s interest in organiz- In June he also sent letters to Trumbić, asking ing Meštrović’s solo-exhibition would again for urgent action. be evinced after Meštrović’s very successful In the letters sent to him at the end of June, exhibition at the Victoria & Albert Museum Ante Trumbić mentioned that both Pašić and in London. The preparations were in ad- Vesnić, with whom he personally discussed vanced stages, and a committee was even the exhibition in Russia, were very positively founded, but due to the war and precarious inclined.96 However, on 5 August 1916, in a transport routes, the artworks prepared for letter Trumbić sent to Meštrović, it is obvious transport from Liverpool were returned to that he was taken aback by the changes London, to the Victoria and Albert Muse- which had perspired in Saint Petersburg, and um, where they remained until the end of advised Meštrović to write to Pašić as soon the war. 99 as possible, and to inquire about further ac- Nonetheless, in the visualized connections tions regarding the exhibition.97 in Ivan and Ruža Meštrović’s social net- Organising an exhibition without political work, two individuals come to the fore. Their implications and support was unfeasible, names were largely unknown in the earlier but since the support had been overdue, studies of Meštrović’s oeuvre, but they were even the information on the initiative to obviously involved in the initiative of prepar- stage an exhibition of Meštrović’s works in ing the American exhibition: Sophie Ma- Saint Petersburg eventually dissipated. It gelssen Groth and her daughter Catherine was important to present this information to D. Groth.100 During 1916, Sophie sent several demonstrate Meštrović’s aptitude in discus- letters to Ruža Meštrović, writing about her sions with politicians about organising an stay on the French Riviera, namely, Cannes, exhibition as a cultural and political project. but also about Meštrović’s exhibition in However, as one initiative was discontinued, America, pointing out that her daughter another gained momentum: the affirmation of Ivan Meštrović in America. 98 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Brinton, It a well-known fact that the initiative to Christian, ident. 152 (AAM, Zg, Pup). stage Meštrović’s exhibition in America 99 See, Dalibor Prančević, Ivan Meštrović was set off by his great success at the In- i kultura modernizma: ekspresionizam i art ternational Fine Arts Exhibition in Rome, déco (Split: Filozofski fakultet u Splitu, 1911, and primarily prompted by Cornelia Muzeji Ivana Meštrovića, 2017), 323–327. Ill. 5 100 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Magelssen The letter of Catherine D. Groth to Ivan Meštrović, New York, dated 16 December, 96 Ibid. Groth, Sophie, ident. 346 i Groth, 1916. Letter from the Correspondence collection of Atelier Meštrović Archives, Zagreb, ident. 345 A7, courtesy of Mate Meštrović) 97 Ibid. Catherine D., ident. 345 (AAM, Zg, Pup). 60 61 was an exceptionally successful manager clear in the letters he sent to the sculptor, who could bring Meštrović not only moral where he commented, among other things, but also material success in America. This that the names Groth mentioned were tru- exhibition was a collaborative project on ly the wealthiest people in New York, but a higher political level as well. Namely, at that he should be wary because she would the beginning of November, Milenko Vesnić demand a hefty percentage. It seems that sent a telegram to Groth from Paris, inform- things got more complicated over the fol- ing her that the prince regent, Alexander lowing months, leading Milan Ćurčin to write Karađorđević, agreed to be the patron of to Ivan Meštrović on 5 March 1917, saying he the exhibition. Groth informed Meštrović did not think that there was any conspiracy about this, providing a lot of interesting in- on the part of Groth, since she still wanted formation in the letter sent on 16 Decem- to manage the entire project, but that it was ber 1916 (Ill. 5).101 Namely, Christian Brinton obvious that she was also, naturally, work- was mentioned in the letter as the person ing in her own favour.103 He stated that she in charge of the catalogue, and Cornelia actually perceived everything as a business Sage for museums outside New York. Also arrangement. Shortly afterwards, in March, of interest is the naming of prominent New all the packaged artworks were returned to York cultural figures who promised initial London, supposedly because trans-Atlantic financial support. Among those mentioned ships were in danger of being torpedoed. was the wife of Harry Payne Whitney, Ger- Looking at the geographic distribution trude Vanderbilt Whitney, a well-known pa- maps of texts about Ivan Meštrović, it is tron of the arts and a sculptor herself, future interesting to note his gravitation towards founder of the famous New York museum, the western hemisphere, which would, in a Henry Clay Frick, an industrialist, patron way, ensure his affirmation in America in the of the arts, and future founder of the Frick following period, attested by his solo-exhi- Collection in New York, Thomas Fortune bitions held – first in the Brooklyn Museum, Ryan, industrialist and businessman, and and then in other American cities – and the Otto Hermann Khan, a banker, philanthro- fact that he was commissioned to create a pist and patron of the arts. Of course, the sculpture of the Equestrian Indians by the key figure was the scientist Mihajlo Pupin. city of Chicago. On these occasions, Cor- However, the war and the precarious trans- nelia Sage and Malvina Hoffman proved to port conditions interrupted the organisation be very apt “managers”. It is especially in- of the exhibition and it was postponed until teresting to note that women were the ones it was finally scrapped. Throughout the cor- who undertook much of the initiative and respondence, it is interesting to take note activity in organizing Meštrović’s exhibitions of Catherine D. Groth’s resolute business in America, as well as in his promotion in attitude, since Meštrović’s former associ- that cultural space. ates had certain complaints about her, especially Božo Banac, who was in charge of the transport of the artworks.102 This is made

101 Meštrović’s Correspondence: letter from Catherine D. Groth to Ivan Meštrović, ident. 345 A7 (AAM, Zg, Pup). 102 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Banac, 103 Meštrović’s Correspondence: Ćurčin, Božo, ident. 94 (AAM, Zg, Pup). Milan, ident. 234 (AAM, Zg, Pup). 62 63 Irena Kraševac, Petra Šlosel grebu 1911. od 1. svibnja do 1. lipnja. (Exhibition cat- DArtHist Austria. “Exhibitions of Modern European Paint- Prančević, Dalibor. “Sculpture by Ivan Meštrović at the Networking of Central European Artists’ alogue). Zagreb: Dionička tiskara u Zagrebu, 1911. ing 1905–1915”. Accessed January 5, 2019. https://www. Grafton Galleries in 1917: critical and social contexts.” Associations via Exhibitions. The Slovenian Art darthist.at/projektdetail/exhibitions-of-modern-euro- Sculpture Journal, vol. 25, no. 2 (2016): 177–192. Association, Czech Mánes and Polish Sztuka in Kraševac, Irena. Ivan Meštrović i secesija. Beč – pean-painting-1905-15.html Zagreb in the Early 20th Century” München – Prag: 1900.–1910. Zagreb: Institut za povi- Prančević, Dalibor. Ivan Meštrović i kultura modernizma: pp. 16-36. jest umjetnosti, and Fundacija Ivana Meštrovića, 2002. ekspresionizam i Art déco. Split: Filozofski fakultet u Dalibor Prančević Splitu, Muzeji Ivana Meštrovića, 2017. Best, Bettina. Secession und Secessionen, Idee und Or- Kraševac, Irena, and Željka Tonković. “Umjetničko um- Between Art Nouveau and the Avant-Garde: The ganisation einer Kunstbewegung um die Jahrhunder- režavanje putem izložaba u razdoblju rane moderne Personal (Ego) Network of Ivan Meštrović and the Map Scott, John. Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. Lon- twende. München: Matthes & Seitz, 2000. – sudjelovanje hrvatskih umjetnika na međunarodnim of Critical Reception of His Work during the 1910s don: Sage Publications, 2000. izložbama od 1891. do 1900. godine”. Radovi Instituta pp. 38-62 Marian Bisanz-Prakken. Heiliger Frühling. Gustav Klimt za povijest umjetnosti, no. 40 (2016): 203–17. Vujanović, Barbara. “Doticaji umjetnika: Auguste Ro- und die Anfänge der Wiener Secession 1895–1905. Wien- din i Ivan Meštrović”. In Rodin u Meštrovićevu Zagrebu, München: Christian Brandstätter Verlag, 1999. Kraševac, Irena, and Petra Vugrinec, eds. Izazov mod- “Rus o Meštroviću”. Srbobran April 4, 1911. edited by Jasminka Poklečki Stošić and Barbara Vu- erne: Zagreb – Beč oko 1900, exhibition catalogue. janović, 60–84. Zagreb: Umjetnički paviljon, Muzeji Bogner, Peter, Richard Kurdiovsky, and Johannes Stoll, Zagreb: Galerija Klovićevi dvori, 2017. “Ruski glas o Meštroviću”. Narodni list September 9, 1911. Ivana Meštrovića, 2015. eds., Das Wiener Künstlerhaus. Kunst und Institutuion. Wien: Lehner, 2015. Kraševac, Irena, ed., 150 godina Hrvatskog društva “Ruski sud o Meštroviću”. Brankovo kolo October 13, 1911. Archival sources likovnih umjetnika. Umjetnost i institucija. Zagreb: Hr- Brzyski, Anna. “Vienna Secession, Hagenbund, Sztuka, vatsko društvo likovnih umjetnika, Institut za povijest Bulimbašić, Sandi. Društvo hrvatskih umjetnika „Medulić“ Atelier Meštrović Archives, Letters collection, Zagreb. and Manes : competition and stategic collaboration umjetnosti, 2018. (1908.–1919.). Zagreb: Društvo povjesničara umjetnosti among central European art groups.” Centropa, no. Hrvatske, 2016. University of Notre Dame Archives, Notre Dame, Indiana 11 (2011): 4 –18 . Kršnjavi, Izidor. “Druga izložba Društva hrvatskih um- 46556, Ivan Meštrović Papers, 1924– 1962. jetnika, I. Slovenski slikari,” Narodne novine, December Clegg, Elizabeth. “Meštrović, England and the Great Brzyski-Long, Anna. “Unsere Polen...: Polish artists and 31, 1900. War.” The Burlington Magazine, no. 144, (December 2002): Online sources the Vienna Secession, 1897–1904”. In Art, culture, and 740–751. national identitiy in Fin-de-Siecle Europa, edited by Mi- Krzysztofowicz-Kozakowska, Stefania, and Piotr Mizia. Bentkowska-Kafel, Ana. “Debating Digital Art History.” chelle Facos and Sharon L. Hirsch, 65–89. Cambridge: “Sztuka-Wiener Secession-Mánes. The central Euro- Ivančić, Jasna, and Sanja Kreković-Štefanović, eds. International Journal for Digital Art History, no. 1 (2015): Cambridge University Press, 2003. pean Art Triangle,” Artibus et Historiae, vol. 27, no. 53 Građa za bibliografiju Ivana Meštrovića od 1899. do 50–64. https://doi.org/10.11588/dah.2015.1.21634b (2006): 217–259. 1993. Zagreb: Fundacija Ivana Meštrovića, Nacionalna Bulimbašić, Sandi. Društvo hrvatskih umjetnika „Me- i sveučilišna biblioteka, 1993. Tamara Bjažić Klarin, Nikola Bojić dulić“ (1908.–1919.). Zagreb: Društvo povjesničara um- Maruševski, Olga. Društvo umjetnosti 1868.–1879.–1941. CIAM Network Visualisation – Detecting jetnosti Hrvatske, 2016. Zagreb: Društvo povjesničara umjetnosti Hrvatske, Kečkemet, Duško. Život Ivana Meštrovića (1883.–1962.– Ideological Ruptures in the CIAM Discourse 2004. 2002.), Vol. I and Vol. II. Zagreb: Školska knjiga, 2009. pp. 64-82 Buhrs, Michael, ed. Die Münchner Secession 1892–1914. München: Museum Villa Stuck, 2008. Milčinović, Andrija. “Umjetnička izložba,” Savremenik, Kečkemet, Duško. Ivan Meštrović: Bibliografija 1899–2002. Anon., “Architecture et urbanisme en U.R.S.S.” L’Archi- Cavanough, Jan. Out looking in. Early Modern Polish no. 8 (1911): 526–529. Split: Filozofski fakultet u Splitu, Duško Kečkemet, 2017., tecture d’Aujourd’hui, no. 8 (1932): 49–96. Art, 1890–1918. Berkley University Press, 2000. knjiga je u tisku. Rollig, Stella, Irena Kraševac, and Petra Vugrinec, Bjažić Klarin, Tamara. Ernest Weissmann: društveno Čorkalo, Katica, ed. Isidor Kršnjavi, Listovi iz Slavonije – eds. The Challenge of Modernism: Vienna and Zagreb Kraševac, Irena. Ivan Meštrović i secesija. Beč – München angažirana arhitektura, 1926 – 1939 / Ernest Weissmann: Članci. Vinkovci: Vinkovci Branch of the Matrix Croatia, around 1900, exhibition catalogue. Vienna: Belvedere, – Prag: 1900.–1910. Zagreb: Institut za povijest umjetnosti, Socially Engaged Architecture, 1926–1939. Zagreb: Hr- Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts. Vinkovci 2017. and Fundacija Ivana Meštrovića, 2002. vatska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti, Hrvatski muzej Center for Scientific Research, 1995. arhitekture, 2015. Secessioni Europee. Monaco, Vienna, Praga, Roma, Machiedo Mladinić, Norka. “Prilog proučavanju djelovan- Goveker, Fran, ed. Seznam in imenik I. slovenske umet- Palazzo Roverella, exhibition catalogue. Rovigo: Silvana ja Ivana Meštrovića u Jugoslavenskom odboru.” Časopis Bjažić Klarin, Tamara. “CIAM Networking – International niške razstave. Ljubljana: Slovensko umetniško drušvo, Editoriale, 2017. za suvremenu povijest, vol. 39, no. 1 (June 2007): 133–156. Congress of Modern Architecture and Croatian archi- 1900. tects in the 1950s.” Život umjetnosti, no. 99 (2016), 40–57. Wilhelmi, Christoph. Künstlergruppen in Deutschland, Meštrović, Ivan. Uspomene na političke ljude i događaje. Hägerstrand, Torsten. “What about people in regional Husslein-Arco, Agnes, Matthias Boeckl, and Harald Österreich und der Schweiz seit 1900. Ein Handbuch, Zagreb: Matica hrvatska, 1969. science?” Papers of the Regional Science Association, Krecji, eds. Hagenbund. Ein europäisches Netzwerk der Stuttgart: Dr. Ernst Hauswedell & Co., 1996. no. 1 (1970): 6–21. Moderne 1900 bis 1938, exhibition catalogue. Vienna: Milačić, Karmen. Talijanska pisma Ivanu Meštroviću 1911– Belvedere, 2014. Žerovc, Beti. Slovenski impresionisti. Ljubljana: 1921. Zagreb: Globus, 1987. Huber, Benedikt. Die Stadt des Neuen Bauens. Projekte Mladinska knjiga, 2013. und Theorien von Hans Schmidt. Zürich: gta ETH, 1993. Jooss, Birgit. “Kunstinstitutionen: Zur Entstehung Prančević, Dalibor. “Odjek Ivana Meštrovića u Velikoj und Etablierung des modernen Kunstbetriebs”. In Online sources Britaniji nakon izložbe u Victoria & Albert Museumu”. In Mumford, Eric. The CIAM discourse on urbanism, 1928– Geschichte der bildendnen Kunst in Deutschland. Vom Zbornik II. kongresa hrvatskih povjesničara umjetnosti, 1960. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2000. Biedermeier zum Impressionismus, Vol. 7, edited by Hu- Belvedere. “HAGENBUND. Ein europäisches Netzwerk 395–403. Zagreb: Institut za povijest umjetnosti, 2007. bertus Kohle, 189–211. München: Prestel, 2008. der Moderne (1900 bis 1938)”. Accessed January 5, Katalog izložbe Hrvatskog društva umjetnosti : u Za- 2019. http://tools.fas.at/hagenbund/exhibition.html 202 203 Risselada, Max, and Dirk van den Heuvel, eds. Team