Uncivil Alliances: Delacroix, the Private Collector, and the Public Author(s): Elisabeth A. Fraser Source: Oxford Art Journal, Vol. 21, No. 1 (1998), pp. 89-103 Published by: Oxford University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1360698 . Accessed: 13/03/2011 09:56

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Oxford Art Journal.

http://www.jstor.org Uncivil Alliances: Delacroix, the Private Collector, and the Public

Elisabeth A. Fraser

Eugene Delacroix was probablythe most controversialartist of the Bourbon Restorationperiod in . Shiftingcritical alliances coalesced around his work, and none sustainedand embracedhis art; 1. The most important study of images from yet evenly whole-heartedly the Greek War is N. Athanassoglou-Kallmyer's, his works shown at the Salon exhibitions were the object of heated and FrenchImages Jom the GreekWar of Independence, extensive discussion. Received ideas about historiansto 1821-1830; Art and Politicsunder the Restoration prepare be to this of the of Delacroix's career, (Yale University Press: New Haven and London, receptive part story early yet they 1989). Other major works on the obscure another equally important facet of it: his success. Within the first include F. Haskell, 'Chios, the Massacres, and eight years of his career, Delacroix received private and public commissions, Delacroix', in J. Boardman and C. E. and all but one of his were for the Musee du Vaphopoulou-Richardson(eds.), Chios:A major bought Conferenceat the Homereionin Chios, 1984 Luxembourg. Rather than being a detour on the way to acclaim, his early (Clarendon Press: Oxford, 1986), pp. 335-58; career defined a direct route to it. L. Johnson, The Paintingsof EugeneDelacroix, A In a in which administrationsstill determinedthe CriticalCatalogue (Clarendon Press: Oxford, period government largely 1981), vol. 1, pp. 83-91; F. Trapp, The success of artists, this combination of official endorsement and public Attainmentof Delacroix(Johns Hopkins Press: controversy needs closer exploration. Internal conflicts in the arts and G. Baltimore, 1971), pp. 29-48; Busch, administration the Salon of 1824, and the of 'IkonographischeAmbivalenz bei Delacroix; Zur concerning royal purchase Enstehungsgeschichtedes "Szenen aus dem Delacroix's Scenesdes massacresde Scio (Scenesfromthe Massacresof Chios),the Massakervon Chios"', in Stil und Ueberlieferung most discussedwork of that exhibition,provide a singularglimpse of the effect in der Kunstdes Abendlandes, Actes des 21. of on a regime committed to an Ancien Regime InternationalenKongresses fur Kunstgeschichte 'public opinion' symbolically in Bonn 1964 (Berlin, 1967), vol. 3, pp. 143- notion of royal prerogativeand authority. After documenting and analyzing 8. this effect, I will suggestthe relevanceof privatecollecting to an interpretation 2. I argue elsewhere that the implications of the of the Massacresde Scio,then reassessthe pressureof unofficialcollecting on the violent grotesque have been overlooked in the of Restoration state the latter until now in a of the as a liberal shape patronage, regarded reading painting plea. manner as to Delacroix's focus on violence effectively simplistic antagonistic innovation. diverted the painting from the strongly It has always seemed strange that Eugene Delacroix's Massacresde Scio overdetermined public opinion of the day, was the Frenchstate at the time of the Salonof 1824-25. the manichean (Fig. 1) purchasedby obfuscating logic structuring The common view of the as a liberal French views of Greeks and Turks during the image advocating call for French War of Independence. Sensual paint mixed with interventionin the Greek War of Independenceagainst the Ottoman Empire violent subject matter made for viewers in 1824 underscoresthe of the Its violation of classical an uncomfortable zone of consciousness of the certainly peculiarity purchase.' its of the Greeks in a of mutable boundaries of violence and pleasure, bodily decorum, depiction state abjectionrather than and of racial stereotypes. See E. Fraser, heroic resistance,again compounds the strangeness.2Certainly the controversy 'InterpretingDelacroix in the 1820s: Readings the at the Salon would seem to make it an in the Art Criticism and Politics of Restoration generated by painting unlikely candidatefor state favour under the BourbonRestoration. France' (Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1993), pp. 65-89 and 143-9. Gericault'sRadeau de la Meduse(Raft of the Medusa),a paintingcomparable in 3. There are few substantialpolitical and ambition, scale, and aesthetic and political provocation, was probably too historical studies of the Bourbon Restoration. controversialfor the and his administrators,and was not after its For an see G. de Bertier de king bought overview, Sauvigny, in the Salonof 1819. The Bourbon on the French La Restauration(Flammarion: , 1955). showing monarchy,imposed Stanley Mellon's unsurpassed study of by foreign powers after the defeat of Napoleon, was justifiablysensitive to Restoration historians reveals much about the controversies its rhetoric.3 constitutive concerns of the see affectingpublic opinion, despite legitimist political period: how the of the Massacresde Scio was has never Mellon, The PoliticalUses of History;A Studyof Exactly quizzical purchase Historiansin the FrenchRestoration (Stanford been fully explored, let alone explained. FrancisHaskell has gone the furthest University Press: Stanford, 1958). More in some of the of the itself: he noted the moral historian Alan has how outlining peculiarities painting recently, Spitzer shown in Delacroix's and sensational of traditional Restoration society shaped a generation of ambiguity updated reworking artists, writers, journalists and intellectuals: see battle scenes and images of violence and conflict, and the indecorous, almost Spitzer, The FrenchGeneration of 1820 (Princeton indifferenttreatment of limp and wounded bodies. The painterprovocatively

( OXFORD UNIVERSITYPRESS OXFORD ART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 87-103 ElisabethA. Fraser

rr"* :i'iilii; 9'" .?.i OtS*F::t. :.?H'i:iL ?1;1?I,i ??sr:r?s". ?I .1?:91'

Fig. 1 EugeneDelacroix: Scnes des massacresde Scio (Scenes of the Massacresof Chlos), 1824, oil, 419 x 354 cm. Musee du Louvre,Paris. (Photo: R6uniondes Musees Nationaux.)

90 OXFORD ART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 Uncivil Alliances

reversed conventional heroic symbolism: the Turk on horsebackinevitably refers, of course, to a tradition of equestrian iconography, here however the University Press: Princeton, 1987). See also negating image's political resolution along the lines of French opinion, Sheryl Kroen, 'The Cultural Politics of which vehemently opposed the Ottoman Turks and supported the Greeks. Revolution and Counter-revolution in France, Delacroix's detachedtreatment of the to his 1815-1830' of subject, shocking contemporaries, (Ph.D. dissertation, University seemed to them to reveal rather than California, Berkeley, 1992). professional political ambitions. Haskell that the recent in 1818 of the Musee du 4. Indeed, one possible and unexplored argued opening explanation of the purchase of the painting Luxembourg,dedicated to the exhibitionof works by living artists, created a would be a conscious strategy to subvert the new sense of destinationin the artistic of the Restoration,one of imaginary early controversy Delacroix's work: the purchase to which Delacroix have been the first artist to Delacroix's and display of the painting in the prestigious may fully respond.4 Musee du Luxembourg put the king's stamp of magnificentlyambiguous painting refused easy location in the usual official approval on it, effectively absorbing and the of the administrations,courts, halls, the officialdom renders places: king's palaces, buildings city overriding controversy: churches. Yet, as a sizeable the Massacresde Scio was not the controversy moot. For all the critical debate history painting, during the run of the Salon, no one seems to apparently intended for a private collection. Haskell's interpretation have complained that the painting was bought suits this in which destinationwas not and exhibited in the most compellingly pre-Modernistperiod officially prestigious an extra-artisticconsideration (as in a art but an venue for living artists. capitalist 'open' market), of the formulationof such basic as 5. On see R. The integral part pictorial components size, criticism, Wrigley, Originsof and FrenchArt Criticism:the AncienRegime to the structure, format, formality, subject, handling. Potential patrons and Restoration(Clarendon Press: Oxford, 1993); N. places of displaywere finite and readilyidentifiable, making destination surely McWilliam, V. Schuster and R. Wrigley (eds.), as much a of the broaderartistic unconscious the nature of A Salon Criticismin the part determining Bibliographyof Parisfrom of art and AncienRegime to the Restoration,1699-1827 images as political allegiances,the expandingpractice criticism, the (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, rapid growth of the periodicalpress since the fall of Napoleon.s A. 'Delacroix and his critics: 1991); Larue, For these reasons, the purchase of Delacroix's painting bears closer stakes and strategies', in M. R. Orwicz (ed.), Art Criticismand its Institutionsin Nineteenth- scrutiny,as do two points that serve as correctivesto the historicalrecord, but CenturyFrance (Manchester University Press: that also raise broader, interpretativeissues about Delacroix's early work. Manchester and New York, 1994), pp. 63-87; the Massacresde Scio was the state in an and and E. Delacroix in the First, purchasedby irregular Fraser, 'Interpreting the audience and destinationof the work were 1820s' (1993). On the nature and expansion of revealingprocedure; second, the periodical press during the Restoration, see very much in question in 1824. These points, which I will adumbratein this C. Des Granges, Le Romantismeet la critique:la are relevantto a of Delacroix'swork in this litterairesous la 1815-1830 essay, general rereading intensely presse Restauration, the (Societe du Mercure de France: Paris, 1907); C. concentrated,formative moment in his career, 1820s, inauguratedunder Ledre, La Pressea l'assault de la monarchic,1815- the BourbonRestoration. 1848 (Armand Colin: Paris, 1960); I. Collins, The arts administration Delacroix's but not The Governmentand the Pressin government's bought painting, Newspaper France, in 1814-1881 (Clarendon Press: Oxford, 1959); J. at the close of the Salon, as was the practice:it bought it, an irregularand Godechot, et al. (eds.), Histoiregenirale de la politically risky procedure, during the first weeks of the Salon, along with pressefranfaise,vol. 2: De 1815 a 1871 (Presses three other three different artists. official universitairesde France: On paintings by Usually acquisitions Paris, 1969). were determinedtowards the end of the Salon and announcedat its patronage under the Restoration see G. exhibition, Lacambreand J. Lacambre, 'La Politique close. Significantly,these acquisitions,approved directly by the king, were d'acquisition sous la Restauration:les tableaux associatedwith his and benevolence means of a Bulletinde la societede I'histoirede closely authority by special d'histoire', in which the bestowed the announcedthe l'artJfanfais, 1973, pp. 331-44; R. Rosenblum, ceremony king awards, acquisitions 'La peinture sous la Restauration, 1814-1830', and future commissionsof favouredartists. What makes this unusuallyearly De Davida Delacroix;La peinturefianfaisede 1774 is the the terms, and the a 1830 (Editions de la Reunion des Musees purchaseparticularly interesting urgency, charged internal of the relevant administrative Nationaux: Paris, 1974), pp. 233-47; M.-C. political implications reports. Chaudonneretand A. Pougetoux, 'Les Correspondence between the Comte de Forbin, director of the Royal Collections princieres sous la Restauration', and the Vicomte de La head of the of Revuede la Societed'histoire de la Restaurationet de Museums, Rochefoucauld, Department in Maisondu la monarchicconstitutionelle, vol. 3, 1989, pp. 33- Fine Arts the Ministryof the Roi, servingdirectly under the king, 49; B. S. Wright, 'Henri Gaugain et le musee CharlesX,6 provides a detailed account of the transaction.7 Colbert: l'entreprise d'un directeur de galerie et On 6 Forbin wrote to La the d'un editeur d'art a September 1824, Rochefoucauld,urging l'epoque romantique', of a few Nouvellesde l'estampe,vol. 114, 1990, immediate, and exceptionalpurchase paintingsbefore the close of the December, pp. 24-31; and M.-C. exhibition; along with Delacroix's Massacres,the first on the list, he mentions Chaudonneret, 'Historicism and Heritage in the Francois-MariusGranet, Charles-Caius Renoux, and Art vol. 14, genre paintings by Louvre, 1820-1840', History, Theodore Gudin.8 remarkableabout the is Forbin'sbreach December 1991, pp. 488-520. Especially exchange of administrative for the sake of he recommendedthat the 6. Louis XVIII died on 16 September 1824, protocol: rapidity, purchasebe effected without the king's official approval.

OXFORD ART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 91 ElisabethA. Fraser

In general, Forbin's position allowed him great latitude in a variety of important administrativedecisions: it was he who initiated proposals for to be made to artists at the close of each he encouragements young Salon; during the time of the Salon, and was succeeded presidedover the jury selecting works to be exhibited. He draftedthe lists of by his brother, . The Vicomte de La artiststo be awardedmedals and honoursat the end of each Salon exhibition. Rochefoucauldwas named to the Department of Fine Arts on 28 August 1824, after his father, His administrativedomain also encompassed much more than the Salon the Duc de Doudeauville, had become the exhibitions. As the intermediarybetween the Academie and the director of Minister of the Maison du Roi in the same Fine Arts in the of the Maison du Forbin have been the month. On La Rochefoucauld'sadministrative Ministry Roi, may and see F. most in the Restorationarts administration.9 style, politics, prudishness, Waquet's single powerful figure LesFetes royales sous la Restauration,ou l'Ancien Given Forbin's customary prerogative, what is unique about the Regimeretrouvc (Droz and Arts et Metiers transactionsin 1824? official is graphiques:Geneva and Paris, 1981), pp. 5-6, Admittedly, anything resembling protocol and On see P. Le to in the of administrative 9, passim. Forbin, Angrand, difficult discern fragmentary representations Comtede Forbinet c Louvreen 1819 (Bibliotheque papers.10 However, the dossiers from the six Salons held during the des arts: Paris and Lausanne, 1972). Restoration indicate that only in 1824 were purchasesproposed this early 7. The correspondence is found in the Archives the close of and as much bureaucraticfanfare Nationales, in the dossiers of the Maison du (before Salon), accompaniedby and has never been For a and sheer in all other Roi, published. paperwork; cases, purchases,medals, commissions,royal general analysis and overview of the wealth of visits and other administrativeacts surroundingthe Salons took place with a documentation availablein the Archives minimumof in a manner. Decisions about Nationales concerning state patronage of art exchange, perfunctory acquisition, the see Lacambreand and selection were submittedto Forbin's who transmitted during Restoration, reward, superior, Lacambre, 'La Politique d'acquisition'. Also them to the king. It shouldbe emphasizedthat regardlessof Forbin'sinitiative, useful is F. Waquet's LesFetes royales, an all official acts bore the To the extent extensive study of a single administrative naturally king's symbolic imprimatur. under the and the that the archives reveal the actual of the he is a department Restoration, only participation king, passive one of its kind on the period. is more than real - and that presence, and his prerogative represented yet 8. The other three works are as follows: representationis consistent. Even where a proposalapparently issues from an Granet, La Prised'habit d'une jeunefille d'Albano administrator, the official is 'the ordered . . .'. In this dans le choeurdu couventSte-Claire a Rome(Musee wording always king St- the distinction between the for their own du Louvre); Renoux, L'lnterieurde l'Eglise way, royal family's purchases Etienne-du-Monta Paris(Musee Crozatier, Le was residences and the royal administration'spurchases for the museums Puy-en-Velay); and Gudin, Le Sauvetaged'un blurredand into one of the supportof the navirenaufrage (Louvre). A genre painting by collapsed representation monarchy's HenriIV son lit de arts. not Forbin's administrative within the Pierre-Nolasque Bergeret, sur (Indeed, coincidentally, purview mort(Musee de Pau), was added in later lists; themselves to Ministryof the Maison du Roi extended beyond the museums works by three different artists (Sigalon, on the list private royal residences.) Cogniet, Marigny) figured initially and as it was in until their prior purchase was revealed. The The breachin 1824, then, was as much in timing procedure Maison du Roi Delacroix 6000 francs for La paid causing, eventually, the actual involvement of the king, when his canvas over two years. The actual amount is Rochefoucauld writes to Charles X in of Forbin's act. In his of some importance, since it establishesthe complaint of the of 12 October in he out relative urgency and prestige specific unusuallylong report to king 1824, which points at the time. In November 1824, Rochefoucauld purchases all the ways that Forbin has acted without royal sanction, La Forbin, through the agency of Dedreux-Dorcy, that Forbin's Your Majestyof one obtained Gericault's Le Radeaude la Midusefor emphasizes procedure 'essentiallydeprives francs at the sale of his most noble that of the arts and of 6005 posthumous of His prerogatives, supporting rewarding works; these sums are small with arises here is compared artists'.l The question of royal prerogativeand authoritythat those paid by private commissions for Forbin's as Forbin his initial proposal, comparable works, for instance, the sums of very suggestive given timing: penned 8000 and 10000 the Duc Louis XVIII on his deathbed and La Rochefoucauldwas a brand-new francs, paid by lay d'Orleans for canvases by Horace Vernet in minister; Charles X acceded to the throne after his brother's death on 16 1821 and 1824, respectively. See L. Eitner, 'The Sale of Gericault's Studio in 1824', Gazette September 1824. Interestingly,it is Forbinhimself who introducesthe whole to La Rochefoucauld:the des Beaux-Arts,6e ser., vol. 53, 1959, pp. 115- notion of irregularity in his opening remarks 26. to be made than is and the tone of his purchasesare 'earlier customary', Both Le de and the 9. Angrand, Comte Forbin, proposalis urgent. Finally, Forbincommits the unusualact of representing Chaudonneret, 'Historicism', p. 490, confirm king's absencefrom these decisionsin his defense of 30 September;until then, the breadth of initiative accorded Forbin. it was the king's presencethat was represented: 10. According to Article VIIIof the Ordonnance royale of 22 July 1816, which administrationof the I adopted in my proposals for acquisitions, which I had the honour of making to you, established the royal museums and its the director of the the custom followed to this day in the Administrationof the Royal Museums. Also regulation, museum and effects, after the until now the Ministers of the Maison du Roi have not believed that the August royal 'proposes express authorizationof the minister, the sanction of His Majesty was necessary to consummate such trivial administrative purchases of works of art'. See Angrand, p. 17. acts as acquisitions or commissions of paintings and statues.12

92 OXFORDART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 Uncivil Alliances

- In 1824, administrativeroutine the impersonal exchange of reports, - proposals and approvals was interrupted. The sheer volume of around the issue of Salon and 11. AN 03 1413, report to the king from La correspondenceexchanged purchasesduring Rochefoucauld, 12 October 1824: 'je voyais after the exhibition indicates a ripple in otherwise seamless bureaucratic avec regret une maniere de proceder qui, pour ainsi Votre d'une de ses procedures. dire, prive Majeste plus That Forbinshould have the of Delacroix'swork within the nobles prerogatives, celle d'encourager les arts sought purchase et de recompenser les artistes'. first two weeks of the exhibition clearly indicatesthat his administrationwas 12. AN 03 1413, letter to La Rochefoucauld not a reluctantpatron in this case but a surprisinglyeager one. Thathe should from Forbin, 30 September 1824: 'J'ai adapte do so in violation of administrativehierarchy further establishesthe dans les eu higher propositions d'acquisitions que j'ai Forbin, at least, to the of the work. I'honneur de vous adresser, l'usage suivi jusqu'a importance assigned acquisition Finally, ce jour dans l'Administrationdes Musees the fact that Forbin visited Delacroix's studio twice during the month Royaux. Jusqu'a ce jour aussi les Ministres de la precedingthe Salon opening shows that his early recommendationissued less Maison du Roi n'ont pas cru que la sanction from a to the work in the Salon than from a sustained auguste de Sa Majeste fut necessaire pour spontaneousresponse consommer des actes administratifsaussi and prior interest.13 minimes que des acquisitions ou des commandes Why would an experienced administratorrisk the disapprobationof his de tableaux et de statues'. Interestingly, in this and his in such an act? was Delacroix's letter his measure, Forbin the superior, possibly king, irregular Why defending repeats so to him that its in notion that genre paintings should always bypass painting,along with the other three, important placement royal sanction. Given this argument, it is the royal collections became imperative? How could he persuade La interesting that Forbin has cast Delacroix's Rochefoucauldof its the cannot be Massacresinto the unsuitable importance?Certainly urgency explained obviously category of or of the other three Delacroix was of 'genre painting'. by the eminence Delacroix, painters: was for the second 13. See Delacroix's entries in his Journal, 1822- only twenty-six years old at the time, and exhibitingonly of 1822 1863 (1931; rpt. Plon, Paris, 1981): 8 July time. The reception of his Dante et Virgile(Dante and Virgil)at the Salon 20 90. 1824, p. 90; and July 1824, p. Granet, had been positive, but hardly determining.'4 Granet, Renoux, and Gudin a friend and established artist, was a likely were candidate for Forbin's favours and not much of (forty-nine, twenty-nine, and twenty-two years old, respectively), a 'risk'. presenting smaller, somewhat generic works: Prise d'habit d'une jeune fille choeurdu couventde Sainte-Claireac Rome the Habit a 14. Although Delacroix did receive several d'Albanodans le (Taking of by this and positive critical comments about work, Young Girl of Albano in the Choir of Sainte-Claire, in Rome) (Granet, Fig. 2), the painting was bought for the Musee du de Saint-Etienne-du-Monta Paris the ChurchSaint- this debut made him L'nterieur l'Eglise (Interiorof Luxembourg, strong hardly and Le navire an overnight success. Note, for instance, the Etienne-du-Mont,in Paris) (Renoux, Fig. 3), Sauvetaged'un naufrage very qualified view Forbin had of the showing of (Rescueof a WreckedShip) (Gudin, Fig. 4). With the exception of Granet, a history paintings at the Salon of that year, of Forbin's and an the stature of in a letter to Granet: 'On travaille close friend establishedartist, professional expressed such beaucoup ici pour l'Exposition; tout est en these artists, then, would not seem to justify high-level agitation. mouvement. Je crois qu'elle sera belle et The explanationfor Forbin's interest in these works lies in the terms he nombreuse; mais je ne vois pas parmi les jeunes used to couch his and here I come to second audienceand d'histoire un homme sorte du request, my point: peintres qui pair. in was an Tout cela fait assez bien, mais personne ne destination of contemporaryFrench painting general increasingly depasse son voisin; enfin je ne vois pas un homme contested issue in the Restoration, and Forbin was trying to resolve the dans tout cela' [Forbin's emphasis]. See Baron in the favourof the His to La Rochefoucauldevokes the 'Le Comte A. de Forbin', Riuniondes ambiguity king. report Guillibert, in the to snatch sociltesde beaux-arsdes dipartements,1905, rivalryof imaginedor real privatepatrons lurking wings, ready p. 467. up these and other paintingsonly in order to discredit the government. He 15. AN 03 1413, letter to La Rochefoucauld says: from Forbin, 6 September 1824: 'J'avais eu l'honneur de vous proposer l'acquisition plus I have the honour of proposing to you the acquisition, earlier than is customary, of de coutume, des tableaux . . . prompte que some paintings, in order to avoid having these remarkable works bought by private eviter ces ouvrages tous remarquables, pour que collectors, who establish themselves as protectors of the arts only so that the banal fussent achetes par des particuliers qui ne and will be addressed against the Goverment of not supporting s'etabliraienten protecteurs des arts que pour unjust reproach faire adresser au Gouvernement le reproche them.15 aussi bannal [sic] qu'il est injuste, de ne pas les encourager. Alreadythree additionalpaintings, works by Sigalon,Cogniet, and Marigny, apparentlyincluded in Forbin's initial proposal, had been bought by other parties. Forbin furthermoreclaims, to add weight to his proposal, that the in paintershe had thus honouredwith the prospectof their eventualplacement the Luxembourg had already resisted higher prices offered by private collectors. La Rochefoucauldtakes up this theme in his later report to the king:

OXFORD ART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 93 ElisabethA. Fraser

Towards the beginning of September, I was advised by the director of the Museum that some private collectors, who present themselves as protectors of the arts, bringing to this claim a greater sense of partisanship than of real generosity, were attempting to procure the acquisition of some of the most remarkable paintings.16 16. AN 03 1413, report to king from La Rochefoucauld, 21 September 1824 (added emphasis mine): 'Vers le commencement du Adding that a significant painting had already been sold and that consequently mois de septembre, je fus prevenu par le there was no time to lose, La Rochefoucauld requests the king's retrospective directeur du Musee que de riches particuliers, authorization of the qui s'erigent en protecteurs des arts et purchase.17 en cela, d'esprit de de La Rochefoucauld had the but he later apportent, plus parti que By then, already approved purchase, vritable generositi, cherchaient a se procurer sent a memorandum to the king, about one month after Forbin's proposal, l'acquisition de quelques tableaux les plus remarquables.' requesting that Charles review the official procedures for purchases. He the institution of an official for state of exhibited 17. Unfortunately, we have no specific account suggested jury purchases of these events from Delacroix's to and exercises of those in the perspective. paintings prevent arbitrary dangerous power by Neither his journal nor documented correspondence of the period mentions anything about this unusual purchase. Furthermore, his early journal, otherwise centrally preoccupied with the preparationof the Massacres,ends with an entry on 8 October 1824, not two months into the Salon exhibition.

Fig. 2. MariusGranet: Prise d'habit d'une jeune filled'Albano dans le choeurdu couventde Salnte- Clairea Rome(Taking of the Habitby a YoungGirl of Albanoin the Choirof the ConventSalnteClaire, in Rome),1824, oil, 200 x 151 cm. Mus6e du Louvre,Paris. (Photo: Reunion des Musees Nationaux.)

94 OXFORDART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 Uncivil Alliances

higher ranks of the administration. Clearly La Rochefoucauld was trying to circumscribe the power of Forbin. Forbin defended himself in a cold letter to his the between collectors and the 18. With the coming to power of the Ultras superior, evoking again competition private following Charles' accession to the throne, art administration, especially in the case of tableauxde genre. Strangely, there is no and policies became accordingly stricter more clear to the and no institution of a ensued. However, conservative, control from the follow-up exchange, jury privileging top; the whole event account for a more conservative direction taken La Rochefoucauld, too, who acquired his post in may generally 1824, supported centralized and hierarchical by the Restoration administration toward the next Salon in 1827-28.'8 within the arts administration, and his authority Forbin's act probably indicates some subtle political manoeuvring on his own taste was prudish and conservative. part. Having recently obtained Gericault's Radeau de la Medusefor the royal museums through delicate negotiation, Forbin, thought by some scholars to have been a liberal operating in a conservative regime, may have taken a dangerous but surer route to the promotion of a broader, more tolerant programme in state patronage. There is evidence that Forbin operated in general against the grain of dominant administrative opinion. In addition to his

.

.

Fg. 3. CharlesCaTus Renoux: Interleur de I'egliseSalntttlennedu-Mont a Paris(Interior of the churchSalnt-Etlenne-du-Mont, in Paris), c.1820, oil, 194 x 152 cm. Musee Crozatier,Le Puyen- Velay.

OXFORD ART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 95 ElisabethA. Fraser two-year ministerial campaign for the purchase of the Meduseand his support of young and controversial artists, Forbin also took a lenient stand on paintings associated with the Revolution and This is Empire. perspective particularly 19 See also Angrand, Le Comte de Forbin, visible in letters to the much less enthusiastic La Rochefoucauld, letters in pp. 96-138; Lacambreand Lacambre, 'La over the Forbin tried on numerous occasions to Politique d'acquisition', pp. 333-4; and which, years, bring F. 'Le sort sous la Restaurationdes works out of and into the Boyer, Napoleonic storage public eye.9 tableaux i sujets napoleoniens', Bulletinde la Given Forbin's major, and historically important, innovations, fear of his societe de l'histoire de l'artfrancais, 1967, pp. 271- and well be in a 81. Signs of intrigue also seem to suggest influence, power, authority might justified politically Forbin's isolation within the administration.His 'Ultra' minister like La Rochefoucauld. It is after who antagonistic Forbin, all, private correspondence, particularlylengthy proposed the creation of the Musee du Luxembourg, and oversaw the creation with Granet, record his anxieties about the him of the Musee Charles X (of Egyptian antiquities); he was also responsible for political manoeuvringsagainst during periods of absence from Paris. (See, for obtaining official and royal acceptance of the expanding, permanent instance, Forbin's letter to Granet of 27 museological component of the Louvre palace during the Restoration, as October 1820, in the correspondence included in Le Baron Guillibert, 'Le Comte A. de Pierre has shown.20 It is possible, then, that his occasional jockeying Angrand Forbin', p. 462.) In one affair, a director of with La Rochefoucauld represented the typical power intrigues of courtiers. finance in the Maison du Roi tries to control Throughout the following months Forbin used the same argument about Forbin's correspondence and use of office collectors to make several more and have budget (complaining, among other things, about competing private purchases, may Forbin's use of administrative for a and aesthetic money found in this approach a way of attaining greater political subscription to the oppositionaljournal des independence. debats!),accusing Forbin of using government His choices for this indicate as much: are funds for personal purposes. (The exchange exceptionally early purchase they occurs in AN 03 1408 between the Controleur with the of his friend and all work in the allyoung painters, exception Granet; general des depenses and the Minister of the 'lower' genres (interiors, landscapes, genre), with the exception of Delacroix. Maison du Roi, Marquisde Lauriston.)Also, a Forbin seems to be not his own taste - he was an active negative report probably penned by La revealing only painter, Rochefoucauld, indicates anxieties about - but also a specializing in interiors, in mid-career during the Restoration years Forbin's unchecked authority should Granet be element of his administration. His patronage was to some extent hired to the post of conservator of paintingsof defining is so allied with M. formed in to as he them. In a the royal museums: 'Granet opposition Napoleonic practices, perceived de Forbin as to cause one to fear that they report written early in his administration, Forbin criticizes Napoleon's would make common cause, and that, creation of a clique of 'peintres-courtisans' at the expense of support for strengthened by this support, M. de Forbin would continue as he est Pernicious to the of art', as Forbin saw it, was the began' ('Granet younger painters. 'progress tellement lie avec Mr de Forbin qu'il faudrait a select of exclusiveness of 'Bonaparte's' policy, which privileged small, group craindre qu'ils ne firrent cause commune, et artists: que, fortifie de cet appui, Mr de Forbin ne continuat comme il a commence' (AN 03 1420)).

20. See Angrand, Le Comte de Forbin, 'Defense et decor du Musee', pp. 23-8.

Fig. 4. TheodoreGudin: Sauvetage d'un navire naufragd (Rescue of a WreckedShip), 1824, oil, 141.5 x 216 cm. Musee du Louvre,Paris. (Photo: R6union des Mus6es Nationaux.)

96 OXFORDART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 UncivilAlliances

It is to them that the conquerorentrusted the care of paintinghis battles and the great momentsof his ephemeralreign. These painter-courtierswere made proudby his exclusivefavour; as a consequence, their pretentionsknew no limits.Little 21. 'C'est a eux que le conquerant confiait le satisfied witha decent materialease, they regardedthe arts as a means of grand soin de peindre ses batailles et les grandes speculation,and, in proportionto the enormousprices accordedtheir works, they de son epoques regne ephemere. Enorgueillis neglectedto do well for doingmuch.2' d'une faveur exclusive, ces peintres-courtisans n'ont plus mis de bornes a leurs pretentions. Peu satisfaitsd'une honnete aisance, ils ont Forbin's contemptuous notion of the 'peintre-courtisan' is an important image les arts comme un de regarde moyen grande in his official and private correspondence, the frequent of which are speculation, et d'apres les prix enormes targets and to Forbin on several accordes a leurs travaux, ils ont neglige de bien Gros, Gerard, Girodet, Guerin, who, according faire pour faire beaucoup.' See AN 03 1390. occasions during the Restoration, are resting on their laurels and 'doing This is dated 16 1816, a fact report February It is easy to hear his resentment in his on artists in that raises some questions about its nothing'. general report authorship which includes some evaluations of the since Forbin was not officially made Director of 1825, surprisingly personal 'courtiers' the Royal Museums until 16 June 1816. among the artists. Gros is described as an 'uneven talent. A vain and brusque there are other official documents However, man, this artist no sustains his Gerard, in written Forbin in this dossier, that are dated longer grand reputation'. depicted by the as a and insincere in Forbin's from January,February, and March 1816, report 'jealous artist', appears private indicating that he was already in some measure correspondence as a flattering, mendacious opportunist. (Significantly, Forbin a of the if not part administration, perhaps yet worries out loud about his own dual role as administrator to a court and artist, in an official capacity. fearing of his work that 'maybe it's just the painting of a chamberlain, I cannot 22. Of Gros: 'talent Homme vain et inegal. 2 the of 1816 warns that the result of brusque, Cet artiste ne soutient plus sa grande tell'.) Tellingly, report dangerous reputation'. Of Gerard: 'artiste jaloux et peu Napoleon's exclusive patronage was to have driven younger, discouraged sincere'. The report on artists showing at the artists into the arms of private collectors, whose interests spawn a Salon of is in AN wooing 1824, presumably by Forbin, of anecdotal 03 1420. Another copy, AN F21 1420, has predominance genre painting. been published by Pierre Angrand; see his 'Liste Forbin's commitment to broad-based patronage, rather than exclusive alphabetiquedes peintres d'un talent support of a privileged few, would seem to be mirrored in his encouragement 1824', Gazettedes beaux-arts,6th remarquable, of the unknown artists Delacroix, Renoux, and Gudin, and even per., vol. 100, 1982, pp. 178-82. On his own relatively painting, Forbin writes: 'peut-etre est-ce encore Granet, who despite a solid reputation, was a 'minor' painter of interiors, de la peinture de chambellan, je l'ignore'; see according to the standards of the day. Certainly scholars have noted that his letter to Granet, in Guillibert, Le ComteA. de Forbin was an even-handed with a breadth of interests, famous for Forbin,p. 463. patron artists in and the 'Romantics' in 23. See Richard U.-M.-V. Audin], Le Vcritable encouraging young general, particular. and social connections some role in Forbin's Conducteurparisien (1828; rpt. Editions les Yeux Possibly professional played Ouverts: Paris, 1970); and Chaudonneret and precipitate proposal: at least Delacroix had had contact with Forbin 'Les Collections Pougetoux, princieres'. previously, and Granet was a fellow Aixois, a peer from the days when both studied in David's atelier, and a life-time confidant. Nonetheless, it is striking that Delacroix's work would be included in this group of paintings supposedly susceptible to purchase by private collectors: his canvas was twice the size of the others, and the only one clearly fitting the normative definitions of history painting. That ambiguity is symptomatic, I believe, of larger shifts in Restoration culture; I will return to this point at the close of this essay. Forbin's evocation of competition launched by private collectors was not only a rhetorical construction. During the Restoration there were numerous private collectors of repute in Paris, some in the ranks of the administration, some connected to the royal family, and, what is most novel, many with art galleries opened to the public, as publicized by Richard in his tourist's guide to Paris, Le VeritableConducteur parisien.23 However, there was one such collector who haunted the pages of administrative transactions more than any other, and most likely impelled Forbin's haste in 1824: Louis-Philippe, the Duc d'Orleans. The duke had begun to assemble a major art collection in 1816, after his return from exile in 1814. Establishing the Palais Royal as his principal residence, he hired the architect Fontaine to undertake major renovations of the dilapidated palace, renovations lavish enough to take sixteen years to accomplish. The rich art collections at the Palais Royal, initiated by the first occupant, Richelieu, in the seventeenth century, had been scattered through

OXFORD ART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 97 ElisabethA. Fraser sales and state requisitionsduring the Revolution: Philippe d'Egalite, Louis- Philippe's father, sold most of the art works in 1790; in 1793, after the execution of the unfortunatePhilippe, the Commissiontemporaire des arts, 24. See AN 03 1430, 'Reclamationsde establishedby the Convention, inventoried some forty remainingart works, tableaux par des Emigres, Lettres originales du and transferredthem to the Musee Central. Duc d'Orleans, aujourd'huiRoi', 1817. In a clearly dynastic gesture, the duke reassembled the dispersed art 25. On the duke's return from exile and collections of the Orleans some still in various French political self-positioning, see H. Robert, family, properties L'Orleanisme(Presses universitairesde France: returnedto his possessionby the law of restitutionof 1814. A thick dossier of Paris, 1992). For information on the history of correspondencein the papersof the administrationof the RoyalMuseums in the the art collections at the Palais Royal, see the Maisondu Roi furtherrecords the duke's for the returnof artworks exhibition catalogue, Le PalaisRoyal (Musee negotiations Carnavalet, Paris, 1988); on the history and then in the royal collections.24In other words, the dukeworked to refurbishthe dispersal of the collection during the materialdemonstration of the historyof the Orleansfamily line (the cadetbranch Revolution, see the catalogue with engravings of the founded the brotherof Louis at begun in 1786 by the Abbe de Fontenay, but royalfamily, by Philipped'Orleans, XIV), published only in 1806: Galeriedu PalaisRoyal the same time that he perpetuatedand publicizedthis patrimonyfor his own gravee(Paris, 1786), pp. 1-4 especially; on the offspringand for Frenchsociety. The importancehe attachedto the symbolic Duc d'Orleans's collection during the restorationof the Orleans can be measuredin the factthat Restoration, see Chaudonneretand Pougetoux, dynasty by reclaiming 'Les Collections princidres'. For informationon his inheritance,the duke also assumedsubstantial debts incurredby his father Ferdinand-Philipped'Orleans's continuation of (who, paradoxically, not only gave the Orleans family its oppositional Louis-Philippe'senterprise, see H. Robert, 'Le d'une collection au but also renouncedhis in 5 Destin grande princiere reputation, dynasticrights 1792). XIXe siecle: 1'Examplede la Galerie de tableaux As a prince related to the reigning Bourbons, the duke's art collecting du Duc d'Orleans, Prince Royal', Gazettedes of course, never have been in nature, a beaux-arts,6th ser., vol. 118, 1991, July- would, wholly 'private' given long and a tradition of as a form of self- August, pp. 37-60; Delegation 1'Action standing princely patronage political Artistique de la Ville de Paris, Le Micenatdu Duc representation.2 However, as I will show, his collecting activitiestook on a d'Orl&ans,1830-1840 (Paris, 1993). On the in the context of Restorationcultural restitution of art works in the royal collections, particularmeaning politics. see P. Le Comtede 78-84. It is this after his return from exile that the duke Angrand, Forbin,pp. during period began See also N. M. Athanassoglou-Kallmyer,'Imago collecting contemporary art and commissioning new works. He clearly Belli: Horace Vernet's L'Atelieras an Image of Radical Militarismunder the Art favouredthe Nouvelle Ecole, as Romanticpainting was then called, and genre Restoration', Bulletin,vol. 68, no. 2, June 1986, pp. 268-80. Delacroix, an obvious choice for such a collection, received a paintings. 26. On and other forms of commission in 1828, Richelieudisant la Messedans la du Palais collecting patronage chapelle Royal and princely rivalries in the eighteenth century, (CardinalRichelieu Saying Mass in the Chapelof the Palais-Royal),for part of the see for instance K. Scott, TheRococo Interior duke's collection called the 'Galerie which included scenes of the (Yale University Press: New Haven and London, historique', and the work of Susan life of Richelieu and the of the The Galerie was 1995), pp. 177-211, history palace. historique Taylor-Leduc on garden patronage; I am grateful anothernod to one of the past glories of the PalaisRoyal, Richelieu's 'Galerie to Susan Taylor-Leduc for generously sharing des Hommes Illustres'.27For the of it is interesting with me her paper, 'The Garden in the City: purposes my argument, Public in that the Duc d'Orleans owned several Granetand Gudin, and at Space Eighteenth-CenturyParis', paintingsby presented at the annual meeting of the College least one by Renoux, in additionto the work he commissionedof Delacroix, Art Association, Boston, 1996. of his art and that Forbin wrote some of the entries for the publication 27. See Johnson, The Paintingsof Eugene gallery. Furthermore, Forbin was a friend of Horace Vernet, an Orleans Delacroix,pp. 127-9. intimate. 28. In 1824 appeared an Indicateurdes tableaux 1824, the Orleans of totalled over 400 works. The de S.A.S. Mgrle duc d'Orleansau Palais-Royal, By gallery paintings the duke's librarian, duke's interests in his art collection extended Paris; J. Vatout, published expanding certainly beyond two lithographededitions of the collection in personal pleasure: he broadcast his collections in handsome lithographed the 1820s, beginning in 1823. These volumes in three the 1820s.28 In his Veritable publications combine both types of 'art books' separate publicationsduring discussed F. Haskell in his The Birth Richard the duke's collection as second to the by Painful of Conducteurparisien, praised only the Art Book(Thames and Hudson: London, king's, and provided instructionsfor obtainingaccess to the collection. The 1987): the published collection served first of all between the collection and the duke's echoed a the purpose of glorifying the Duc d'Orleans, explicit comparison king's a broader art in the but it also was intended for public similarrivalry between the Orleansand Bourboncollections eighteenth than the immediate intimates of the duke. It century. In his famous publicationof 1747, La Font de Saint-Yenneadmired was sold by subscription;and the authors of the of the Orleans while the inaccessible many of the entries had substantialcredentials, public accessibility gallery, criticizing the information was less disordered collection.29 The fame of the art although provided and royal eighteenth-century 'scholarly' in nature than that of the Recueil galleryin the PalaisRoyal was due to the extraordinaryefforts of the Regent, Crozatdiscussed at length by Haskell, entitled Recueil les beauxTableaux, et PhilippeII d'Orleans, guided by Pierre Crozat. The memory and significance d'Estampesd'apres plus d'apresles plus beauxdessins qui sont en Francedans of this ancestral precedent hovered around Louis-Philippe's enterprise,

98 OXFORDART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 Uncivil Alliances

associatingit with the only period in which the PalaisRoyal had been the seat of government of France, the only time an Orleans had ruled. The of taste led the - his inclusion of le Cabinetdu Roy et dans celui du Duc d'Orleans,et refashioning by Regent smaller, dans autresCabinets, and only partially published. cabinet paintings and patronage of Rococo artists, the strong presence of Interestingly, the Crozat publication itself was in Venetian and Northern - is evoked his the of Crozat's close relations with painting by nineteenth-century part product who works in the relaxed classicismof the Nouvelle the duke's ancestor, Philippe d'Orleans, the counterpart, preferred Regent of France from 1715 to 1723, and his Ecole (a 'school' identifiedrather simplistically by the contemporaryart press famous art collection in the Palais Royal. with the liberal opposition).30The duke furthermoresurrounded himself with 29. Regarding La Font de Saint-Yenne's liberal artists, writers, and intellectuals. AlexandreDumas was his remarks and the art markedly published Regent's Vatout,his librarian; Scheffer,the art tutor of his collection, see the catalogue of the Musee secretary;Jean Ary children; Carnavalet, Le Palais Royal, pp. 95-103. See also and Horace Vernet, a semi-official'court' painter. Dubois de Saint-Gelais, Descriptiondes Tableaux The Duc d'Orleans transformedthe Palais into a du Palais avecla vie des a la t,te de nineteenth-century Royal Royal peintres of while the Tuileries so close at hand; became leursouvrages, dedi daM. le Duc d'Orleans,Premier symbol opposition, palace, Princedu Sang (Paris, 1727). For the importance increasinglythe mark of Ultra absolutism.He openly supportedoppositional of the art collection of the Regent, Philippe causes, notably as the patron of the Societe Philanthropiquewhich sponsored, d'Orleans, see T. Crow, Paintersand PublicLife other the Exhibitionfor the Benefitof the Greeksat the Galerie in Eighteenth-CenturyParis (Yale University Press: among events, New Haven and London, 1985), pp. 39-44. Lebrun in 1826.31 Oppositionalpublicists often had it that he was a viable 30. The relationship between what I call here alternativeto the rule of the Bourbonsduring the Restoration,rumour made the 'relaxed classicism' of Romanticism and reality during the . liberalism is no self-evident oppositional this reputation in part Forbin'sand La Rochefoucauld's affiliation, contrary to the common assumption Certainly explains made about the period. Romanticism in notion that more was at stake in rival collectors' bids for importantpaintings France, prior to 1824 understood as a literary than competition over the aesthetic quality of their collections. To have the movement, was initially associated with duke and others32take of the of artists conservative, monarchist positions. Indeed, charge encouragement young usurped Laura Hickman Neis has shown that the the self-defined role of the monarch, in conjunction with his arts relationship between Ultra-Royalist patronage administration,as the unique and paternalisticsource of enlightenedguidance and Romantic painting obtained throughout of the arts.33It also threatenedthe near of the Restoration; see her and directly government's monopoly 'Ultra-Royalism with its to direct and Romanticism: the Duc de Blacas's Patronage the public's engagement art, capacity control the of Ingres, Delacroix, and Horace Vernet' audience for art. As Marie-ClaudeChaudonneret and Alain Pougetoux point (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin- the of collectors in the to exhibit their works in In the Salon exhibitions this out, tendency private period Madison, 1987). them from their seventeenth- and affiliation was recast by young critics who put quasi-public galleries distinguishes an oppositional stamp on their chosen painters eighteenth-centurycounterparts whose cabinetsde curiositeswere generally (the 'Romantics') and created a cleavage in meant for more exclusive art criticism. Still, the oppositional moniker viewing.3 has to be understood as a rhetorical Furthermore,it is clear, both from the account of the Delacroix purchase, construction and not a perfect reflection of and from numerous other incidents, that these semi-public galleries had an the political inclination of individual artists or even more insidiouseffect on the not served of the valence of works of monarchy'spatronage. They only political specific as materialdetractors of the of the art more art. See my argument about this development singularity king's collections;they in 'Interpreting Delacroix in the 1820s', especiallydefined an alternativeagenda to that which was officiallyupheld by 34-64. pp. the king and his minions:history painting, especially of religioussubjects, with 31. On the duke's oppositional self-positioning, and values often used in La see demonstrably royalist pious (terms H. Robert, L'Orlianisme,pp. 7-10. See N. Rochefoucauld's to the What is this alternative Athanassoglou-Kallmyer'sFrench Images, pp. 10, reports king). more, 39-40, 135 n. 8 on the duke's unofficial programme had such public success and visibility, and was supported by as leader of the liberal position opposition, financial resources greater than those of the administration,that it was specifically in relation to Philhellenic activities and the Exhibition for the Benefit of the Greeks gradually defining royal patronage. In a defensive position, the king's (in which Delacroix participated with his La administrationwas forced to back this programme to stay ahead in the Grce sur les ruinesde Missolonghi).Susan Taylor- Leduc's work on the manifestation of competition. princely On several occasions the Salon of the Duc d'Orleans's rivalries in garden style in the late eighteenth during 1824, century clearly bears out the relevance and collecting activitiesreceived notice in the administrativepapers of the Maison consciousness of this form of to the politics du Roi, sometimes with explicit political shading. One of the most recurrent Restoration; she has shown that Louis XVI, the difficulties for the arts administrationwas the of with Comte de Provence (the future Louis XVIII), problem dealing the Comte d'Artois (the future Charles X), and Revolutionaryand Napoleonicpaintings often executed by the most celebrated the Duc d'Orleans (father of the Restoration of Restorationartists. In one instance, Forbin requested permissionto allow Duc d'Orleans) consciously developed their several controversial to be exhibited in the Salon of 1824. Forbin respective public gardens with an eye to paintings explains why he believes these works, includingVernet's BatailledeJemmapes

OXFORDART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 99 ElisabethA. Fraser

(BattleofJemmapes), owned by the duke, should be allowed to be shown, and one of his reasons is:

manipulatingthe political uses of 'public space'. If we reject these paintings, which one sees daily in artists' studios or in the Duke of Thus, they were old hands at this type of Orleans's would we not have reason to fear that will be gallery, public curiosity politics by the 1820s. awakened by this resistance, that the public would take itself in crowds to the artists'? 32. Richard's lists seventeen Doubtlessly we would then see the resurgence of those private Exhibitionswhich guide private collections that were accessible to the public foster annoying ideas and are the always the cause of bitter and hostile pamphlets during the Restoration; presumably, the list is that hasten to lend a facile and malicious to an act of prudence.35 interpretation not comprehensive since a few known collections are not listed. Among the better Forbin believed that the duke had the power to force the administration's known, substantialcollections listed are those of the Duc de Alexandre hand. As Chaudonneret and show, the duke Casimir Perrier, Blacas, Pougetoux displayed generous du Sommerard, the Comte de Sommariva,and scenes in his numbers of Revolutionary and Napoleonic gallery. the Marquisde Lauriston. The incidents at the sale of Gericault's work in multiply: posthumous 33. The founding texts of the arts November 1824, Forbin finally obtains the Radeaude la Meduse, but the duke administrationat the beginning of the Bourbon its role the Chasseurde la Garde Chasseur the Guard) and the Restoration articulate clearly perceived buys (Charging of Imperial as the arts from amateurs' Cuirassierblesse A Forbin seeks to from the saving predilection (WoundedCuirassier). painting acquire for genre painting. See Forbin's report in 1816, Salon turns out to have already been sold to the duke.36 Forbin quickly reprinted in full in Lacambreand Lacambre, 'La 343-4. smooths over this embarrassment by suggesting a substitution; he saves face in Politique d'acquisition', pp. Chaudonneretand his memo to La Rochefoucauld, evoking this new testimony to artistic quality: 34. See Pougetoux, 'Les Collections 33-4. On the the artist has 'turned down four offers [from collectors] for the princieres', pp. high private history of private collecting in France, see K. honour of being placed in the Luxembourg'. Pomian, Collectionneurs,amateurs et curieux;Paris, Gallimard: The fact that offers of private collectors would form a Venise:XVIe-XVIlle sicles (Editions superior money by and A. du of for a state administrator indicates how Paris, 1987); Schnapper, Curieux new criterion or proof quality GrandSicle, Collectionset collectionneursdans la defensively the monarchy, through its representatives, had begun to define its Francedu XVIlesiecle. II. Oeuvresd'art position. It also suggests a historical realignment of art world interests, a (Flammarion:Paris, 1994). process of change that occurred in piecemeal rather than wholesale manner, 35, Archives des Musees Nationaux, X Salon 1824, letter to La Rochefoucauldfrom Forbin, not a function of administrative policy but of gradually defined explicit 24 July 1824: 'Si l'on refuse ces tableaux, que practice. l'on voit journellement chez les artistes ou chez an le Duc n'aurait on de What gives particular significance to this defensive position is d'Orleans, pas lieu eveille discursive context established read Salon criticism. craindre que la curiosite publique par accompanying by widely cette resistance, ne se en foule chez ces art critics were the portat Two prominent and related leitmotivs of oppositional artistes, l'on verrait sans doute alors the recommencer ces disadvantages of government intervention in the arts and the necessity of Expositions particulieresqui font tenir des facheux et sont toujours unbridled self-determination in of artistic preference. propos public's questions cause de brochures ameres et hostiles qui the Bourbon Critics such as , who opposed reigning monarchy, upheld s'empresseraient de donner une interpretation state facile et a un de the private collector as a symbol and subversive agent undermining maligne acte prudence.' administration as was authority in the arts; he polemically denounced the royal arts 36. The first painting by Leopold Robert; a and influence on art. In his 'Salon of 1824', Stendhal the substitution by Schnetz. AN 03 1413, letter pernicious stultifying La Rochefoucauldfrom October as a direct to Forbin, wrote that talented young painters were abandoning their careers 1824. uses of of the arts. the monotonous result of the public funding Deploring 37. 'le seul Horace Vernet donne des contrasted them with the works produced under state patronage, Stendhal jouissances reellesau public de 1824, puisque c'est le seul dont on se tableaux. engagement and daring of art sponsored by private collectors: dispute les M.M. Gros, Guerin, Girodet, etc., ou, bien Only Horace Vernet gives real pleasure to the public of 1824, since he is the only n'ont plus a s'occuper de leur fortune, ou c'est one whose paintings are disputed. Messieurs Gros, Gu6rin, Girodet, etc., either no au tresor de l'Etat qu'ils vont toucher le prix de tableaux' 'Salon de 1824', in longer have to worryabout their fortune, or tum to the state treasury for the price of ses (Stendhal, d'art et de litterature, their paintings.37 Melanges originally published in Journalde Paris, 1824 (Michel-Levy:Paris, 1867), p. 158). Although in official accounts of French painting at this time, it is the private the amateurs who undermine high standards in art, for Stendhal, they and the public are painting's only chance. Arguing like a laissez-faire economist, liberal critic contrasts real, contemporary taste with an artificially imposed, the government-sponsored style. In doing so, he also cleaves the 'public' from those of the 'state', suggesting that the interests of the one are distinct from other. This view contrasts with official policy of guiding public taste, in which the state speaks for the public, in its interest.

100 OXFORDART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 Uncivil Alliances

In the latter years of the Restoration the notion that artistic initiatives outside the state's administrationswere positive and invigoratingbecame No better of the of this unofficialdiscourse 38. 'toutes les nouveautes qui pourront lui widespread. example prevalence plaire, lui seront offertes comme par dessus le can be found than in the dramaticchange of tone in the writings of Etienne marche' (Delecluze, 'De l'Exposition au Louvre Delecluze in theJoural desdebats. At the Salonof 1824, Delecluze had written et de l'Exhibition en faveur des Journal Grecs', that in contrastto state influencedart. We des debats,October 20, 1826, pp. 2-3). public taste, support, dangerously find him in 1826 different, much in the mode of 39. 'diminuer peu a peu le nombre de writing something very productions fastidieuses dont on tapisse les murs , Stendhal,and others. Now, Delecluze, using the example of du Louvre tous les deux ans' (Delecluze, 'De the private benefit exhibition for the Greek cause, for which an entrancefee 1'Exposition', pp. 2-3). was required, argues for the importance of this type of privately sponsored 40. 'Tous les jurys, toutes les mesures exhibition. If the it will want to be certainin advancethat administrativesn'ont aucun sur la public public pays, empire 'all the novelties that will him will be offered to him as a kind of marche des arts: c'est en vain qu'on please pretendroit, par des arretes et des ordonnances, bonus'.38This type of exhibitionwill make artistsmore scrupulous,he claims, modifier le gout des curieux et le talent des and the more which would diminishthe number artistes. Si du Louvre ne public demanding, 'gradually 1'exposition remplit of fastidious with which the walls of the Louvre pas completement son but, faites des exhibitions productions they paper every qui attirent le public, et l'exposition du Louvre two years'.39He adds: suivra d'elle-meme la meme marche' (Delecluze, 'De l'Exposition', pp. 2-3). No jury, no administrative measure can control the progress of the arts: in vain does one desire to modify the taste of amateurs and the talent of artists by 41. For the basic argument for the use of the administrative acts and ordonnances. If the Louvre exposition is not completely concept 'political culture' rather than that of its then make exhibitions that attract the public, and the Louvre sociological causality in historical analysis, see K. fulfilling purpose, Baker, 'Introduction', in Inventingthe French exposition will automatically follow in kind.40 Revolution; on FrenchPolitical Culture in the EighteenthCentury (Cambridge University Press: The Restoration art world came to be dominated by unofficialinterests Cambridge, 1990), pp. 1-11; and R. Chartier's under the influenceof an discourse. In contradistinctionto official the French trans. oppositional The CulturalOrigins of Revolution, this discourse ratificationof the arts, L. Cochrane (Duke University Press: Durham, regime ideology, emphasized public N.C., 1991). propelled by private collectors. The regime was forced into the defensive itself. 42. Archives des musees nationaux, X Salon position of acknowledgingthis discourseand attemptingto arrogateit to 1827, letter to Forbin from La Rochefoucauld, A new alliance, perhapsmore developed ideologically by polemical writers 11 October 1827. like Stendhal than in fact, can be seen as operating directly on art world 43. S. Maza, PrivateLives, Public Affairs; The them, on the 'political culture' of the Restoration.41 France interests, and, through CausesCelbres of Prerevolutionary dominanceof this alliancecan be found once of California Press: 1993), A final index of the eventual (University Berkeley, before p. 11. For an overview of and argument for the again in the defensive manoeuvresrecorded in administrativepapers: notion of 'civil society' as a formation in the of the Salonof 1827, La Rochefoucauldsent off to Forbina list of modem see Maza's opening political culture, especially new rules. In one he ordered the of introductory chapter, pp. 1-17. See also J. memo, prohibition any purchaseby 'any Habermas, The StructuralTransformation of the organizationor any individual'of paintingsat the exhibition before the king PublicSphere: an inquiryinto a categoryof bourgeois and the had made their own selection.42 trans. T. and F. Lawrence royal family society, Burger (MIT Recent historiansof culture, on Press: Cambridge, MA, 1989). scholarshipby pre-Revolutionary drawing Jiirgen Habermas'snotion of 'civil society', has shown how similar cultural structures, issuing from apparentlyapolitical and private interests, acted as a foyer for the development of democratic culture under the Ancien Regime. Habermas argued that the development of critical engagement with art, literature and philosophy created an institutionalform of a 'public sphere' competitive with the state in the eighteenthcentury. In historianSarah Maza's words:

A crucial segment of civil society ... moved away from its assigned role as an audience for the displays of power and exhibitions of art staged by the monarchy; it became a judging, debating, criticizing entity - a public.43

This approach to the late Ancien Regime usefully illuminates social and culturalstructures of the Restoration,a revivalof monarchicalgovernance that provoked the development of oppositional strategies similar to prerevolu- tionary initiatives. The restored monarchynominally sought a return to an Ancien Regime past, an erasure of over twenty-five years of Frenchcultural and political history, yet in practice the regime inherited institutions,

OXFORDART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 101 ElisabethA. Fraser

practices, and beliefs from the revolutionary period and the Empire, and was forced to negotiate a compromise cultural politics.4 One of the main burdens of this on the French the alliance that had regime, imposed by European 44. On the restored Bourbons' compromise defeated Napoleon, was the management of a volatile public sphere, as it between post-revolutionarysystems and Ancien see 'The Cultural sought to reinvest culture with monarchical values, the and of Regime ideology, Kroen, authority power Politics of Revolution', and P. Ribner, the The to circumscribe culture with Jonathan prerevolutionary period. attempt public BrokenTablets: The Cult of Lawin FrenchArtfrom the symbol of royal initiative and direction was never complete in practice, in David to Delacroix(University of CaliforniaPress: 50-4. part because of the fragmentary, complicated nature of modern statecraft, Berkeley, 1993), especially pp. 45. Of limitations on will with the king's volition refracted through a complicated network of course, royal always administrations and ministries. But was also circumscribed in existed, even during the height of absolutist royal authority politics; see Jeffrey Merrick on this point: part by the notion of 'public opinion' itself as a political category, whose 'Political realities, of course, never conformed independence and existence historians date to the latter half of the to the rhetoric of divine-right absolutism that eighteenth flourished in the seventeenth and It is in its to the culture of this civil the century century.45 appeal evolving society, survived until the Revolution. The corporate of source an alternative public and art, that Delacroix's Massacresde Scio structures of the kingdom, not to mention its participated in these tensions. size and lack of uniformity, imposed de facto limitations on While far afield from and the individual royal power' (Merrick, The seemingly single paintings painter, Desacralizationof the FrenchMonarchy (Baton Delacroix, this perspective does delineate the new and fundamental conditions Rouge: LouisianaState University Press, 1990), of possibility in which Delacroix operated. at the artist's work in the p. 6). On historical uses of the term 'public Looking see 1820s this filter reveals new contours to its overall opinion', Jeremy Popkin: 'There is general through shape. agreement that [after 1750], 'public opinion' Clearly the purchase of the Massacresde Scio in 1824 indicates that Forbin, at graduallyusurped the legitimating function least, saw the work as implicated in the competition over and formerly held by royal authority' (review publics vol. no. But the itself us its own clues. Like his other article, Eighteenth-CenturyStudies, 28, 1, paintings. painting gives large 1994, p. 151). of the 1820s, there is a tension in the Massacresbetween the kind of paintings 46. See Delacroix, journal, 25 March 1824, billboard-like statement of Salon art and the of broad, magisterial, eruption p. 58; 3 April 1824, p. 60. details that call for close a worked-over breaks viewing, highly surface, abrupt 47. 'Envie de faire de petits tableaux, surtout in the sweep of the narrative (much discussed by Salon critics) that induce pour acheter quelque chose a la vente de in the movement across the canvas. Much of the Gericault' (Delacroix, journal, 3 April 1824, pauses spectator's peculiarity 'II me vient au lieu d'un autre of these the Dante et and the Mort de p. 60); l'envie, early, daring works, including Virgile tableau d'assez grande proportion, d'avoir Sardanapale (Death of Sardanapalus), can be understood in this way. They plusieurs petits tableaux, mais faits avec plaisir' associated with intimate and connoisseurial (9 April 1824, p. 62); 'Plus de Don Quichotteet present qualities long pleasures, de choses de toi. Recueille-toi sudden areas of softness and intimate sensuousness indignes texture; small, moments; profondement devant la peinture et ne pense and an undercurrent of eroticism. qu'au Dante. C'est la ce que j'ai toujours senti en moi' There is evidence that Delacroix was contemplating questions of audience (7 May 1824, p. 78). and genre as he painted the Massacresde Scio. The most famous of the private galleries was well known to him: Delacroix visited the Orleans gallery at least twice during the spring of 1824.46 Also, several passages in his journal record his internal dialogue about the appeal, accessibility, and conflicting artistic pleasures in large historical compositions and small cabinet paintings, and the specific stakes in each. Genre painting is initially associated with pleasure and money: in a passage juxtaposing the payment of the model Emilie for sexual favours, a visit to the Duc d'Orleans's gallery, and the attraction of genre painting, he writes: 'Desire to do little paintings, especially in order to buy something from the Gericault sale'; and later: 'Instead of another large-scale painting, the desire comes to me to have many little paintings, but done with pleasure.' Subsequently Delacroix scolds himself for wasting his time on his small Don Quichotte, entoure de livres (Don Quixote Surroundedby Books), completed while he was working on the Massacresde Scio, exalting instead in his passion for 'true', virile painting of a seriousness worthy of Dante.47 Scholarship has tended to emphasize exclusively the artist's large, public canvases in the early period of his career. This emphasis has obscured another, equally important part of that career: the smaller works, numbering more than thirty canvases, paid for by private patrons and exhibited in their homes and private collections. Consideration of these paintings forms a more complicated

102 OXFORD ART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 Uncivil Alliances

view of Delacroix's art, and it also reveals the contradictory climate for the arts under the reign of the Bourbon Restoration. Heir to the revolutionary notions of and within a monarchical 48. Although Geicault went so far as to public culture, yet working patronage compete for the Prix de Rome in 1816, system, Delacroix had to develop complicated strategies while creating a Delacroix, after already failing the first part of context and market for his art. the exam in 1820, only flirted with the idea after his success in 1822. For information on Delacroix's painting in the 1820s seems to follow David's radical model of Delacroix's training at the Ecole des Beaux- the virtuous artist acting independently in the public sphere, to use the terms Arts, including his progress through the basic of Thomas Crow. His demonstrates a consciousness of the existence concours,see Maurice Serullaz, Delacroix audacity (Fayard: and effect of and a to use it. In Delacroix's case that Paris, 1989), pp. 63-73. See also John 'public opinion' capacity Lambertson, 'Guerin's Pupils at the Ecole des role is filtered through Gericault's version of it, and reiterates many of the Beaux-Arts', in his 'Genesis of French elements of Gericault's own both Gericault and Delacroix received Romanticism: P.-N. Guerin's Studio and the example: and then turned from academic both chose the arena of the Public Sphere' (Ph.D. dissertation, University of away training; Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,1994), pp. 43- Parisian Salon over the Rome Academy48 (in contrast to Ingres), compensating 59. for technical deficiencies by sheer bravado, hubris, and attention to surface 49. Thomas Crow has dealt magnificently with of the artwork.49 Unlike the example of David, however, - much complication painted the broad sweep connecting against of and in Delacroix's artistic received wisdom - Delacroix to David via the strong current public virtuosity independence Gericault in his two chapters in S. Eisenman's development of these early years must be understood as prompted by a tension Nineteenth-CenturyArt: A CriticalHistory (Thames particular to Restoration society. The claim of the monarchy, and the and Hudson: London, Previous authors 1994). administration which it, to dominion over culture have consistently seen French Romantic painting represented symbolic public on in in the 1820s as fundamentallyand diametrically was challenged and altered by an art-critical war carried the press, the work of a opposed to David, simplistic insisting on laissez-faire practices in art-making, exhibiting and collecting that dichotomy that obscures rather than reveals the the state's broad and stakes in Romanticism. See Crow, 'Patriotism cogently aggressed against enlightened public was in a debate over and Virtue: David to the Young Ingres', pp. 14- museological programme. Delacroix's work implicated 50; and 'Classicism in Crisis: Gros to and an attempt to define and control the public sphere in which major cultural Delacroix', pp. 51-77. events occurred during the Restoration, a debate elaborated within the for art in and 50. For the importance general and, more in the of the arts administration Delacroix in of the of oppositional press covertly, papers particular development of the Maison du Roi. This creation of a new in which to conceive 'civil society' as a wedge between the space art, (nominally circumscribed) power of the restored which could be designated as the space of civil society, can be seen concretely Bourbon monarchy and its subjects, see the at work in the formation and in the fate of the Massacresde Scio in 1824.50 chapter, 'Staging Art and Politics in the Restoration', of my dissertation, 'Interpreting Delacroix in the 1820s', pp. 130-55. Parts of the researchfor this article werefunded by the National Endowmentfor the Humanities, the Institut Francais de Washington,and the ResearchCouncil of the Universityof South Florida. TheMaison Suger in Parisalso mademy researchpossible. I wish to thank Candace Clements,Robert Herbert, and David Van Zantenfor their commentson this essay, which is part of a larger study in preparationon Delacroixin the BourbonRestoration, In Civility: Eugene Delacroix and the Private History of Romanticism.

OXFORDART JOURNAL 21.1 1998 103