GOING BRITISH AND BEING MODERN IN THE VISUAL ART SYSTEMS OF CANADA, 1906-1976
by
Sarah A. Stanners
A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Graduate Department of Art
University of Toronto
© Copyright by Sarah A. Stanners 2009 Library and Archives Bibliotheque et 1*1 Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition
395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington OttawaONK1A0N4 OttawaONK1A0N4 Canada Canada
Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-82339-2 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-82339-2
NOTICE: AVIS:
The author has granted a non L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats.
The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantias de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author's permission.
In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privee, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont ete enleves de thesis. cette these.
While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis.
•+l Canada Abstract
Going British and Being Modern in the Visual Art Systems of Canada, 1906-1976
Doctor of Philosophy, 2009
Sarah A. Stanners
Department of Art, University of Toronto
Between 1906 and 1976, Canada looked to Great Britain as a model for modernity in the visual arts. 'Going British' and 'Being Modern' - which is an inversion of Paul Nash's
1932 investigation of whether an artist could 'Go Modern' while 'Being British' - is described in relation to Canada's visual art systems, namely the processes of art collecting, dealing, and the self-fashioning of the artist in the 20th century. Evidence for the impulse to modernize via British precedents is primarily sought through an analysis of three collections of British art in Canadian art institutions: the Massey Collection of
English Painting at the National Gallery, and the founding collections of the Vancouver
Art Gallery and the Beaverbrook Art Gallery. The Art Gallery of Ontario is discussed in relation to its history of foreign art advisement. Anthony Blunt and Alfred Barr, Jr. are explored as representatives of British and American cultural authorities respectively.
Finally, artists Jack Bush and Henry Moore are treated as case studies in mapping the shift in Canada from receiving primarily British cultural influences to the dominance of
American art as the model to emulate after mid century. Near the end of the period examined, in the 1970s, an international profile in the arts becomes most attractive to all three nations. Social history, historiography and biography are used as methods to
ii approach this topic. The lives that intersect throughout this illustration of the history of
AngloModem influence in modern Canada (from British to American) include: Alfred H.
Barr, Jr., Lord Beaverbrook, Anthony Blunt, Jack Bush, Wyndham Lewis, Vincent
Massey, Marshall McLuhan, Henry Moore, Jerrold Morris, and Henry Stone. An epilogue shows how Simon Starling's work manifests the nature of Henry Moore's relationship to Toronto and reflects on the import of Britishness to Canadian culture.
in Acknowledgements
I wrote this dissertation for my parents, my husband and my daughter. Aaron and
Josephine, you kept me going and smiling, thank you. My biggest debt of gratitude is to my mentor, and supervisor, Mark Cheetham, whose support has been unshakable. I aspire to be the kind of teacher he is. It has been an honour to also have Dennis Reid and
Barbara Fischer on my committee, they both inspired and enabled me to curate Canadian art. Thank you to Elizabeth Legge for her continued encouragement. I also owe much to
Sarah Parsons for her most generous help with the Beaverbrook material and for her inspirational enthusiasm. There are many librarians, archivists and registrars behind this dissertation, all of which have been so valuable and helpful to my research, and kind with their permissions. A very special thanks to everyone at the E.P. Taylor Research Library and Archives at the AGO, especially Donald Ranee, Larry Pfaff, Randall Speller, Blythe
Koreen, Amy Furness, and Karen McKenzie. Thanks to archivist Cyndie Campbell at the
National Gallery of Canada, Cheryl Siegel and Lynn Brockington at the Vancouver Art
Gallery Library, Laura Ritchie at the Beaverbrook Art Gallery, Michael Phipps, Emma
Stower and everyone at the Henry Moore Foundation, Elizabeth Ennion at the King's
College Archive in Cambridge, the good people at the Museum of Modern Art Archives, the New York Public Library, the Metro Toronto Reference Library, Margaret English and Larry at the Department of Art Library (University of Toronto), the Tate Library and
Archive, the Carl A. Kroch Division of Rare and Manuscript Collections at Cornell, and my librarian friend Adam Lauder, who provided good incentives to get my research going on Marshall McLuhan and Wyndham Lewis. Thanks also to Cassandra Getty at the
Art Gallery of Windsor, and the other curators that helped me in countless ways, such as
iv Judi Schwartz, Graham Larkin, Annabelle Kienle, Alan Wilkinson, Helena Reckitt, Anita
Feldman, David Mitchinson and especially Michael Parke-Taylor. Thank you also to the
Reis family on Hope Street, who gave me the time and peace of mind to work.
For making it all financially possible, I want to express my sincere thanks to the
Ontario government's Ontario Graduate Scholarship, the Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council of Canada, the Hon. H.N.R. Jackman and his Chancellor Jackman
Graduate Student Fellowship, the Department of Art and the School of Graduate Studies at the University of Toronto. Special thanks are also owed the Henry Moore Institute and to the Henry Moore Foundation for assistance, access, and accommodations in Perry
Green and Leeds, and for getting me to Helsinki. Thank you to the Didrichsen Art
Museum for their support and encouragement. I am grateful to the Didrichsens for introducing me to Viljo Revell's daughter, Tuula Fleming.
For their permission and thoughtful sharing, I thank my wonderful interviewees
Sir Anthony Caro, John Morris, William Withrow, Simon Starling, and David Silcox.
Malcolm Woodward and Linda Milrod also deserve thanks for speaking with me about the Transformation AGO project. For opening the door onto a fuller picture of the artist and Canadian art history, great thanks are owed to the Jack Bush Estate and Terry Bush in particular for granting me access to the diaries of Jack Bush. Many thanks are owed to
David and Audrey Mirvish for introducing me to so much wonderful art, and for their confidence-inspiring interest in my research. Thanks also to Eleanor Johnston for her support of my scholarship. Thanks to Betty Jarvis for her friendship and conversations on art and Alan Jarvis. Special thanks go to Simon Starling for being genuinely interested and generous, and for inspiring my future research.
v Table of Contents
Introduction 1
Chapter 1 - Presenting an English Collection to Canada, and Beyond: The Massey Collection of English Painting at the National Gallery of Canada 26
Chapter 2 - The British Foundations of Two Founding Collections: The Vancouver Art Gallery (est. 1931) & the Beaverbrook Art Gallery (est. 1959) 50
Chapter 3 - From Blunt to Barr: The Shift in Cultural Authority from British to American at the AGO 91
Chapter 4 - Jack Bush - Canada's Shift in Cultural Influence Personified 124
Chapter 5 - The Cultivation of Henry Moore in Toronto 163
Epilogue 189
Figures 201
Bibliography 222
Appendices Appendix A - Sarah Stanners interviews David Silcox 232 Appendix B - Sarah Stanners interviews William Withrow 267 Appendix C - Sarah Stanners interviews John Morris 291 Appendix D - Sarah Stanners interviews Sir Anthony Caro 330 Appendix E - Sarah Stanners interviews Simon Starling 343
VI List of Figures
Figure 1 - Simon Starling, Infestation Piece (Musselled Moore), 2006-08 - p. 202
Figure 2 - Paul Nash, Solstice of the Sunflower, 1945 - p. 203
Figure 3 - Stanley Spence, Self Portrait, 1944 - p. 204
Figure 4 - Art on display in a University of New Brunswick classroom, ca. 1955 - p. 205
Figure 5 - Graham Sutherland, LordBeaverbrook, 1951 -p. 206
Figure 6 - Ben Nicholson, Still Life, June 6, 1948, 1948 - p. 207
Figure 7 - Andy Warhol, Elvis I and II, 1964 - p. 208
Figure 8 - Jerrold Morris and Emilio del Junco, Morris International Gallery - p. 209
Figure 9 - Jerrold Morris International Gallery, Toronto, ca. 1964 - p. 210
Figure 10 - Franz Kline, Cupola, 1958-60 - p. 211
Figure 11 - Reading Life at the military camp branch in Exhibition Park, 1939 - p. 212
Figure 12 - Jack Bush, Bonnet, 1961 - p. 213
Figure 13 - Jack Bush, Sumach, 1930 - p. 214
Figure 14 - The Henry Moore Sculpture Centre, AGO, 2008 - p. 215
Figure 15 - Henry Moore, Three Way Piece No. 2: The Archer, Toronto 1964-65 -p. 216
Figure 16 - Henry Moore, Large Two Forms, 1966-69, corner of the AGO - p. 217
Figure 17 - Starling, Infestation Piece (Musselled Moore), in process (2007) - p. 218
Figure 18 - The recently expanded Art Gallery of Ontario by Frank Gehry - p. 219
Figure 19 - The new Galleria Italia at the Art Gallery of Ontario - p. 220
Figure 20 - Julian Opie, This is Shahnoza, 2006 - p. 221
vii List of Appendices
Appendix A - Sarah Stanners interviews David Silcox - p. 232 (3 February 2009)
Appendix B - Sarah Stanners interviews William Withrow - p. 267 (27 May 2008)
Appendix C - Sarah Stanners interviews John Morris - p. 291 (14 January 2009)
Appendix D - Sarah Stanners interviews Sir Anthony Caro - p. 330 (14 February 2008)
Appendix E - Sarah Stanners interviews Simon Starling - p. 343 (31 October 2007)
Vlll INTRODUCTION
To say that there is something distinctly modem about British art of the twentieth century usually provokes blank stares or expressions of disbelief. With the brilliance and invention associated with, for example, Russian constructivism, or cubism bom out of
France, or the later triumph of abstract expressionism from the United States, the art of
Great Britain is not often discussed as a paradigm for the development of advanced visual art in the twentieth century. The title for this dissertation is inspired by a brief but telling investigation by Paul Nash into this apparently oxy-moronic suggestion: modem British.
In an article called '"Going Modem' and 'Being British'," published on 12 March 1932 by the Weekend Review, Nash asks, "Whether it is possible to 'Go Modem' and still 'Be
British..."' This study is, however, a consideration of British modernism out of context - that is, of the affect of British modernism in Canada from 1906 to 1976. From the periphery then, I ask whether it is possible to 'Go British' and still 'Be Modem'? In
Canada, the answer is yes.
1 Paul Nash, '"Going Modem' and 'Being British'," The Weekend Review (12 March 1932), pp. 322-323.
1 2 Today, the field of art history acknowledges multiple modernisms.2 My approach is at once old and new: I propose another perspective on modernism in the visual arts but
1 rely on a combination of methods, including social history, historiography and biography. This dissertation is decidedly focused on visual art galleries, including their collections, advisors, dealers and exhibitions, as well as two key artists - Jack Bush and
Henry Moore - and the critical history and reception that helped to form their reputations.
In both cases - that is, the gallery and the artist - archival sources provide the bulk of my evidence, with less weight placed on formal analysis. Furthermore, I do not claim that this account of a particular kind of Canadian modernism be the story of art in Canada during the first three quarters of the twentieth century. Rather, the familiar modern art histories of Canada must be acknowledged and considered integral to the scope of
Canada's conception of modernism. For example, the veneration of Clement Greenberg's concept of high modern art is undeniably a part of the art history of Jack Bush and there is Serge Guilbaut's successful text How New York Stole the Idea of Modern Art (1983), which considered social and political history in order to reveal a larger picture of post-
War abstraction. Seven years later, Guilbaut edited Reconstructing Modernism: Art in
New York, Paris, and Montreal 1945-1964, which has done much to outline the points of contact between French Canada and modernism in the twentieth century.3 The present study is cognizant of the various modernisms and aims to contribute one more vantage
2 Two good sources include: Kobena Mercer, ed., Cosmopolitan Modernisms, London: Institute of International Visual Arts, 2005, and David Peters Corbett, The Modernity of English Art, 1914-30, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1997.
3 Serge Guilbaut, ed. Reconstructing Modernism: Art in New York, Paris, and Montreal, 1945-1964, and Hot Paint for Cold War Symposium. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1990. 3 point, which has not yet been outlined in any extensive manner. Speak to anyone experienced the middle decades of the twentieth century in Canada and they will tell you that the notion of Canada's culture being based on British footings is nothing new.4 Now, in an age where very young Canadians - those who were born long after Beatlemania - feel that all of modern culture in Canada was born from or is a spin-off of American precedents, it is time to recall and assess the British foundations of Canada's sense of modernism in the visual arts.
As a former colony of the British Empire, it is, in many respects, a given that
Canada should be shaped by British culture. Aside from the long history of expeditions for resources, the British Empire first laid claim to territory in what is now known as
Canada in 1713. With Confederation in 1867 (known then as the British North America
Act), Canada became a federal dominion, and in 1982 the Canada Act, passed by the
British Parliament, gave Canada legislative independence. Queen Elizabeth II remains, however, Canada's Head of State. That there has not yet been a book written about the way in which British art advisors (namely Anthony Blunt) and Canadian collectors of
British art (most prominently Vincent Massey, Henry Stone and Lord Beaverbrook) have shaped Canada's art institutions is a matter of cultural amnesia. The onset of this amnesia, which is perfectly traced through an analysis of critical accounts of Jack Bush, is most noticeable at mid century. At this point, Canada was assessing its own state of affairs
41 have interviewed several people, both Canadian and British, who experienced these vital years in Canada, and by including excerpted transcripts of these interviews in the appendices to this study I aim to represent the subtler and more personal art histories that tend not to fit within traditional historical prose. I hope they will serve as a broad background to my topic, and be mined for more detailed information or future scholarship. 4 with the Report of the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences 1949-51 (commonly known as the Massey Commission), and the United
States of America was becoming one of the best places in the world to find avant-garde art. By the 1960s, Canada's major cities were consciously pursuing a greater international and independent profile but, in the case of Toronto, they still turned to the best of
Britishness in British art (Henry Moore) to do so.
The various names that I have mentioned represent some of the essential threads of my argument. I am proposing a way to understand the transnational character of
Canada's visual art systems during the twentieth century and have found no better way to express it than through an examination of the lives of certain key individuals. One of the best embodiments of this transnational cultural condition is Wyndham Lewis - the artist and writer (in)famous for his lead role in Vorticism, which is arguably the only avant- garde art movement to come out of England in the first half of the twentieth century. My
Introduction takes Lewis as its subject in order to set the tone for the arguments to follow.
This study does not in any way claim to be comprehensive, since the subject is too vast for any one single project. My choice of subjects, both human and institutional, has been selective, foregoing any false notion of covering all bases across Canada's far- reaching geography. The aim of this study - to demonstrate the impact of an
'AngloModem'5 sensibility on the Canadian art scene - also precludes attention to French
Canadian artists and institutions, for obvious reasons. Again, this is not a comprehensive account of'Going British' and 'Being Modern' in Canada, but rather a carefully selected
5 Janet Wolff uses this apt term in her book AngloModem: painting and modernity in Britain and the United States, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2003. 5 assembly of lives and circumstances, with an emphasis on gallery collections, which have shaped the way in which the visual art systems of Canada experienced and pursued modernism in the twentieth century.
The Oxford English Dictionary first defines 'system' as "A set or assemblage of things connected, associated, or interdependent, so as to form a complex unity; a whole composed of parts in orderly arrangement according to some scheme or plan; rarely applied to a simple or small assemblage of things.. ."6 and subsequently describes the term 'system' along methodological lines, stating, "The set of correlated principles, ideas, or statements belonging to some department of knowledge or belief; a department of knowledge or belief considered as an organized whole; .. .a comprehensive body of doctrines, conclusions, speculations, or theses."7 What I imply by the use of the word
'systems' in my title are the combined approaches and people, often interdependent, which form what we know as art institutions, specifically art museums or galleries, which are the focus of my study. Understanding a museum or gallery as a system is fundamental to my argument - that an art institution may project one mandate or story of modern art, but that vision is always a product of a system of both internal and external advisors, collectors and so on. I will demonstrate that Canadian visual art systems, such as major galleries, have demonstrated, due to a variety of influences, a reliance on British art and authority to become modern. In the case of the Beaverbrook Art Gallery, in Fredericton,
6 "System," Oxford English Dictionary, second edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989,
7 Ibid. 6 and the Vancouver Art Gallery, the process and contents of their founding collections will be examined to reveal their highly British bent. Similarly, the systems involved in the acquisition of artworks by the Art Gallery of Ontario, in Toronto, and the National
Gallery of Canada, in Ottawa, will be explored as primary examples of the effects of
British-led art advisement to the most prominent art institutions in Canada. In assessing the shift in Canada toward a more American sensibility in the arts, the oft-omitted system of art dealing will be considered, with a particular focus on Toronto during the 1960s.
Chapters 1 and 2 of this study will highlight three significant collections of British art that have been gifted to Canadian public galleries in Ottawa, Vancouver and
Fredericton. The Massey Collection of English Painting will be addressed in Chapter 1, and the founding collections of the Vancouver Art Gallery and the Beaverbrook Art
Gallery will be explored together in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 contrasts the impacts made by
Anthony Blunt and Alfred Barr, Jr. on the Art Gallery of Ontario. Chapters 4 and 5 will assess the telling systems of self-fashioning and the associated desire for international status in the artistic careers of Henry Moore and Jack Bush. Moore's personal and institutional correspondence and the personal diary of Bush have provided new and important insights into the development of an international attitude in the culture of
Canada. In the case of both art institutions and individual artists, this study will, while aiming to reveal the British base to Canada's sense of modernity in the arts, recognize and attempt to map the shift to an American model, which started to become evident in these systems in the late 1950s, and increasingly obvious in the 1960s.
Finally, an appropriately anachronistic epilogue on the contemporary British artist
Simon Starling will account for a combination of these two sorts of systems - that of the 7 museum and the artist. Starling's serendipitous project for Toronto's Power Plant
Contemporary Art Gallery, called Infestation Piece (Musselled Moore) (2006-08) (Figure
1), is a brilliant manifestation of the proliferation of Britishness in the cultural waters of
Canada, so to speak, and the deferred, if not parochial, experience of modernism attributed (whether rightly or wrongly) to both nations.
Although "Going British and Being Modern in the Visual Art Systems of Canada,
1906-1976" contributes another story to the mosaic that is modernism, this dissertation purposely refuses to develop a narrative, in the strictest sense. It is the examination of particular moments within the lives of a select group artists, advisors, curators, dealers, collectors and directors that will allow for a more realistic sense of how Canada developed its own sense of modernity in the visual arts; it is an amalgamation of concepts and approaches, rather than the linear development and delivery of one doctrine that I wish to present. By exploring key moments from the careers of pertinent individuals, it is hoped that the reader will be able to appreciate this multivalent picture of modernism in
Canada - one that finally acknowledges its British under-painting.
Wyndham Lewis (1882-1957) was both terribly English and technically Canadian. He was born on a yacht off the coast of Nova Scotia to an American father (with French
Canadian roots) and a British mother, raised and educated in England, self-exiled to
North America from 1939 through 1945 (spending most of those years in Canada), and, 8 finally, laid to rest in England, where he returned after the war.8 Lewis is the epitome of the 20l -century transnational figure. He reflected on this state of being in between, both consciously and unconsciously, in his writing; most notably in his novel Self-Condemned
(1954), based on his few years living in Toronto in the early 1940s, and in an earlier work of fiction titled America, I Presume (1940). In a short essay called "On Canada," Lewis expresses his feelings as a self-described interloper:
.. .in a new country - at all events in Canada - what he does is overshadowed by what he is until such time as he shall have qualified by long residence to be regarded otherwise. Identified thus by his national status and geographical position, he is apt to feel a little like a floating island that has somehow got into the mouth of the St. Lawrence and become a mild traffic problem. He feels a thing and not a person.9
Lewis was, however, famous for honing his skills as an enemy. Biting criticism, which some actually admired him for, left Lewis snubbed by many of his peers in the arts and letters." Lewis left England for North America in 1939, when he felt, rightly so, that he
George Woodcock, ed., "Biographical Note," Wyndham Lewis in Canada, Vancouver: University of British Columbia Publications Centre, 1971, vii.
9 Wyndham Lewis, "On Canada" (ca. 1942) reprinted in Wyndham Lewis in Canada, ed. George Woodcock, Vancouver: University of British Columbia Publications Centre, 1971, p. 27. "On Canada" was first published, and only after the author's death, in Canadian Literature, issue 35, 1968.
10 Notorious for being a rather contentious personality, Wyndham Lewis was also the editor for a journal called The Enemy. The Enemy: a review of art and literature, Wyndham Lewis, ed., London: Arthur Press, 1927-29.
11 In a 1954 BBC broadcast, which reviewed Lewis' 1954 publications Self-Condemned and The Demon of Progress in the Arts in very positive terms, Marshall McLuhan notes "Lewis has not disappeared, but he has been boycotted for thirty years." McLuhan also states, "Anybody who imagines that free speech exists in the English speaking world 9 would have a hard time earning a living at home during the war years.12 Once out of
England, Lewis and his wife, Anne, found themselves stuck, since monies were not allowed to flow out of England and women were not allowed to travel to England during the war.13 Lewis referred to himself as a "war-transient" and to his situation as "self- displaced."14 Lewis was a keen observer, and once in Canada, he went straight to work making apt, yet painful, observations on the habits of the Anglo-Saxon Canadians from
Upper Canada: "What the Canadian of these parts tells you is that the social organism to which he belongs is 'snooty': or, he will say, 'more English than the English.' And he seems in an odd way pleased about it."15 Lewis was particularly wary of ex-patriot
Britons in North America, feeling that they were xenophobic and repellant in their predilection for exclusivity.16
today had better have a look at the writings of Percy Wyndham Lewis, foremost English painter and literary satirist of this century." Marshall McLuhan, "Critically Speaking," typed manuscript for a CBC broadcast (21 August 1955), Wyndham Lewis Collection (4612), Box 55, Folder 3, Ithaca: Carl A. Kroch Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, Cornell University.
12 Lewis, "On Canada," pp. 25-26.
13 Anne Wyndham Lewis, "The Hotel," Wyndham Lewis in Canada, George Woodcock, ed., Vancouver: University of British Columbia Publications Centre, 1971, p. 21. Anne describes the situation as "Our enforced stay in Canada..."
15 Lewis, "On Canada," p. 28.
16 Wyndham Lewis, manuscript for an article on Canada (n.d.), Wyndham Lewis Collection (4612), Box 3, Folder 10, Ithaca: Carl A. Kroch Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, Cornell University. This is the manuscript for Lewis' "On Canada," which was posthumously published in 1968 in issue 35 of Canadian Literature and reprinted in George Woodcock, ed., Wyndham Lewis in Canada, Vancouver: University of British Columbia Publications Centre, 1971. 10 Lewis spent many years honing this critical attitude toward 'America', a term, he believed, applied to both the US and Canada.17 Before settling in Toronto in the early
1940s, Lewis spent some time in the US, mainly in New York, where he wrote the novel
America, I Presume. During this time, Lewis also paid visits to parts of Canada. Notably,
Lewis attended a dinner at Toronto's York Club at the end of November 1939, which was hosted by J.S. McLean and attended by John Reid, Douglas Duncan, Terrence
MacDermot, Charles Comfort, Carl Schaefer and A.Y. Jackson.18 Lewis arrived late to dinner because he had been held up on a tour of Hart House, on the University of Toronto campus. If there was ever a site that inspired Lewis' sense of disproportionate exclusivity in new English Canadians, it was Hart House. In a chapter called "I Dine with the Warden" from America, I Presume, the protagonist, Archie, visits a place he calls
Brunswick Hall, which is, in actuality, Hart House:
My taxi approached a towering Gothic pile. There were never any Goths in Canada, but there are a goodly number of Gothic buildings. .. .within I was awaited, it turned out, by a nice young man with a thoughtful young mustache. He
Lewis states in a draft for a lecture on America and England, ".. .an American (and by this term I mean a man of this Hemisphere, for 'America' does not stop at the Canadian and Mexican borders)..." Wyndham Lewis, "I Can Take It," manuscript draft (n.d.), Wyndham Lewis Collection (4612), Box 16, Folder 1, Ithaca: Carl A. Kroch Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, Cornell University.
18 Sheila Watson, "Canada and Wyndham Lewis the Artist," Wyndham Lewis in Canada, George Woodcock, ed. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Publications Centre, 1971, pp.71-72.
19 Ibid, p. 72.1 have found a discrepancy in dates, since Wyndham Lewis' signature in the Hart House guest book is dated 29 November 1939 and Sheila Watson's article "Canada and Wyndham Lewis the Artist" (op. cit.) claims that the York Club dinner was 30 November 1939. In America, I Presume, Archie signs the Hart House guest book as "Walt Whitman" by accident. Wyndham Lewis, America, I Presume, New York: Howell, Soskin&Co., 1941, p. 261. 11 called me "sir" frequently, to show that he had been well-educated. In England it's the other way round. They call you sir (so often as that!) by way of confessing, or admitting, that they have been badly educated.20
For any first-time visitor, Hart House is remarkably English in both architectural style and in spirit. Conceived of in 1910 but not open, officially, until 11 November of
1919, Hart House was made possible by funds from the Massey Foundation, which was based on the fortunes resulting from the Massey-Harris Company. Massey-Harris manufactured farm equipment under the presidency of Chester Massey, who was the father of (Charles) Vincent Massey - a key figure in this study of 'Going British and
Being Modern' in Canada, whose contributions to the visual arts will be explored in detail. Hart House was named in honour of Vincent's grandfather, Hart Massey, but it was Vincent who brought the House to life with his desire to build a place of recreation and fellowship for the young gentlemen of the University of Toronto. Writing about
Vincent Massey and Burgon Bickersteth, the second, and arguably the most dedicated,
Warden of Hart House, Ian Montagnes states, "The first was a Canadian who loved things British, the second an Englishman who loved Canada."21 Hart House's Gothic
Revival style, with a remarkably grand dining area of oak and stone (known as the Great
Hall) and its overhanging Faculty Club (now a restaurant), are strikingly similar to the academic haunts of England, and its interior is equally English in its respect for both the
20 Wyndham Lewis, America, I Presume, New York: Howell, Soskin & Co., 1941, pp. 231-232.
21 Ian Montagnes, "The Founder and the Animator," in A Strange Elation, Hart House: The First Eighty Years, David Kilgour, ed., Toronto: Hart House / University of Toronto Press, 1999, p. 5. 12 Pre-Raphaelite and Arts and Crafts revivals of the nineteenth century. The architecture of
Hart House, designed by Henry Sproatt and Ernest Rolph, is not simply in keeping with academic tradition, it is a manifestation of the Englishness of Canada - a sensibility that was, as Lewis observed, uniquely Canadian. On the architecture of Hart House, one author observes:
If we appreciate Gothic design with an Arts and Crafts sensibility, it is not one of a range of styles to be selected as swatches from a pattern book, rather it is a social, aesthetic, and political statement in that it was seen as a group project inspired by the collective will of a community living in a northern land.22
During his exhausting tour around this pseudo English building in Toronto, the protagonist of Lewis' America, I Presume awakens to the New World and New Man found in the caverns of Hart House: "Now for the first time I said to myself, I was fully in
America (though it was only Canada). I had got into the bowels of this New World: this deceptive continent. It was not just hot dogs and hamburgers, skyscrapers and G. Men."23
One New Man that Lewis would meet in 1943 while living in Windsor, Ontario, was (Herbert) Marshall McLuhan (1911-1980). Citing Time and Western Man (1927), where Lewis writes, "In England and America we want a new learned minority as sharp as razors, as fond of discourse as a Greek, familiar enough with the abstract to be able to handle the concrete. In short, we want a new race of philosophers, instead of'hurried
Paul Gary Russell, "The Mutable Monument: The Architecture of Hart House," in A Strange Elation, Hart House: The First Eighty Years, David Kilgour, ed., Toronto: Hart House / University of Toronto Press, 1999, p. 20.
Lewis, America, I Presume, p. 242. 13 men,' speed-cranks, simpletons, or robots,"24 W. Terrence Gordon makes the clever suggestion that "Lewis was also looking for McLuhan."25 More specifically, Lewis found his New Man in Canada.
McLuhan, famed for his thoughts on communications and media, had been reading Lewis since his days at Cambridge University as a student of English.26 He began corresponding with Lewis in 1943, when McLuhan learned that the author-painter was lecturing at Assumption College in Windsor, Ontario.27 That summer, McLuhan traveled by train, from his base at St. Louis University, to meet Lewis in Windsor.28 McLuhan saw Lewis as a mentor and vowed to forever promote his work. On 2 June 1944,
McLuhan writes to Lewis: "You had been, for years before I met you, a major resource in my life. These past months have been a very great experience indeed. To recruit understanding students for your work will always be part of mine. One day I shall have some influence."29 When back in St. Louis, McLuhan and Felix Giovanelli helped to
Wyndham Lewis, Time and Western Man, ed. Paul Edwards, Santa Rosa: Black Sparrow, 1993 (1927), p. xvi.
25 W. Terrence Gordon, Marshall McLuhan: Escape Into Understanding, New York: Basic Books / HarperCollins Publishers, 1997, p. 118.
26 Philip Marchand, Marshall McLuhan: The Medium and the Messenger, Toronto: Random House, 1989, p. 70.
27 Ibid.
28 W.K. Rose, ed., The Letters of Wyndham Lewis, London: Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1963, p. 360. It should be noted that McLuhan, writing in 1976, recalled the year of their meeting as being 1944. Marshall McLuhan quoted in "The Global Lewis," Lewisletter, no. 5 (October 1976), published by the Wyndham Lewis Society, p. 11.
29 Marshall McLuhan to Wyndham Lewis (2 June 1944) in Marshall McLuhan, Letters of Marshall McLuhan, Matie Molinaro, Corinne McLuhan and William Toye, eds., Toronto/Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 1987, p. 160. 14 secure portrait commissions and lecture engagements for Lewis. Lewis left Windsor for
St. Louis in January of 1944 and returned to Windsor in July.30 That summer, upon
Lewis' recommendation, McLuhan successfully applied for a job at Assumption College as head of the English department.31 While in Windsor, McLuhan attended Lewis' lectures on art (a three week-long course called "The A.B.C. of the Visual Arts")32 and continued to read and respect Lewis, arguably developing his notion of the 'global village' from Lewis' America and Cosmic Man (1948),33 which states, among other influential observations, "the earth has become one big village.. ."34 America and Cosmic Man was based on a series of lectures Lewis gave while in Windsor in 1943.35 McLuhan notes the importance of America and Cosmic Man in the introduction to his COUNTERBLAST publication (1954 and revised in 1969), a homage of sorts to Lewis' BLAST of 1914.
In 1967, McLuhan spoke about the impact of Lewis on his important percept of counter-environments, saying, "That's where I got it. It was Lewis who put me onto all of
W.K. Rose, "Exile's Letters," Wyndham Lewis in Canada, George Woodcock, ed., Vancouver: University of British Columbia Publications Centre, 1971, p. 87.
31 Marchand, Marshall McLuhan: The Medium and the Messenger, p. 72.
32 J. Stanley Murphy, C.S.B., "Wyndham Lewis At Windsor," Wyndham Lewis in Canada, George Woodcock, ed., Vancouver: University of British Columbia Publications Centre, 1971, p. 39.
33 Marchand, Marshall McLuhan: The Medium and the Messenger, p. 75.
34 Wyndham Lewis, America and Cosmic Man, London: Nicholson & Watson, 1948, p. 12.
35 J. Stanley Murphy, C.S.B., "Wyndham Lewis At Windsor," Wyndham Lewis in Canada, George Woodcock, ed., Vancouver: University of British Columbia Publications Centre, 1971, p. 35. 15 this study of the environment as an educational - as a teaching machine."36 That same
year, McLuhan published an article in artscanada (now known as Canadian Art
magazine), under the title "Technology and Environment," which addressed the notion of
counter-environments within a cultural context.37 Two years previously, McLuhan
participated in a conference at Southern Illinois University called Vision 65, where he
lectured on the idea that new technologies create new environments that allow us to gain
a valuable perspective on the old, dominant environments to which we've grown
accustomed. McLuhan credits Lewis for inspiring his meditations on the idea "that the
man made environment was a teaching machine," or "a mechanism for shaping
sensibility," and that this condition is also observable in the work of art.38 Lewis'
contentious BLAST publication, which brought together both the visual and literary arts
of its Vorticist contributors, is a prime example of a counter-environment at work: BLAST
critiqued, or re-framed, its contemporary environment in order to encourage new
perspectives. Following suit, McLuhan's COUNTERBLAST of 1954 blasted Canada's
position at mid-century in an effort to create a new vantage point on the current state of
transnational culture. The 'counter' in McLuhan's COUNTERBLAST title does not,
Marshall McLuhan, "Wyndham Lewis Recalled: Marshall McLuhan Recalls Lewis," a Flexidisc recording included with artscanada, 24: 114 (November 1967), special issue on Wyndham Lewis.
37 Marshall McLuhan, "Technology and Environment," artscanada, 24: 105 (February 1967), pp. 5-7.
38 See both Marshall McLuhan, "Wyndham Lewis Recalled: Marshall McLuhan Recalls Lewis," a Flexidisc recording included with artscanada, 24: 114 (November 1967), special issue on Wyndham Lewis and Marshall McLuhan, "Technology and Environment," artscanada, 24: 105 (February 1967), pp. 5-7, for a full impression of the links between McLuhan's counter-environments and Lewis. 16 therefore, mean that it is against or opposite to the efforts of Lewis' BLAST, rather, as
McLuhan clarifies in the introduction to the 1969 revised (and greatly expanded)
COUNTERBLAST publication, "The term COUNTERBLAST does not imply any attempt to erode or explode BLAST. Rather it indicates the need for a counter-environment as a means of perceiving the dominant one."39
As I have noted, the 1954 COUNTERBLAST and the 1969 COUNTERBLAST are quite different; the former is a seventeen-page pamphlet, which was produced (using a museum labeling machine operated by the anthropologist Edmund Carpenter) as a result of McLuhan's reaction to the published findings and recommendations of the Massey
Commission.4 Chaired by Vincent Massey, who became the first Canadian-born
Governor General of Canada in 1952, this national pulse-check of Canada at mid century is formally known as the Report of the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences, 1949-1951, which also included, in a companion volume, the Royal Commission Studies, A Selection of Essays Prepared for the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences; both were published in 1951 and exhibit a marked concern with Canada's relationship with Great Britain and the US.
The exceedingly bureaucratic tone and approach of the Report and Studies proved to be an irresistible invitation to criticism from McLuhan, especially with Section II of the
Report dedicated to "Mass Media."
39 Marshall McLuhan, COUNTERBLAST, designed by Harley Parker, Toronto: McClelland and Stewart Limited, 1969. McLuhan was applying his counter-environment perspect to the understanding of art, and Pop Art in particular; Marshall McLuhan, "Technology and Environment," artscanada, 24: 105 (February 1967), pp. 5-7.
40 Edmund Carpenter, "Remembering Explorations," Canadian Notes & Queries, no. 46 (Spring 1992), p. 7. 17 McLuhan was a champion of television, especially as a new medium that would help to shape a new society.41 He also felt it was critical that people, and certainly the young, should become media savvy - to understand how to watch and learn from television, and to recognize the interests of broadcasters. The Massey Report, on the other hand, expressed a sense of suspicion of TV and did not recommend that TV be used as a tool in classrooms, as McLuhan would have it. In Part I of the Report, which aims to take stock of the current condition of the arts, letters, and sciences in Canada, the section dedicated to "Television" states, "Even those who look forward to the services of television are acutely aware of possible dangers and feel that there must be a nationally controlled system" and finds, "Some also expressed a fear of excesses and abuses."42
Further to the point that the Massey Report makes frequent comparisons and contrasts to the US and Great Britain, on the matter of television, the Report bluntly states, ".. .we do not think that American programmes, with certain notable exceptions, will serve our national needs," and that since TV in the US is, for the most part, "a commercial enterprise, an advertising industry," sponsors will aim to give the majority of viewers what they desire, which results in "programmes of inferior cultural standards.. ."43 Looking to the British Broadcasting Corporation as a model for managing
Marshall McLuhan's respect for television has now extended, posthumously, to the viewing world on the World Wide Web. Television has now become the content on websites, such as YouTube. Marshall McLuhan can now be seen talking about television on the Today Show on YouTube. "Marshall McLuhan on the TODAY show," uploaded by DrFallon, YouTube, < http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZF8jej3j5vA>, accessed 28 January, 2009.
42 "Television," in Report of the Royal Commission On National Development in the Arts, Letters, and Sciences, 1949-1951, Ottawa: Edmund Cloutier / King's Printer, 1951, p. 49.
Ibid, p. 47. 18 television broadcasts, the Report places the British system on a pedestal: "... it is part of
British policy in television to present programmes which are consciously educational in nature; indeed, the directors of television in Britain refer to their 'moral and cultural responsibilities'. For this reason British television is extremely varied, but possesses nonetheless a markedly cultural character."44 This general anxiety of influence with regard to America, and the out-weighed admiration of British systems, is common in the findings and recommendations of the Report, and in the contributed Studies. McLuhan makes this observation with his initial blasting in COUNTERBLAST (1954):
BLAST england ancient GHOST of culture POACHING the EYES of the Canadian HAMLETS USA COLOSSUS of the South, horizontal HEAVYWEIGHT flattening the
Canadian imagination45
McLuhan's criticism of the Massey Report, and its chairman, is in no way veiled; he counters Massey's effort to affect culture in Canada, and even reacts to the red cover in which the Report was published:
BLESS The MASSEY REPORT, HUGE RED HERRING for derailing Canadian kulcha while it is
Marshall McLuhan, COUNTERBLAST, privately printed, 1954, n.p. 19 absorbed by American ART & Technology. MASSEY-HARRIS farm machinery, Canada's REAL contribution to CULTURE46
Far from casting the US as the bossy big brother to Canada, McLuhan's
COUNTERBLAST (1954) points to the US as a saving grace for Canada's fate as a quiet, in-line member of the British Commonwealth: "BLESS the USA for SAVING canada from the fate of AUSTRALIA."47 But the official line, represented by Massey and his
Report, saw the benefits of a renewed, non-colonial relationship with Great Britain, one that was certainly connected with the mother country. Karen Finlay's in depth study on
Massey, The Force of Culture: Vincent Massey & Canadian Sovereignty (2004), convincingly demonstrates that Massey favoured an independent Canada, but one that was built on a vital new partnership with Great Britain. Finlay explains that a renaissance in the relationship between Great Britain and Canada emerged in the 1940s and 1950s and that the stability that Great Britain demonstrated during this tumultuous period made the nation an attractive model.48 In fact, in chapter 1 of the Massey Report, titled "The
Nature of the Task," the virtue of Winston Churchill is mentioned when describing the
Report's mandate:
When Mr. Churchill in 1940 called the British people to their supreme effort, he invoked the traditions of his country, and based his appeal on the common background from which had grown the character and way of life of his fellow
46 Ibid, n.p.
47 Ibid, n.p.
48 Karen Finlay, The Force of Culture: Vincent Massey & Canadian Sovereignty, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004, pp. 198-199. 20 countrymen. .. .Nothing could have been more "practical" than that appeal to thought and emotion. We have had examples of this truth in our own history.49
This first chapter of the Massey Report goes on to defend the role of government in reviewing the nation's cultural climate by citing the example of Great Britain, stating:
Today governments play a part not foreseen a generation ago, in the matters which we are required to review. In most modern states there are ministries of "fine arts" and "cultural affairs". .. .In Great Britain, to avoid the danger of bureaucratic control or of political interference, semi-independent bodies, referred to later in this Report, have been set up for the promotion of the arts and letters. We have given careful consideration to this experience as it may apply to Canada.50
Notably, Great Britain is here portrayed as a modern state to emulate. In an 'Address' dated 30 May 1947, made in response to the American press' reaction to the Canadian
Citizenship Act of January 1947, Massey states:
This was interpreted by some newspapers to the south as a step which would weaken our ties with Great Britain. They overlooked the fact that this legislation states quite clearly that a Canadian citizen is still a British subject. ... Indeed, in working out our own destiny we have quite unconsciously been the laboratory in which the principles of the modern British Commonwealth were discovered and successfully applied .. .51
Report of the Royal Commission On National Development in the Arts, Letters, and Sciences, 1949-1951, Ottawa: Edmund Cloutier / King's Printer, 1951, p. 4.
50 Ibid, p. 5.
51 Vincent Massey quoted in Karen Finlay, The Force of Culture, p. 199. 21 My dissertation will show that mid-century Canada was a time when confidence in Great
Britain ran high and their systems, especially those dealing with the visual arts, were admired. It was also a time when the transition toward an American model of culture was just beginning to gain momentum. Although it was a meager private printing of no more than 17 pages, COUNTERBLAST (1954) was an attempt to drop a bomb of self-reflection on the interplay of cultural influence between three English-speaking nations.
It must be acknowledged that a much bigger bomb was dropped in the summer of
1948 with Refus global, a small but mighty one-off artistic publication produced by members of the Quebec-based artists' group Les Automatistes. It was another literary and visual protest to the current state of affairs - though this time aimed at the French-
Canadian cultural front. The subjugating nature of the Church was a major target.52
Lewis' BLAST (1914) also unleashed healthy doses of venom, and praise, along national lines, starting first "(from politeness)" with England and later with France, among other nations.53 When McLuhan blasted Canada, he did it "(for kindly reasons)."54
The apparent manners of both Lewis and McLuhan were still aimed at revealing the stereotypes of their own countrymen. This critical attitude toward one's homeland can be considered a method for creating the sort of counter-environment that McLuhan wrote about after Lewis. In the second, and last, issue of BLAST, known as the War issue, due
52 Paul-Emile Borduas, et. al., Refus global, Montreal, Mithra-Mythe Editeur, 1948.
53 Wyndham Lewis (ed.), BLAST 7(1914), Santa Barbara: Black Sparrow Press, 1981, p. 11.
54 Marshall McLuhan, COUNTERBLAST, privately printed, 1954. 22 to its release in the summer of 1915, Lewis' criticism bears the seeds of McLuhan's later thoughts on the insights of a new medium or context for perception:
The English have never been so insular and "English" as at the present moment. When a people first comes in touch with neighbouring races, its obstinate characteristics become momentarily more pronounced than ever. A man traveling abroad for the first time becomes conscious of his walk, his colour, his prejudices.55
To speak English, for example, while visiting a country of another language, makes apparent the absurdities of what is usually considered normal. BLAST and
COUNTERBLAST aim to shift the norm, and their method is based on their perceived benefits of establishing a counter-environment to observe the current environment.
Any consideration of McLuhan within a cultural context or through an art historical lens, as the case is with this dissertation, must acknowledge the success with which Richard Cavell has framed this media guru as a man of artistic sensibility in
McLuhan In Space: A Cultural Geography. McLuhan In Space was first published in
2002, but was reissued in 2003 with corrections.56 Highlighting the fact that McLuhan saw 'spatiality' as a key characteristic of the arts in Canada, Cavell asserts, "Throughout his career, McLuhan positioned himself as a Canadian; Canada was the counter- environment grounding his artistic/intellectual notions of the dynamics of spatial
55 Wyndham Lewis, "The Art of the Great Race," in BLAST 2 (1915), Wyndham Lewis, ed., Santa Barbara: Black Sparrow Press, 1981, p. 71.
Richard Cavell, McLuhan In Space: A Cultural Geography, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2003. It is this second edition that I will refer to throughout my argument. 23 production."57 Cavell explores McLuhan's 1952 article "Defrosting Canadian Culture" in the American Mercury, calling this response to the Massey Commission "immediate and visceral."58 Cavell's study characterizes McLuhan's writing as postmodernist,59 pointing out that McLuhan was critiquing modernism, especially as seen from a Canadian standpoint:
Commenting on Canada's colonial history, McLuhan notes that, whereas Canada was emerging from its colonialist relation to Britain at the beginning of the century, it is now becoming a colony of the United States, based on the economic relations between the two countries. But while the United States has emerged from its cultural colonization by Britain, Canada has been hampered in this regard by its political loyalty to Britain. Canadians 'will continue to act as though nothing has happened [in terms of the decline of Britain's cultural hegemony], if only because the dominant Victorian culture of the country has already accustomed them to ignore the cultural significance of technology and the new communications media of the continent.' The implications are clear: one way of ending Canada's cultural recoil is to acclimatize that culture to the new media.60
Cavell's choice of words - "Canada's cultural recoil" - is apt for describing McLuhan's feelings about the issue, not to mention the actual mid-century circumstances of Canada's rather deferred adoption of mainstream modernism.
As I have aimed to establish in this Introduction - the sense of modernism during the first three quarters of the twentieth century, as it pertains to the visual arts, was unique
57 Ibid, p. 197.
58 Ibid, p. 200.
59 Ibid, p. xvii.
60 Ibid, p. 95. 24 in Canada. Although Chapters 1 and 2 focus on particularly British collections of art in
Canada, an investigation into the aims of these collections will demonstrate how they were intended to be the building blocks upon which a Canadian culture could grow.
Chapter 3 traces the history of advisors to the Art Gallery of Ontario, and the shift in cultural authority that was felt both within and outside of the institution. In Chapter 4, an analysis of Jack Bush and his pursuit of international success as a painter will map this shift toward a more American sensibility in the visual arts. Chapter 5, on "The
Cultivation of Henry Moore in Toronto," will show how one of Canada's largest visual art institutions (the Art Gallery of Ontario) would pursue an international, and therefore less parochial, reputation through the adoption of the figure of Britishness in the arts - Henry
Moore. Although the Art Gallery of Ontario began to make a concerted effort to acquire
American abstract art in the 1960s, as Chapter 3 will discuss, the uptake was rather late; the reasons for this will be explored at multiple points throughout this study.
Both Karen Finlay's The Force of Culture: Vincent Massey and Canadian
Sovereignty (2004) and Maria Tippett's Making Culture: English-Canadian Institutions and the Arts before the Massey Commission (1990) have done a tremendous job of plotting the AngloModern story of Canadian culture, but only up to the early 1950s. My study goes further, taking into account the height, and eventual plateau, of British influence on Canadian culture, as well as the subsequent shift that saw Canada turning toward her closest neighbour, the US, as a modern art authority. The rising pursuit of an internationalist sensibility in the arts and in the operation of visual art systems, such as the private art gallery, will also be explored. The transition period between modernism 25 and postmodernism is a vital part of understanding just how strong, and for how long, the
British sense of modernity in the visual arts was evident in Canada. Chapter 1
Presenting an English Collection to Canada, and Beyond:
The Massey Collection of English Painting
at the National Gallery of Canada
Art for a Dominion
The Massey Collection of English Painting (MCEP) at the National Gallery of Canada in
Ottawa is a prime example of the high value placed on British modernism in the visual art systems of Canada. In the year 1946, Vincent Massey and his spouse, Alice Massey, acting as trustees of the Massey Foundation - the same foundation that built Hart House
- donated 75 contemporary British paintings to the National Gallery of Canada with the intention of edifying the nation. Between 1948 and 1959, fourteen more paintings would join the collection through Massey's efforts. The terms of the gift stipulated that the
MCEP must tour throughout Canada. The Canadian newspaper publisher Harry S.
Southam was also an important art collector (benefiting the Art Gallery of Hamilton in
Ontario most of all) and Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the National Gallery of
Canada at the time of Massey's gift. Southam wrote the foreword to the MCEP catalogue, which states:
The importance to Canada of these paintings lies not merely in the acquisition of a number of outstanding works including some which have been widely studied and
?fi 27
exhibited and which therefore heighten the prestige of the National Gallery in the world of museums and connoisseurs; it lies perhaps chiefly in the enjoyment and understanding fostered in our own people. A condition of the gift is that the pictures are to be widely exhibited throughout the country, and this will lead to a fuller appreciation of the spirit of the mother country...'
This post War gift to Canadian culture from "the mother country" is evidence of the heightened sense of admiration that many influential Canadians, such as Massey, had for
Great Britain at mid century, and which included a desire for a renewed, non-colonial partnership.2 Southam goes on to write in the Foreward to the MCEP catalogue: "During the course of recent studies, the feeling has been growing up among impartial students that the British school is perhaps the most vital and the most productive of significant works of any school today."3 The superlatives attached to Southam's comments on contemporary British art capture perfectly why it was Modern to 'go British' in Canada.
In late April of 1939, Vincent Massey Wrote to Southam with his idea to build a
British collection of paintings for Canada:
My dear Harry, My wife and I decided some time ago that it would be an appropriate thing for the Massey Foundation to present to the National Gallery of Canada a group of contemporary British pictures. The Gallery is building up a very worthy collection of old masters, and Canadian painting, our primary
1 H.S. Southam, "Forward," The Massey Collection of English Painting, Ottawa: National Gallery of Canada, 1946, p. 4.
2 As I mentioned in my Introduction, Karen Finlay has argued brilliantly for this drive for Canadian-British camaraderie in Canada in the 1940s and 1950s. Karen Finlay, The Force of Culture: Vincent Massey & Canadian Sovereignty, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004.
3 Southam, "Forward," The Massey Collection of English Painting, p. 4. 28
responsibility, is well looked after, but we have relatively few examples of modern English work. The fact that we are for the time being living in London makes it possible for my wife and me to keep in touch with the current exhibitions and in many cases to visit the studios of the artists themselves, and for the last year we have gradually acquired a number of examples of contemporary work which will go to the National Gallery when the collection is complete. Our desire is that when the collection is handed over it should be kept intact as a group to be known as the Massey Collection of Contemporary British Painting. I think this condition that the pictures should be kept together is reasonable because the collection will possess a natural unity. .. .4
The 75 British paintings that comprise the original MCEP include: one work by Vanessa
Bell; two by William Coldstream; two by Charles Conder; two by Richard Eurich; one by
Frederick Spencer Gore; one by Lawrence Gowing; one by Walter Greaves; three by
Tristram Hillier; two by Ivon Hitchens; one by Frances Hodgkins; two by James Dickson
Innes; eight by Augustus John; one by David Jones; one by Eve Kirk; one by Edward Le
Bas; one by Derwent Lees; one by Ambrose McEvoy; one by Lord Methuen; one by
Cedric Lockwood Morris; one by Alfred Munnings; one by John Nash; eight by Paul
Nash; one by Christopher Richard Wynne Nevinson; one by Algernon Newton; three by
William Nicholson; one by William Orpen; one by Victor Pasmore; one by John Piper; one by William Rothenstein; three by Walter Richard Sickert; five by Matthew Smith; four by Stanley Spencer; one by Sidney Starr; five by Philip Wilson Steer; two by
Graham Sutherland; one by Edward Wadsworth; one by Dame Ethel Walker; and one by
Christopher Wood. Late in the year 1948, eleven more works were gifted via the Massey
4 Vincent Massey to Harry S. Southam dated 28 April, 1939, U of T archives B1987- 0082 / 250 (04), copy at National Gallery of Canada. 29
Foundation to join the MCEP, including one work by Gwen John; one by Derek Hill; one by Eric Ravilious; two works by William Scott; one by Philip W. Steer; one by Mary
Potter; two works by Geoffrey Tibbie; and two works on paper by Henry Moore. In 1952, the MCEP grew with the addition of two more paintings, one by Duncan Grant and another extraordinary work by Paul Nash called Solstice of the Sunflower (1945) (Figure
2). Finally, in 1959, one last painting joined the MCEP - John Lavery's Portrait of Grey
Owl (1935). The most remarkable works, by my own account, include John's Self
Portrait (ca. 1937-40); Paul Nash's Chestnut Waters (1923, 1938) and Dymchurch Steps
(1924, 1944); Pasmore's Evening, Hammersmith (1944); Spencer's Landscape with
Magnolia, Odney Club (1938) and his late Self Portrait (1944) (Figure 3).
It wasn't just Southam who thought that the paintings included in this special collection for Canada were exceptional. John Rothenstein, then director of the Tate
Gallery, London, laments in the Introduction to the MCEP catalogue: "...[the MCEP] not only provides a comprehensive display of twentieth century tendencies; it also contains a number of works which must be considered as ranking among the masterpieces of the artists concerned and whose departure from England -1 may be allowed to say - must be regarded with regret."5 Yet, Rothenstein was confident that the MCEP would take on an
"ambassadorial function."6 This function was made all the more apparent when the Tate
Gallery hosted the inaugural exhibition of the MCEP under the more neutral title A
5 John Rothenstein, "The Massey Collection of English Painting," The Massey Collection of English Painting, Ottawa: National Gallery of Canada, 1946, p. 5.
6 Rothenstein, "The Massey Collection of English Painting," The Massey Collection of English Painting, p. 5. 30
Collection of Contemporary English Painting. The exhibition ran from 11 April to 30
June 1946. Rothenstein states in the National Gallery of Canada's MCEP catalogue:
It was our privilege at the Tate Gallery to be the first to display this collection
publicly, and its excellent reception here by a public already well acquainted with
the work of the painters represented confirms my belief that its value and interest
will be even greater in Canada... As a result of the present gift, Canada is the only
dominion where modern English paining can be properly studied and enjoyed on
the spot.7
It might have been a "privilege" for the Tate to be the first to show this collection, but, as
Southam indicated in his Foreward to the catalogue, the National Gallery in Ottawa had its own profile heightened by association with the venerable Tate Gallery.
Although the reception of this collection was generally very positive, the collection's debut in London was met by at least one vocal protest. The Ottawa Journal'?,
London correspondent reported on 11 April 1946 that upon the opening of the exhibition of Massey's collection at the Tate Gallery, a London artist named Frank Emmanual shouted, "I protest and register my strongest disapproval that this gallery should be used
o for exhibitions like this. Most people here do not understand what they are looking at."
This minor protest could have arisen for a number of reasons, such as the collection being beyond the academic taste of a more conservative connoisseur. Yet, the exhibition's
7 Ibid.
8 Quoted in "Massey to Bring 71 Paintings to Ottawa Gallery," Ottawa Journal, 11 April 1946. 31 rather innocuous initial title at the Tate Gallery might indicate that Massey, who had very recently served as a trustee on the Tate's board, may have anticipated that an exhibition of a private collection stemming from a recent member of the board would appear self- serving. On the other hand, John Rothenstein was entirely unapologetic and proudly announced the Massey collection as a highlight of the Tate Gallery's official reopening.9
Museum ethics then were not what they are now.
In an article regarding the Tate Gallery's reopening in April 1946, Rothenstein put a positive spin on the closed conditions of the War and what it had done for living British artists:
During the war the artistic isolation of these islands encouraged our artists to rely upon their own vision, to draw upon their own traditions to a degree unparalleled for generations. [...] British artists, momentarily isolated from the influence of the art of other countries - more particularly from that of France, where other values are, in general, sacrificed to formal perfection - tended to become deeply preoccupied with the imaginative significance of contemporary life, and intensely poetic in feeling. They recovered a sympathy with the peculiar qualities of the English genius, and it is my conviction that, before long, the British School will be recognized as one of the most varied, original and serious of contemporary schools of painting.10
The Massey collection confirmed Rothenstein's claims perfectly: contemporary British art was particularly Modern. As Chapter 4 on Jack Bush will demonstrate, the notion of artistic isolation is also used in Canadian art history as a condition for genius in modern
9 John Rothenstein, "The Reopening of the Tate Gallery," The Listener, XXXV: 900 (11 April 1946): pp. 455-56.
Ibid, p. 456. 32 art.
The MCEP first toured throughout Canada directly after its opening engagement at the Tate. Appropriately, the first Canadian exhibition of the MCEP was held at the
National Gallery of Canada, and ran from 30 October 1946 through to 2 January 1947.
The MCEP then moved on to the Art Association of Montreal (10 January - 31 January,
1947); then to the Art Gallery of Toronto (7 February - 2 March, 1947); on to the
Edmonton Museum of Fine Arts (14 April - 14 May, 1947); then the Vancouver Art
Gallery (3 June - 29 June, 1947); then the Regina Industrial Exhibition (28 July - 2
August, 1947); followed by the Public Library and Art Museum London (24 September -
31 October, 1947); then the Winnipeg Art Gallery (15 November- 31 December, 1947); then the Willistead Art Gallery in Windsor (2 February - 17 March, 1948); the Owens
Museum at Mount Allison (7 October- 1 November, 1948); on to Queen's University,
Kingston (22 February - 24 February 1949); and finally to Trinity College School in Port
Hope on 26 February 1949.
During the years of Massey's chairmanship at the National Gallery of Canada
(1948-52), the MCEP traveled beyond Canada's borders to Australia, beginning in
November of 1949 in the National Art Gallery of New South Wales in Sydney, and continuing on in Australia through the National Gallery, Melbourne; the Hobart Gallery, in Hobart; the Lauceston Gallery, Hobart; the National Gallery, Adelaide; the Art
Gallery, Perth; and finally the National Gallery, Brisbane, where the Australian tour ended in October 1950. The exhibition of the MCEP picked up again in March of 1951 in
New Zealand, where it was shown at the National Gallery in Wellington; the Auckland
Art Gallery, Auckland; the Dunedin Public Art Gallery, Dunedin; and the Robert 33
McDougall Art Gallery, Christchurch. In 1952, the tour expanded to the US, finding venues in Honolulu and San Francisco before returning home for engagements with the
Vancouver Art Gallery and the University of British Columbia. While the MCEP was certainly a gift intended to edify the people of Canada, these international engagements in
Australia, New Zealand, and the USA, along with its first coming-out in England, signify
Massey's intention to garner a wide-reaching repute for contemporary English painting, partnered with the name of the National Gallery of Canada. Massey's drive to extend the
MCEP to so many galleries worldwide is also an indication of his respect for the methods of the British Council, an important system in supporting the promotion of British arts internationally. This will be addressed in more detail shortly.
"...the apex of Vincent's ambitious career"
This section of Chapter 1 might also be called "The Britishness of Vincent Massey." For the most part, Vincent and Alice Massey amassed their collection of English painting in the years 1935 through 1946, while they lived in London, when Vincent was Canada's
High Commissioner in London. It was economically advantageous to purchase contemporary paintings in England during the 1930s and 1940s - years that saw an economic depression, followed by WWII. In March of 1938, in an attempt to secure a regular flow of funds from the Massey Foundation for the purchase of English art to be gifted to the National Gallery of Canada, Massey contacted the National Trust Company, which managed the monies, to say, "it is possible at the present moment to buy very 34 interesting examples of contemporary work here at very reasonable prices."11
Contemporary art was also often less expensive than historical works with established market values.
Massey's role as High Commissioner in London placed him in an ideal position to purchase English paintings. From 1941 to 1945 he was a Trustee on the board of the
National Gallery, London, and selected to be the board's Chair in 1943. In 1942, Massey accepted a position on the board of trustees for London's Tate Gallery. The exhibition activity of these two institutions was low, if not non-existent, during the War; the Tate
Gallery was bombed in September 1940 and was kept closed until the end of the War. In the meantime, beginning in the summer of 1943, good efforts were made by the National
Gallery's director, Kenneth Clark, and especially his wife, Jane, to stimulate the wartime community of Canadian and American soldiers in London through the establishment of the Churchill Club, which hosted the occasional exhibition of modern British artists and other cultural events. In December of 1943 a small group of Canadian War Artists were invited to the Club to hear talks on "Modern English Painting" delivered by artists such as John Piper, Henry Moore, Paul Nash and Graham Sutherland.13 The Churchill Club had a positive effect on Charles Comfort, for example.14 Comfort would go on after the
11 Vincent Massey to H.V. Laughton, National Trust Company, 29 March 1938, Vincent Massey Papers, University of Toronto Archives (UTA B87-0082) 250, quoted in Karen Finlay, The Force of Culture, 2004, p. 183.
12 Finlay, The Force of Culture, 2004, pp. 179-80.
13 Christine Boyanoski, The 1940s: A Decade of Painting in the 1940s, exh. cat., Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1984, p. 23, produced in conjunction with an exhibition of the same title at the AGO (25 May - 30 June 1985), which toured throughout Ontario.
14 Ibid. 35
War to contribute a considerable vote of confidence for the way in which Great Britain
supported its own art and culture in his recommendations to the Massey Commission.15
In closing his recommendations to the Commission, Comfort stated:
When the very existence of their culture was threatened by war, Britain took steps to ensure its preservation and development both at home and abroad. This admirable policy on the part of a wise and experienced state is convincing evidence of the store that is placed in the spiritual life of its people. What the artist has always needed is patronage and a forum.16
Throughout this essay on "Painting" for the Massey Commission, Comfort urged Canada
to adopt a system of support similar to the British Council. Comfort would also later
become the director of the National Gallery of Canada from 1960 to 1965 - a directorship
that would be considered by many to be quite conservative.
In the supportive company of museum directors Kenneth Clark and John
Rothenstein (then director of the Tate Gallery), Massey did make things happen, or not happen as one case explored by Karen Finlay has revealed. Finlay's The Force of
Culture: Vincent Massey & Canadian Sovereignty finds that Massey and Clark were
instrumental in blocking an exhibition of modern American painting from showing at the
National Gallery, London, in late 1943.17 The communications between Massey and
Clark on this matter, according to Finlay,".. .veiled the obvious British and Canadian
15 Charles Comfort, "Painting," Royal Commission Studies: A Selection of Studies Prepared for the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters, and Sciences, Ottawa: Edmond Cloutier, 1951, pp. 407-418.
16 Comfort, "Painting," Royal Commission Studies, p. 418.
17 Finlay, The Force of Culture, 2004, pp. 179-80. 36 hostility to American art."18 Massey was in fact Canada's first minister to the United
States, in Washington, D.C., from 1926 to 1930, and was therefore very much aware of
Canada's closest neighbour. Claude Bissell's biography of Massey's life in office points out Massey's biased perspective on the US: "Vincent Massey was sympathetic to the
United States.. .but saw it through British eyes."19 If Massey did possess some hostility to
American art, it was rooted in his great desire to see a new partnership formed between
Canada and Britain, which, as Finlay's argument holds, ".. .counterbalanced the threat of colonial dependency from Canada's powerful neighbour to the south."20 Of course, the opposite was felt by Marshall McLuhan in COUNTERBLAST (1954), written the year after Vincent Massey's 6-year-long position as Chancellor of the University of Toronto ended in 1953.
Returning to Massey's service on the boards of the National Gallery and the Tate
Gallery in London, another important role that Massey played from 1943 to 1945 was that of the Chair of a committee set to assess the functions of the national galleries of
Great Britain. This included the National Gallery, the Tate Gallery, and the Victoria and
Albert Museum's collection of paintings. Again, Finlay has done an admirable job in tracing the impact of Massey in such activities abroad. She concludes that Massey
".. .was acutely sensitive to the role of the museum in nation-building, while bringing a persona of sympathetic impartiality to the task of adjudicating the claims of the various
18 Finlay, The Force of Culture, 2004, p. 180.
19 Claude T. Bissell, The Imperial Canadian: Vincent Massey in Office, Toronto: University of Toronto, 1986, p. 15.
20 Finlay, The Force of Culture, 2004, p. 167. 37
museums," and that ".. .he also held the concordant belief that, while art must not
propagandize, it could play an essential role in affirming national identity."21 It is a most
interesting backdrop to Massey's efforts with his own MCEP for the National Gallery of
Canada and surely a primer for his role as Chairman of the Massey Commission (1949-
51). In fact, this extra committee work, set to determine the national role of Britain's three
major museums, did produce a "Massey Report". Officially answered to by Massey in
December of 1945, the report, known formally as The Report of the Committee on the
Functions of the National Gallery and Tate Gallery and, in Respect of Paintings, of the
Victoria and Albert Museum Together with a Memorandum Thereon by the Standing
Commission on Museums and Galleries, made its biggest impact by ensuring that the
Tate, as a national gallery, represent British art of all eras as an independent institution.22
Finlay insightfuly points to this Massey Report and related activities as developing
Massey's already deep respect for the construction of history and its role in shaping
national consciousness, and national self-preservation. Essentially, Finlay characterizes
Massey's service in London as a springboard for his later efforts to shape Canadian
culture with British models in mind.23
21 Finlay, The Force of Culture, 2004, pp. 181-82.
22 United Kingdom, The Report of the Committee on the Functions of the National Gallery and Tate Gallery and, in Respect of Paintings, of the Victoria and Albert Museum Together with a Memorandum Thereon by the Standing Commission on Museums and Galleries (Confidential copy), London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1945, referred to in Finlay, The Force of Culture, 2004, pp. 180-81.
23 Finlay, The Force of Culture, 2004, p. 182. Finlay's thoughts on this topic were first put out with her 1999 doctoral dissertation under the same title, The Force of Culture: Vincent Massey & Canadian Sovereignty, for the University of Victoria. Chapter 5 is titled "British Connections/British Models," pp. 242-302. 38
The positions of service and honour in the career of Vincent Massey are too many to list here, but biographies such as Claude Bissell's account of Massey's life in office are exhaustive and telling in title alone: The Imperial Canadian: Vincent Massey in Office?4
Massey's own memoirs were edited and published by himself in 1963 with the title
What's Past Is Prologue?5 In fifteen chapters, Massey outlines his life from his birth in
1887 up to 1962. A full 220 pages - more than 40% of the memoirs - is dedicated to his eleven years in London but, regrettably, hardly any ink is dedicated to his art-related activities. Despite this, the majority of pages devoted to recounting his time in London speak to the fact that he valued his time there like no other episode in his life. On leaving
England in 1946, Massey confesses in his memoirs: "We went home because we were
Canadians. Canada was where we belonged. Had I waited a few years before resigning my post, transplanting would have been very hard. ... England is the last citadel of the individual; it has the right climate for friendship."26 Shifting gears quickly, Massey published a small volume On Being Canadian in 1948 and dedicated it "To those who served on the Staff of Canada House during the years 1935-1946, with the gratitude of their Chief."27 The following passage, which closes a chapter called "Kinsmen" in On
Claude T. Bissell, The Imperial Canadian: Vincent Massey in Office, Toronto: University of Toronto, 1986. Despite his title, Bissell does say in his Preface, "It is an error to think of Massey as an old-fashioned imperialist. The 'imperial' in my title has no political implications. It is meant to suggest his British bias..." (p. xi).
25 Vincent Massey, What's Past Is Prologue, Memoirs, Toronto: The Macmillan Company of Canada Ltd., 1963.
26 Massey, What's Past Is Prologue, p. 441.
Vincent Massey, On Being Canadian, Toronto: J.M. Dent & Sons (Canada) Limited, 1948. 39
Being Canadian, is revealing if we keep in mind both Massey's emotional connection to
Great Britain and his successful efforts to bring a substantial collection of English
paintings to Canada:
Our links with Great Britain are imponderable. They belong to the realm of things of the spirit; those subtle habits of mind we have in common and which elude definition. It is commonly said that such bonds are stronger than material ties: so they are, but even they can be weakened. Only through constant contact can we keep alive a sense of our kinship.
The current subheading for this first chapter of my dissertation, ".. .the apex of
Vincent's ambitious career," comes from a statement made in the diary of Prime Minister
W.L. Mackenzie King regarding Massey's Companion of Honour, which was bestowed
on him before leaving London in 1946 by the King of England himself, with the Queen
and Princess Elizabeth in attendance.29 The relationship between Mackenzie King and
Massey was long and fraught with particular strain in matters to do with Massey's
Anglophile ambitions. In Massey's last year as High Commissioner in London,
Mackenzie King expressed the resentment he felt toward Massey for having established
the exception to the rule that British titles not be bestowed on Canadians: "That certainly
I confess.. .makes me despise Massey more than ever. It shows all of what is back of his
public service - vain glory; desire for Royal recognition; preferring another country.. .to
his own instead of remaining with the country that had honoured him with the position of
Massey, On Being Canadian, p. 112.
29 W.M. Mackenzie King quoted in The Mackenzie King Record, eds. J.W. Pickersgill and D.F. Forster, vol. 3, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970, p. 234, and Massey, What's Past Is Prologue, p. 441. 40
High Commissioner."30 It seems, however, that the Prime Minister's feelings about
Massey were not entirely based on the latter's appeal to the Royals. Years earlier,
Mackenzie King wrote in his diary on 2 December 1935, that the first speech delivered by Massey in London had an "...Imperialist ring about it.. ."31 In 1946 just when
Mackenzie King decided to allow Massey to receive the Companion of Honour - which has since been read as an example of the Prime Minister's egotism in action32 - he noted, with coolness, ".. .he [Massey] would rather get a recognition from the British
Government than from the Canadian government [sic]. He had become an Imperialist,
and would be such from now on."
Massey was aware of Mackenzie King's perception of him, stating that he had been hurt when the Prime Minister had directed the term "self-aggrandizement" at him in
one of their more difficult encounters in London.34 As the animosity that arose in
Mackenzie King regarding Massey's Companion of Honour would reveal, Massey felt that if their points of view on the place and procedures of the High Commissionership
differed, "It was in part because our approach to Anglo-Canadian relations could never be
W.M. Mackenzie King quoted in The Mackenzie King Record, p. 233.
31 W.M. Mackenzie King, The Diaries of William Lyon Mackenzie King, 2 December 1935 (page 3), Library and Archives Canada, < http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/databases/king/001059-119.02- e.php?&page_id_nbr= 16678&interval=20&&&PHPSESSID=s 13k9rg2gv2dlbekme 12q4 77h0>, accessed 23 March 2009.
32 Gordon Robertson, Memoirs of a Very Civil Servant: Mackenzie King to Pierre Trudeau, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000, p. 53.
33 W.M. Mackenzie King quoted in The Mackenzie King Record, p. 231.
Massey, What's Past Is Prologue, p. 448. 41 reconciled."35 Massey states in his memoirs, "The real obstacle to making the best use of these gatherings was not in London at all, but in Ottawa."36 Mackenzie King, according to Massey, was bent on making sure that Canada's High Commissioners in London did not "fall too much under the influence of an 'imperial' point of view," and urged the avoidance of collective meetings between Dominion Commissioners.37 Massey, on the
other hand, "was very conscious of the family feeling that prevailed in London between the dominions, as we called them, and the United Kingdom."38 Their differences
continued after Massey's days in London when, in the Fall of 1948, Massey expressed a
desire in a letter to the director of the Commonwealth Department of the British Council
for the establishment of an outpost of the British Council in Canada, but the Canadian
government, under King, resisted such ties on home turf. The British Council did, however, send numerous exhibitions of British art to Canada, starting as early as 1939.
Massey did not forget about the matter and in fact formalized his stance in the Massey
Report of 1951, which expressed regret that the British Council was not invited to operate
from within Canada with a resident representative.40 The British Council did finally open
35 Massey, What's Past Is Prologue, p. 449.
36 Massey, What's Past Is Prologue, p. 236.
37 Massey, What's Past Is Prologue, p. 236.
38 Massey, What's Past Is Prologue, p. 226.
39 The communications regarding this matter are extensively outlined and quoted in Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, pp. 295-96.
40 Report of the Royal Commission On National Development in the Arts, Letters, and Sciences, 1949-1951, Ottawa: Edmund Cloutier / King's Printer, 1951, p. 264, and noted in Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, p. 296. 42 an office in Canada in 1959. The renaissance in the relationship between Canada and
Great Britain, as argued by Finlay and others,41 is quite clear in the contrasting attitudes held by Massey and Mackenzie King on the matter of postcolonial relations between the two countries. This author cannot help but wonder if Mackenzie King's partial muzzling of Massey in direct matters of policy may have encouraged the latter's substantial activities in securing cultural ties between Canada and Great Britain.
The Cultural Advantage of a London Base
The important contacts that Massey would make while in London facilitated his efforts to amass the MCEP. To begin with, Massey and his spouse Alice arrived to London in 1935 as already seasoned collectors; they brought their personal collection of 132 works42 of
Canadian art with them and were apparently the only diplomats in London to do so.43
Bissell makes an important point about the function of Massey's double-pronged connoisseurship, stating, "The British collection [MCEP] was a compliment to his own
Canadian collection, and each was meant to be an introduction to one country of the art of the other."44 Attaching this sentiment to the purpose of the MCEP is in keeping with
Finlay's assertion that the MCEP ".. .was not a deferential and colonized tribute to a parent country; rather the collection was an effort to use art to promote closer relations
41 Another good example, which is contemporary with the time of this renewed zest for British art in Canada, and abroad, is Kathleen M. Fenwick, "Revival of British Painting," Canadian Art, IV: 3 (May 1947): pp. 118-120.
42 Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, p. 247.
Bissell, The Imperial Canadian, p. 166.
Bissell, The Imperial Canadian, p. 166. 43 within the Commonwealth and between the two countries, to evoke a common purpose and set of values, and, less directly, to affirm a benign nationalism." Massey's relations with Great Britain certainly became closer and he did extend his connections to cultural contacts back home in Canada.
While this subsection of Chapter 1 aims to outline Massey's various art connections in Great Britain in relation to the MCEP, it is important to keep in mind that he remained closely tied with the National Gallery of Canada (NGC) and the Art Gallery of Toronto (AGT, known after 1966 as the Art Gallery of Ontario, AGO). He therefore became a conduit for communications with Canada with regard to the British arts, including possible acquisitions. While I am also cognizant of the very significant exhibition A Century of Canadian Art, which opened on 14 October 1938 at the Tate
Gallery, I have directed my full attention to the impact of British modern art on Canada; the reverse - the impact of Canadian art in Great Britain deserves its own major study.
Massey's association with the AGT began no later than 1915 when he sat on the
Collections and Exhibitions Committee. More importantly, Massey was named the honourary president of the AGT in 1927 and held the title until his death in 1967.46 A letter from the 1st of April 1946 reveals that AGT funds, in the amount of $2,500, were made available to Massey for the purchase of art in London.47 The following year, in
Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, p. 280.
46 Karen Finlay, 20th Century British Art from the Collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario, Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1987, p. 4.
47 Vincent Massey to Charles S. Band (1 April 1946) quoted in Finlay, 20th Century British Art from the Collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario, p. 4. Finlay further comments on this arrangement in her doctoral dissertation, finding that Massey instead gifted a small group of British artworks via the Massey Foundation. In note 183 Finlay 44
1947, Massey would recommend Anthony Blunt to the AGT, which was seeking a
London art representative to act on the Gallery's behalf for purchases abroad. Blunt, who was an acclaimed art historian, long-time Director of the Courtauld Institute in London, keeper of the King's pictures, and - to the regret of many who knew him - one-time
Soviet spy and double agent, will be explored in depth in Chapter 3. The director of the
AGT, Martin Baldwin, had also turned to Massey for help in his dealings with Britain's
Contemporary Art Society (CAS);48 The CAS regularly gifted contemporary British works to its members, such as the AGT, which made an annual monetary contribution in anticipation of such a gift to their permanent collection.
Massey was first appointed trustee of the NGC in 1925, and later, from 1948 to
1952, he served as Chairman. In a letter to Alice Massey, H.O. McCurry, then assistant director of the NGC, expressed his excitement over the idea of the Masseys' stay in
London: "A Trustee resident in London would be of simply incalculable value to the
National Gallery in view of the fact that practically all the best things turn up there.. ,"49
The English-born Eric Brown, who became the first Director of the NGC in 1912, commented to the press in the year of his promotion to the directorship, "We must have, in addition to our own Canadian pictures, the best examples we can afford of the world's
firmly states, "There is no evidence that Massey spent gallery funds on purchases." Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, p. 297, n. 183.
48 Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, p. 297.
49 H.O. McCurry to Alice Massey (7 February 1930), Vincent Massey Papers, 160/03 quoted in Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, p. 245. It should be noted that Massey might have become High Commissioner in London sooner, in 1930, if it were not for Mackenzie King's political defeat. With King's re-election, Massey's appointment to London was re-activated. 45 artistic achievements by which we may judge the merit and progress of our own efforts."50 Brown, of course, was enthusiastic about Massey's sojourn in London and made sure to recommend the work of Philip Wilson Steer to the Masseys, which resulted in the addition of Steer's The Valley of the Severn (ca. 1901-02) to the MCEP.51 Another early directive from Brown to Massey involved seeking out the London-based art expert
Paul Oppe to act as an advisor for the NGC in replacement of the Englishman and artist
Charles Ricketts, who had served as an adviser to the NGC from 1924 to 1931.52 This
Canadian habit of employing London art advisors will be handled more extensively in
Chapter 3. In the summer of 1937, Brown advised Massey to meet with W.G. Constable, then director of the Courtauld Institute of Art, noting that Constable would take him on a
"dealer crawl" in London.53 Whether or not this "dealer crawl" took place, the Masseys became familiar with a number of British dealers and private galleries in the process of forming the MCEP. Some of the dealers and galleries that the Masseys purchased from included: Alex Reid & Lefevre Ltd.; J. Leger and Son; Redfern Gallery; Ernest Brown &
Phillips Ltd., also known as Leicester Galleries; Messrs Roland, Browse & Delbanco;
Barbizon House; Fine Art Society Ltd.; and Arthur Tooth & Son, from which the vast majority of works in the MCEP were purchased. There is also evidence that Massey had
50 Eric Brown, The Toronto Globe (4 May 1912) quoted in "1912", Gallery History, Interactive Timeline, National Gallery of Canada, < http://www.gallery.ca/english/2143.htm>, accessed 25 March 2009.
51 Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, p. 271, referring to Eric Brown to Alice and Vincent Massey (24 September 1938), Vincent Massey Papers, 250.
52 Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, p. 246.
53 Eric Brown to Vincent Massey (5 July 1937), Vincent Massey Papers, 170/07, quoted in Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, p. 246. 46 indicated to at least one dealer which artists he desired to be a part of his collection of contemporary British paintings;54 Massey was, therefore, certainly not collecting on a whim. Whether or not the MCEP is considered vital today, it was, at the time, thoughtfully put together with top-level advisement.
One of the Masseys' strongest and most fruitful connections to the London art scene was found in Kenneth Clark. In 1933, at the remarkable age of 30, Clark became the Director of the National Gallery, London. He was an art historian and well respected in circles of culture and high society. He would later be instrumental in the 1951 Festival of Britain. The Masseys first met with Clark in 1938, and, reflecting on the meeting in a letter to her son Lionel, Alice Massey noted, "... although I like him very much, he is rather arrogant and intolerant."55 Nonetheless, the Masseys' relationship with Clark proved valuable. Clark was available to them to advise on purchases for the MCEP and he also introduced the Masseys to artists such as Victor Pasmore and William
Coldstream, which resulted in direct purchases from the artists.56 Clark and his spouse,
Jane, also introduced the Masseys to the work of the "more modern Graham
Sutherland."57 In Massey's own words, to work with 'K', as he and other friends called
Oliver F. Brown (Leicester Galleries) to Vincent Massey (20 April 1945), curatorial file for John Piper's House of Commons, National Gallery of Canada. Brown to Massey: "Thank you for sending me the list of names of those artists unrepresented in the collection you are making, ..." Brown then mentions available works by Duncan Grant, James Pryde, Wyndham Lewis, Eric Ravillious, John Piper and Eric Kennington.
55 Alice Massey to Lionel Massey (18 November 1938), Massey Family Paper, V. 64 quoted in Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, p. 276, n. 119. Bissell, The Imperial Canadian, p. 28.
57 Jane Clark to Alice Massey (n.d., ca. November 1938?) Vincent Massey Papers, 193/27, quoted in Karen Finlay, The Force of Culture: Vincent Massey and Canadian Sovereignty, PhD dissertation, University of Victoria, 1999, p. 276. 47 him, ".. .was a happy experience and a perpetual stimulus; he is unrivalled in his field."58
Clark was also a founding member of the Council for the Encouragement of Music and the Arts, which was established during WWII and later became the Arts Council of Great
Britain in 1946. As Finlay states so succinctly in The Force of Culture (2004), "Massey studied closely British initiatives in the arts during the war. His friendship with Kenneth
Clark helped."59
The formation of the MCEP - that is, the events and people surrounding this collection during its amassment from 1935 to 1946 - created a legacy that is perhaps more significant than the collection itself as the first major gift of paintings to the NGC.
The contacts that Vincent Massey made in the London art circles, and the activities that he witnessed and the committees that he often chaired, inspired in him a desire for change in the visual art systems of Canada. Most notably, Massey wanted to see a state- supported system for the arts in Canada and his model for this was the British Council.
Known at its founding in 1934 as the British Committee for Relations with Other
Countries, it later became known as the British Council in 1936. In On Being Canadian, published in 1948 - before the Massey Commission - Massey devotes a section of his chapter on "The Projection of Canada" to the British Council; Massey states with conviction:
It is important that there should be machinery with the freedom that departmental mechanism cannot enjoy, to deal with those long-term aspects of the life of a country, particularly its cultural activities, which lie outside the sphere of official
Massey, What's Past Is Prologue, p. 375.
Finlay, The Force of Culture, 2004, p. 175. 48
administration. There is a very good example of this to be found in that body in Great Britain known as the British Council. We should know about its work, for we need something like it in Canada. The British Council is a public organization, but it is not under departmental control. The appointment of its chairman and secretary-general must receive the approval of the Government, and its funds are voted by Parliament, but it has a very large measure of independence. This characteristic British compromise works well.60
As Finlay's exhaustive research has found, "Invariably Vincent Massey's name crops up in the dealings between the [British] Council and Canada."61 When the British Council made its first ever contact with North America, selections from the Massey collection of
English painting were there, too. The year was 1939 and the British Council organized an exhibition of British art to be shown at the New York World's Fair. For the occasion,
Massey lent Augustus John's A Summer Noon (n.d.) and Walter Sickert's The Old
Bedford (ca. 1890); both now in the MCEP. With the outbreak of the war, sending the exhibition up to Canada - with Massey's enthusiastic support - was far more appealing than risking a total loss with a wartime Atlantic crossing.62 The British Council's World's
Fair exhibition opened at the NGC in November 1939. John Rothenstein came with it and delivered a lecture called "British Art Since 1900," which was broadcast nationally by the
CBC.63 The exhibition in Canada must have whet Massey's appetite for the British
Council's presence in Canada, and, ultimately, for a similar system for Canadian arts.
60 Massey, On Being Canadian, p. 166.
61 Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, p. 292.
62 Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, pp. 291-292.
63 Finlay, The Force of Culture, PhD dissertation, 1999, p. 292, n. 169. 49
Vincent Massey was undoubtedly an Anglophile. He loved modern British art and the systems that supported it. But Massey also cherished Canada. The Massey Collection of English Painting does not, therefore, represent a man obsessed with one nation's art, but rather a concerted effort to introduce one culture to another and to maintain established bonds. Again, in the words of Massey on the relationship between Canada and Great Britain, "Only through constant contact can we keep alive our sense of kinship."64 The Massey Collection of English Painting at the National Gallery of Canada represents Massey's hopes in action.
Massey, On Being Canadian, p. 112. Chapter 2
The British Foundations of Two Founding Collections:
The Vancouver Art Gallery (est. 1931) and the Beaverbrook Art Gallery (est. 1959)
The establishment of the Vancouver Art Gallery (VAG) in 1931, led largely by Henry
Stone, and Lord Beaverbrook's founding of the Beaverbrook Art Gallery (BAG), in
Fredericton in 1959, are two important cases of public Canadian art galleries fledged on the perceived authority of British art and the hopes of what it could do for the local citizens. The aims of both Stone and Beaverbrook were very similar to Vincent Massey's aspirations for the Massey Collection of English Painting at the National Gallery of
Canada - to edify, and effectively modernize, the Canadian public through collections of
British art. This chapter will explore the formation of these two largely British founding collections, including the significant role that British art advisors played in the process, and the two very different legacies of these collections in the years following their establishment. With the VAG, the relatively tepid nature of its founding collection will be shown to have inspired and hindered the work of the Gallery's curator, Jerrold Morris, from 1948 to 1956. The legacy left by the BAG's founding collection has been, since
2004, focused on the lawsuits between the heirs of Lord Beaverbrook, representing the
Beaverbrook Foundation based in England, and the BAG.1 Between 1 July 2005 and 5
March 2006, the BAG held an exhibition of the artworks at issue in the lawsuit - being
1 Deborah Cushing, "Art in Dispute at the Beaverbrook Art Gallery," International Journal of Cultural Property, 15 (2008): 297-320.
SO 51 mostly those from the opening collection - and called the popular show "Art In
Dispute."2 Soon the Canadian Beaverbrook Foundation will be Plaintiffs in another lawsuit against the same gallery. The overriding issue in both cases is the ownership of the artworks at the BAG, and although a Canadian Judge ruled in late March of 2007, after three years in the courts, that 85 paintings held by the BAG were in fact gifted to the
Gallery by Lord Beaverbrook, appeals are currently in arbitration and the Canadian side of the Beaverbrook Foundation has yet to plead its case for ownership. At this point, it is premature to discuss the case.
With these founding collections at the VAG and the BAG, it was British art - historical, modern, and contemporary - that was considered to be the best gift to their local Canadian communities; a largely British permanent collection was considered to be the firmest footing for an art gallery in Canada.
The Founding Stone: The Vancouver Art Gallery
In 1931 Henry A. Stone (1861-1942), along with ten other founding members and families,3 led the way to the establishing Vancouver's first major public art gallery. Stone
2 A long format poster depicting all of the artworks in dispute at the BAG was issued in conjunction with the exhibition, thereby showing the people of New Brunswick what they stood to lose if the Foundation won the fight against the BAG. However, the UK Foundation seemed mostly interested in selling two works to replenish their diminishing funds; those works were Lucien Freud's Hotel Bedroom (1954) and J.M.W. Turner's The Fountain of Indolence (1834). The poster showed the 133 artworks in dispute with the UK Beaverbrook Foundation and the 78 artworks in dispute with the Canadian Beaverbrook Foundation; the total being 211 artworks in dispute. 3 Along with Henry Stone, the founders of the Vancouver Art Gallery included Messrs. Wm. Southam and Sons, Mrs. J.M. Lefevre, Mrs. Wm. Farrell and family, Mr. And Mrs. Jonathan Rogers, W.H. Malkin, F.L. Beecher, Mrs. B.T. Rogers, Chris. Spencer [sic], The B.C. Electric Railway Co., and the Gault Brothers Co., Ltd. This list of names is 52 was born in London, England, and had apparently identified himself as a "true
Cockney."4 Stone came to Canada in 1882 and eventually found himself in Vancouver in
1902. Stone had certainly not left behind his British connections entirely; he was a member of the Native Sons of British Columbia (Post no. 2), which acted to promote
British Columbia, Canada and the British Empire through good deeds and by generally raising public awareness of their activities in the community. Other founders of the VAG were British-born, including W.H. Malkin, who was the Mayor of Vancouver from 1928-
1930, and Mr. And Mrs. Rogers, who emigrated from Wales. Many of the founders were practicing Anglicans. Another important contingent of the founders of the VAG included
William Southam and his sons, one of whom was Harry - Vincent Massey's fellow trustee at the National Gallery of Canada (1929-1953) and an avid collector of art.
On 5 October 1931, the Gallery opened with the announcement: "The Vancouver
Art Gallery and the Art Collection therein have been presented to the citizens of the City of Vancouver by the Founders."5 Stone, who also acted as the Gallery's President, planted to the seeds of the VAG as early as 1921, when the Stone family decided that they wanted to do something special, and lasting, in memory of their only son Horace Gordon, who had died in 1918 in WWI.6 Understanding the need for an art gallery in Vancouver,
found in the first pages of the Souvenir Catalogue, Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 1931.
4 "Henry A. Stone, Art Gallery's Founder, 'Good Citizen,' Dies," Vancouver Province (28 June 1942).
Souvenir Catalogue, Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 1931, n.p.
6 Henry A. Stone, "Notes On the Founding of the Vancouver Art Gallery," The Art Gallery Bulletin [Vancouver Art Gallery], 9: 2 (October 1941). 53 by 1925 Stone had contributed $50,000 and, at $5,000 each, the other ten founding members agreed to contribute another $50,000 to aid the gallery project. The idea of building a gallery was pitched to the City Council in hopes that a municipal contribution to help fund the construction of a suitable building would be forthcoming.7 Although the
City Council denied their request for funds at this early stage, the Vancouver press took notice. In an unpublished essay held in the collection of the VAG Library, Patrik
Andersson, who is a professor of critical and cultural studies at Emily Carr University of
Art & Design, points to an article that was written during the controversy over the proposal to fund an art gallery, which states, in part, "It is in our reaction to art that we declare ourselves either progressive and civilized or reactionary and callous to the call of beauty."8 In response to this, and regarding the burgeoning cultural milieu in Vancouver at the time, Andersson aptly suggests, ".. .the cultivation of aesthetic taste was closely associated with the politics of civility."9 Eventually, the City of Vancouver would donate the site on which the Gallery was built and the next order of business was the building of a "nucleus collection of works of art" as the ultimate gift to the citizens of Vancouver.10
When it came time to purchase the central founding collection for the VAG, another British-bora Vancouver citizen would be essential to the process - Charles H.
7 Letter to "His Worship the Mayor and the City Council" (2 December 1925), Vancouver Art Gallery Archives, discussed and cited in Patrik Andersson, "Objects of Contention: The VAG and its Founders' Collection," unpublished (n.d.), p. 2, in the collection of the Vancouver Art Gallery Library.
8 "Vancouver's Projected Art Gallery," Vancouver Sunday Province (3 January 1926) quoted in Andersson, "Objects of Contention," p. 1.
9 Andersson, "Objects of Contention," p. 1.
10 "Foreword," Souvenir Catalogue, Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 1931, p. 5. 54
Scott, who would accompany Stone on a buying trip to Europe. Before coming to Canada in 1912 (settling in Vancouver in 1914), Scott trained as an artist at the Glasgow School of Arts, graduating in 1909. In Canada, Scott made his mark in B.C., first as a founding member of the B.C. Arts League in 1919 and, most significantly, as the principal director of the Vancouver School of Decorative and Applied Art from 1926 to 1952.11 As the director, it was Scott who made the decision to hire artists F.H. Varley and Jock
Macdonald, both British-born and trained, but wholly Canadian in their later reputations as painters. Importantly, Scott was also a practicing artist, but although his art expertise surely surpassed that of Stone's, who made his fortune in the dry goods business, it is clear that the ultimate authority to purchase artworks for the VAG did not rest in Scott's hands.
Stone and Scott embarked on their buying trip in April of 1931 and did not return to Vancouver until July that year. Before leaving Canada, the pair stopped in Toronto,
Ottawa and Montreal. Scott kept a diary while on their art-seeking adventure. Upon visiting the National Gallery in Ottawa, Scott and Stone were received by H.O. McCurry, who was at the time acting on behalf of the director, Eric Brown, since he was away in
England with Vincent Massey.13 When it came time to go to Europe, Scott left a couple
11 "Charles Hepburn Scott; Artist's Biography," 75 Years of Collecting: Vancouver Art Gallery [electronic resource], Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 2006, < http://projects.vanartgallery.bc.ca/publications/75years/>, accessed 1 April 2009.
12 Lorna Farrell-Ward, "Tradition/Transition: The Keys to Change," Vancouver: Art and Artists, 1931-1983, Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 1983, p. 15.
13 Charles H. Scott, diary (21 April 1931), Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery Archive. 55 of weeks earlier than Stone and proceeded to get in touch with Sir Charles Holmes.
Holmes was an artist, as well as a former professor of art at Oxford University (1904-
1910). Most prominently, he was the director of the National Gallery in London (1916-
1921), and was an authority on the Old Masters. This initial contact with Holmes helped to set the course of their collecting trip and ultimately the direction of the founding collection. Stone reported some years later:
We [Stone and Scott] visited the London Art Galleries [sic], sales and auction rooms, and then made the vital decision to endeavour as our funds permitted to purchase a collection of the work of British artists from the earliest days of British Art according to the policy Sir Charles Holmes had recommended.15
Although Holmes would advise and assist in the acquisitions for the VAG in a more official capacity from the spring of 1933 to the fall of 1934, Stone and Scott were left to their own devices on this initial buying period with the simple recommendation from
Holmes to concentrate on British artworks.
Scott's diary is most interesting in its revelation of Stone's rather pedestrian taste in art. Scott's entries during this trip go from referring to his leader as "Mr. Stone" in
April to "the old man" by June.16 While in London, Scott indicates a sense of powerlessness in the shaping of the collection, "How I would love our gallery in
Vancouver to have something of the quality of those galleries in the Tate - a worthy ideal
Stone, "Notes On the Founding of the Vancouver Art Gallery."
15 Stone, "Notes on the Founding of the Vancouver Art Gallery."
16 Scott, diary (21 April 1931 and 5 June 1931). 56
- & it could be done if only painters chose - Here's hoping!!"17 As previously mentioned,
Scott was a trained painter and clearly had a better idea of what was, and was not, a successful work of art. More frankly, Scott writes on 26 May 1931, after visiting the annual show of the Royal Institute of Watercolours in Piccadilly, London, "Scarcely an inspired watercolour of any nobility among the lot. Mostly sweet sentimentality. Had great difficulty in dragging my colleague [Stone] away from much of it. He will choose the world's worst at times."18
Stone, according to Scott, redeems himself in the area of bad taste when he - much to Scott's surprise - enthusiastically agrees to purchase a bronze head by Jacob
Epstein {La Bohemienne, 1922). Scott recalls, "A very fine head in bronze by Epstein. To my surprise the old man fell for the Epstein.. ,"19 At least one citizen of Vancouver, however, was not so thrilled about the Epstein in the collection. John Ridington, librarian at the University of British Columbia, made a point of writing to Stone just three weeks after the Gallery's opening to express his distaste for the work of Epstein:
Dear Mr. Stone, I happened to run across today, in "The Nation", some verses about Epstein, whose every statue seems to give rise to a fresh row. I thought you might be interested, so I had them typed up for your edification; and after the quotation was made, I thought of a limerick that I added, together with some observations that occurred to me as I dictated. The whole is enclosed for your information and delectation. [...] There's a notable family named Stein,
17 Scott, diary (10 May 1931).
18 Scott, diary (26 May 1931).
19 Scott, diary (5 June 1931). 57
There's Rosa, there's Ep., and there's Ein. Rosa's novels are punk, Eppie's statues are junk, I can't make head or tail out of Ein. [...]20
Epstein's La Bohemienne is now, of course, considered a highlight of the VAG's permanent collection.
All in all, Stone and Scott's European buying trip took them to London,
Manchester, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Liverpool, Southport, Blackburn, Bradford, Leeds,
Nottingham, Amsterdam, Berlin and Paris. The aim of their efforts was to ".. .faithfully portray as far as was possible the history and development of British art." The VAG's inaugural Souvenir Catalogue even attempted to describe exactly how the bases in British art were covered in the founders' collection; paraphrased here: Early figure painting was satisfied with the purchase of a work by Wm. Etty and a small picture by an artist reminiscent of Joshua Reynolds; British genre painting was covered with David Wilkie,
William Powell Frith, Erskine Nicol and Thomas Faed; sea subjects by John Callow,
Napier Hemy, and Frank Brangwyn; landscape was taken care of with works by David
Cox, Wm. Mark Fisher, David Y. Cameron, H. Hughes-Stanton, James Bateman, "and others"; pictures of animals by George Morland and A.J. Munnings were purchased; the many categories of late figure work, flower paintings and still-life were represented by
George Clausen, Charles Sims, Laura Knight, Harold Knight, Duncan Grant, Wm.
20 John Ridington to Henry Stone (26 October 1931), Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery Archives.
21 "The Founder's Collection," Souvenir Catalogue, Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 1931, p. 6. 58
Strang, and "many others"; sculpture was sparsely covered with only singular works by
Jacob Epstein and E.W. Colton; the medium of drawing in the British arts was modestly shown with the purchase of artworks by Augustus John, Wm. Orpen, Muirhead Bone,
Jacob Kramer and "one or two others"; and finally the art of etching was represented by
W.L. Griggs, Henry Rushbury, Job Nixon "and others".22 In addition to the British artists just mentioned, pictures by artists that were not British were purchased with discretion when it was felt that the opportunity was too good to pass up. In total, the founders' collection, as it stood at the time of the VAG's opening, included: 58 oil and pastel paintings, 24 watercolours, 2 sculptures, 9 drawings, 23 etchings, and 178 reproductions intended for the study of art history in general.23
The policy of the VAG, at the time of its opening in 1931, was described in part in an essay called "The Founders' Collection," which was published in the Gallery's
Souvenir Catalogue: "After due consideration of all the factors involved it was decided that a collection be formed which would aim at a history of British and Canadian painting." This statement was shortly followed by an admission: "The first part of this policy, viz., the collection of British works, has, with one or two notable exceptions, been adhered to; the second part - the collection of Canadian works - remains to be made..."
This founding collection contained approximately 120 artworks, of which only 7 were by
Canadian artists.25 It appears, after the opening, that there was no rush to equally satisfy
"The Founder's Collection," Souvenir Catalogue, p. 7.
"The Founder's Collection," Souvenir Catalogue, p. 7.
"The Founder's Collection," Souvenir Catalogue, p. 6.
"Chronology," Vancouver: Art and Artists, 1931-1983, p.56. 59 the Canadian component of their policy, but instead, the art advice of Sir Charles Homes began to be sought by the VAG, beginning in the spring of 1933, which resulted in even more purchases of British art. In fact, the VAG would continue to prioritize British art until the early 1960s, save for the accession of the Emily Carr Trust in 1942.26
Holmes' own predilection for British and Old Masters art made an impact on the early formation of the VAG's permanent collection. In a letter from Holmes to Stone, dated 14 June 1933, there is some indication of the logic of Holmes' advice: "Your
Trustees will realize that all these early masters will look rather quiet & sober by the side of modern pictures. .. .1 prefer, subject to your discretion, to stick to old masters for the time being."27 There is evidence, however, that Stone gave Holmes a list of artists that they desired to add the collection at the VAG; Holmes writes to Stone, "Stanley Spencer for example is on your list, but I can find no painting by him which would not seem odd
& extravagant to your Committee."28 Holmes did eventually find a perfectly tame (as compared to most works by Spencer), though still remarkable, painting by Spencer;
"Then I saw an Alpine landscape by Stanley Spencer. So intense & masterly that I could not resist it."29 Spencer's Alpine Landscape (1933) continues to be a prized work in the collection of the VAG. Today, the VAG boasts no fewer than 59 works by Spencer.
"Chronology," Vancouver: Art and Artists, 1931-1983, p.56.
27 Charles Holmes to Henry Stone (14 June 1933), Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery Archives.
28 Charles Holmes to Henry Stone (7 July 1933), Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery Archives.
29 Charles Holmes to Henry Stone (4 April 1934), Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery Archives. 60
The enthusiasm with which Holmes wrote to Stone about the painting by Spencer is just one indication among many that Holmes enjoyed his duties as an art agent for the
VAG. During his first season advising the VAG, Holmes secured the purchases of 16 pictures for the Gallery.30 Upon sending the 16 works to Vancouver, Holmes remarked in a letter to Stone, "I do hope you & the Trustees won't be disappointed with my mixed bag. I'm rather pleased with it myself!"31 Just some of the artists represented in this
"mixed bag" of acquisitions out of London included: Allan Ramsay, John Downman,
Thomas Gainsborough, John Constable, William Hoare, George Lambert and Edward
Burne-Jones - all British artists.32
Stone announced the delivery of these artworks secured by Holmes in a formal policy statement addressed "TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
VANCOUVER ART GALLERY ASSOCIATION."33 This seven-page document, besides announcing the recent acquisitions, noted that C.H. Robson, then Vice-President of the Art Gallery of Toronto, Wyly Grier, painter and former President of the Royal
Canadian Academy, and C.E. Stone of Toronto had been selected to form a committee to
".. .select and forward for our approval as opportunity offers, examples of the work of those Canadian Artists [sic] who have attained distinction and importance emphasizing
Charles Holmes to Henry Stone (28 July 1933), Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery Archives.
31 Ibid.
32 Henry Stone, "To Members of the Council of the Vancouver Art Gallery Association" (14 July 1933), Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery Archives, p. 2.
33 Stone, "To Members of the Council of the Vancouver Art Gallery Association." 61 that only pictures which are good examples of the artist's work to be submitted."34
Warnings as to the risks of collecting contemporary artworks by emerging artists are rife throughout this statement to the Council of the VAG. Stone emphasizes the worth of turning to the Royal Canadian Academy and the Ontario Society of Artists as resources for purchasing Canadian art, which would ".. .build up our collection on firm and solid ground."35 Stone sent a copy of this long statement to Holmes, who responded by stating,
"I concur with every word of your exposition.. ,."36 The document is, essentially, a declaration of conservative taste and a good indication of Stone's lack of confidence in
Canadian art. For Stone, and therefore the early VAG, it was far better to go British to be modern.
Recession and Revival at the VAG
In the 1933 statement to the Vancouver Art Gallery's Council members regarding acquisition policies, Henry Stone laments, "Purchasing pictures for most public art
Galleries [sic] is in the hands of an experienced independent Director, and his assistants, under the direction of the President, but unfortunately we cannot afford a Director..." 7
By "Director" Stone also means curator, as is evident by his description of the duties.
Stone, "To Members of the Council of the Vancouver Art Gallery Association," pp. 2- 3.
35 Stone, "To Members of the Council of the Vancouver Art Gallery Association," p. 6.
36 Charles Holmes to Henry Stone (29 July 1933), Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery Archives.
37 Stone, "To Members of the Council of the Vancouver Art Gallery Association," pp. 3- 4. 62
When it came to hanging exhibitions other than the already established permanent
collection, or pre-arranged loaned exhibitions from outside institutions - such as the
Massey Collection of English Painting from the National Gallery - the VAG was, for
nearly two decades, open to do-it-yourself exhibitions held by artists and artists' groups
that would pay a nominal fee for the use of gallery space. As Scott Watson found in his
assessment of the VAG before mid century:
Before 1951 the gallery had an open policy towards local artists. They paid a fee and rented gallery space. The fee ranged between two and five dollars. Artists of every persuasion availed themselves of this scheme, as well as organizations ranging from the Canadian Federation of Artists to local sketch clubs.38
The depression years proved to be difficult and even hostile times for the VAG. These
years were especially long for the city of Vancouver. In 1938, Ottawa had announced that
the lean years were over but Vancouver was feeling the economic pinch more than ever
at that point, especially in terms of unemployment.39 That year, over one thousand angry
unemployed protesters occupied the Hotel Georgia, the Central Post Office and the VAG,
where the sit-in lasted for one month.40 It goes without saying that the war years imposed
frugal methods of operation at most public institutions. Yet, what became of the VAG just after the War is worthy of discussion, especially since it marks a period of
revitalization in terms of building the British collection.
38 Scott Watson, "Art in the Fifties: Design, Leisure, and Painting in the Age of Anxiety," Vancouver: Art and Artists, 1931-1983, Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 1983, p. 82.
39 Farrell-Ward, "Tradition/Transition: The Keys to Change," p. 22.
40 Ibid. 63
The 1951-1952 "Christmas - New Year" issue of Canadian Art magazine reported on the fondness for English art in the recent collecting habits of both the Art
Gallery of Toronto and the VAG. The article is worth quoting at length:
The Art Gallery of Toronto and the Vancouver Art Gallery have recently been trying to outdo each other in improving their collections of contemporary English painting. They are to be congratulated on what they have achieved, although they naturally do not yet have the resources to enable them to match that group of 75 modern English paintings which the Massey Foundation presented to the National Gallery of Canada in 1946. To this gift, the Foundation has since added 11 other works, mainly by younger artists. But painting in the United Kingdom is today so diverse and lively in character that even the Massey Collection, comprehensive as it is, does not give one a complete picture of this activity. Thus, paintings by Ben Nicholson and Robert Colquhoun are missing; also that great genius of the contemporary generation, Graham Sutherland, is represented by only relatively minor works.
These particular gaps have now been filled, not by Ottawa, but by Toronto and Vancouver. Toronto bought Nicholson last year and Vancouver this year obtained a Colquhoun as well as a Nicholson. Also, in addition to the other English works, both these great galleries have been acquiring Sutherlands. On the other hand, the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts remains curiously weak in its modern British section.41
This influx of new British paintings to the VAG was preceded by the hardy years of
Anglo-affection in Canada during the 1940s. This surge of British nationalism was consolidated with the Festival of Britain of 1951 in Great Britain. In time with the
41 "New Acquisitions by Canadian Galleries," Canadian Art, IX: 2 (1951-52): p. 75. Excerpts quoted in Karen Finlay, "Identifying with Nature: Graham Sutherland and Canadian Art, 1939-1955," (pp.43-59) RACAR, XXI: 1-2 (1994). 64 centenary of the Great Exhibition of 1851, the Festival of Britain was a celebration through exhibition of all things British, which did not go unnoticed in Canada. In the same holiday issue of Canadian Art, which was just quoted, an article titled "The Arts
Council and the Festival of Britain" was published.42 The reporter was Alison Palmer, a former national secretary of the Federation of Canadian Artists, who was commissioned by Canadian Art to write a review of the related events, which she did in a manner that was, in her own words, "not only as news of a great achievement but also for consideration as part of a pattern for the development of the arts in Canada."43 Her sentiment echoes the Massey Report of 1951, and she, in fact, closes her article with the statement: "Perhaps, as the recommendations of the Massey Commission begin to be put into effect, Canada may soon develop enough activities of this nature to be able to present, if not an 'Arts Festival', then at least an annual 'Month of the Arts'."44 The ever- modern air of the Festival of Britain appealed to Canada as a model to emulate in an effort to modernize. The Stratford Shakespeare Festival, which was formerly known as the Stratford Festival of Canada, was founded in 1953. This annual arts festival, whose name was strikingly close to the Festival of Britain, is situated in a town that now revolves around its devotion to the theatre and Shakespeare in particular. Returning to the strictly visual arts, the VAG was certainly on board to modernize by way of emphasis on the British model. On 26 September 1951, the VAG reopened with its new expansion of
Alison Palmer, "The Arts Council and the Festival of Britain," Canadian Art, IX: 2 (1951-52): pp. 81-82.
43 Ibid, p. 81.
Ibid, p. 82. 65 the Gallery. That spring, the new Gallery opened an exhibition called Twenty-One
Modern British Painters, which was organized by the British Council in conjunction with the VAG. Works in the show were offered for sale and the exhibition subsequently toured to six American cities on the west coast.46 The force behind this remarkable exhibition of the best in contemporary British painting was the VAG's new curator,
Jerrold Morris.
Jerrold Morris
Jerrold Morris (1911-1984) was the curator for the Vancouver Art Gallery from the spring of 1948 until the winter of 1956. Morris, who was born in the London suburb of
St. John's Wood, was an artist, but life circumstances, and greater talents in other areas, would prevent a professional career as an artist. His formal education as an artist did not go beyond evening classes at the Chelsea School of Art. He would, however, carry a lifelong passion for art appreciation. His years growing up and working in London conditioned a part of his taste for fine art, which was certainly rooted in the English arts.
Morris recalls in his memoir Adrift On Course, "I was a faithful attendant at the Tate
Gallery, which was about five miles from our home. My first real interest was aroused by the Pre-Raphaelites, my favourite picture being Millais' Ophelia... Later I came to appreciate the more formal qualities of painting, evidenced in the pictures of English
The exhibition ran from April 3 to April 22 , 1951, and a catalogue was published. Jerrold Morris, ed. Twenty-One Modern British Painters, Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery with the British Council, 1951.
Jerrold Morris, "Preface," Twenty-One Modern British Painters. 66 artists influenced by various modern European movements." Once in North America,
Morris would come to understand modern art without the English filters. His informal education in the arts was still invaluable - the constant exposure to an art scene in a major city made Morris an authority in post-war Vancouver:
London offered many resources to the student of art, not only in the permanent collections of its institutions, but in the temporary exhibitions organized by both public and private galleries. I became a regular visitor to the dealers around Bond Street. What excited my admiration was style, the incomparable personal ingredient.48
Morris' leadership skills were well developed before his entrance to the museum world.
Morris was a hero of the Second World War and, due to unusual circumstances, fought with the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF). He had just left a job as a mine surveyor in Dutch Guiana for reasons to do with the outbreak of war when he heard of the fall of France, which compelled him to get back home to Europe to fight. From Dutch
Guiana, he managed to get as far as Trinidad. From there, the best way out was to take on the role of gunner on the deck of a Shell Oil tanker called the Avicus.49 It was the Avicus that would take Morris into the Halifax Basin in the year 1940. While onshore one afternoon, Morris entered an Air Force Recruiting Centre and, after some conversation, was asked the question, "Don't you want to fly?"
47 Jerrold Morris, Adrift On Course; An Autobiographical Essay with Illustrations by the Author, Toronto: Hawthorn Art Press, 1979, p. 36.
48 Ibid, p. 47.
49 Ibid, p. 140.
Ibid, p. 145. 67
By the end of WWII, Morris held the title of Squadron Leader, leading many of the riskiest bombing missions of the War. Starting in 1942, Morris flew a remarkable total of 56 combat missions. Between completing two combat tours, Morris also trained pilots. For his considerable service, Morris was twice awarded the Distinguished Flying
Cross; the first bearing the citation: "This officer's tenacity, courage and determination in the face of the enemy have been of the highest order," and for the second: "He has completed many further attacks with a determination and devotion to duty which have set a magnificent example to all."51 Morris' best effort to relate his life as a bomber pilot was illustrated with a selection of works by Canadian War Artists in his wartime memoir,
Canadian Artists and Airmen, 1940-45 ?2 Although Morris certainly did not flaunt his Air
Force accolades, it would have undoubtedly earned him respect in post-war Vancouver.
The Vancouver Sun announced Morris' arrival at the VAG in 1948, along with his wife
Vivian and young son John, and noted his ".. .sensational flying career.. ,"53 Morris' vigor, and obvious talent as a leader, would serve him well as a curator.
Most of Morris' days at the VAG were spent pushing heaps of administrative papers and trying his best to secure practically non-existent financial support. The conditions were stifling and in the 1952 President's Report, the VAG announced that its 1952-53
51 John Morris to Sarah Stanners [email correspondence] (3 April 2009).
52 Jerrold Morris, Canadian Artists and Airmen, 1940-45, Toronto: The Morris Gallery, 1974.
53 "J.A. Morris New Curator," Vancouver Sun (3 March 1948). 68 fiscal year would have to be operated in deficit. As the case is even today with gallery expansions, the new space at the VAG added pressures but it also provided opportunities for new efforts. Scott Watson reflects on the shift in the policies under Morris and the reopened Gallery:
With the new building, under curator Jerrold Morris, the policy changed. The various groups of Sunday painters, such as the West Vancouver Sketch Club, no longer had access to gallery space. An effort was made to show only the best of regional art, and the 'best' art was art which was progressive and modern. Morris also hired Doris Shadbolt from the National Gallery, where she had worked under Walter Abell, to start an education program.55
The Vancouver News Heraldreported in June of 1954 that delegates of the local Western
Art Circle, including R.D. Buchanan and M.D. Burgess "...told Park Commissioners that they were unable to get space in the Art Gallery to exhibit paintings because they were not 'abstract' painters."56 Buchanan added, '"we don't want to destroy the modernistic artist, we just want him to move over and let us have some room at the Art Gallery.'"
Morris believed in quality control, but he was certainly no art snob. In 1955 the
Vancouver Sun staff reporter Mac Reynolds observed that Morris was ".. .a dapper man
54 "President's Report," President's Annual Report, Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 1952.
55 Watson, "Art in the Fifties: Design, Leisure, and Painting in the Age of Anxiety," p. 82.
56 "'Natural' Artists Hit Gallery Ban," The Vancouver News Herald (8 June 1954). 69 of considerable charm, relatively unscarred by the loftiness of his work, who rides to and from the gallery on the British Columbia Electric."58
Morris' quality control extended to the permanent collection, too. There is evidence that the 1950-51 Purchase and Acceptance Committee at the VAG recommended 28 paintings in the permanent collection for disposal,59 and that they intended to purchase new artworks with the funds generated from the retired paintings.60
The idea was that more British paintings would be purchased with the new funds, and
Morris went further by seeking permission to sell the works from the permanent collection in England in order to secure pounds sterling, which would go further to purchase the new works.61
It was also in 1951 that the previously mentioned Twenty-One Modern British
Painters was arranged between the VAG and the British Council. As early as 15 January
1949, there is evidence that Morris had contacted the British Council for available literature on British culture since the War.62 This inquiry is likely related to the formation
CO Mac Reynolds, "Gets Big Displays at Low Cost: City Art Gallery Curator Most Expert 'Scrounger'," Vancouver Sun (16 March 1955). 59 "DISPOSAL OF PAINTINGS FROM THE PERMANENT COLLECTION," Box #114, Director, J.A. Morris, 1948-56, file "Purchase & acceptance, corr. re. sale of work from perm. coll. 1950-51." Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery Archives.
60 Jerrold Morris to Foreign Exchange Control Board (Vancouver) (6 July 1951), Box #114, Director, J.A. Morris, 1948-56, file "Purchase & acceptance, corr. re. sale of work from perm. coll. 1950-51." Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery Archives.
61 Ibid.
62 Paul Reed (British Council information officer) to Jerrold Morris (14 February 1949), Jerrold Morris fond, box #115, Director's correspondence, Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery Archives. 70 of the British Picture Purchase Fund, which aimed to renew the British section of the
VAG's permanent collection with new acquisitions.63 It's worth recalling that Twenty-One
Modern British Painters offered its featured works for sale and, in the catalogue to the exhibition, the art dealer that lent the work was also noted discretely under the artwork's identifying information. In some cases, as with the two fantastic panels by Spencer (The
Resurrection - Reunion [1945] and The Resurrection - Rejoicing [1946]), the artworks were lent by the artist, but still offered for sale. In the VAG's annual report of acquisitions for 1950-51, five works from the Twenty-One Modern British Painters are listed as donated by the British Picture Purchase Fund: Robert Colquhoun's Two Sisters
(1947); Ivon Hitchen's Moorland Pool (1949); Wyndham Lewis' The Armada (1937);
Ben Nicholson's Still Life - Russian Ballet (1946) and Graham Sutherland's Thorn and
Wall (1946).64 Morris states his intentions in the "Preface" to the exhibition's catalogue:
"The initial idea behind this exhibition was to give museums and private individuals on the West Coast an opportunity of seeing a first-rate selection of recent British painting. It was further thought that many museums might wish to make purchases for their permanent collections."65 In keeping with the spirit of enthusiasm for the British manner of operating in the arts, Morris closes by stating, "This is one more example of excellent work being done by the British Council and it is very encouraging to find that a government is able to provide so much assistance to the arts without in any way exerting
Finlay, "Identifying with Nature," p. 48.
Annual Report (1951), Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery.
Morris, "Preface," Twenty-One Modern British Painters. 71 pressure or influence." It's the arm's length approach to the arts that Canada would eventually emulate with the Canada Council (est. 1957). Writing the Introduction to
Twenty-One Modern British Painters, the Education Director of the VAG, Doris
Shadbolt, makes an interesting observation from the outset:
With the exception of Henry Moore and Graham Sutherland, the work of contemporary British artists is largely unknown on this continent, especially on the West Coast. It is common information that during the years of the war, with the specific encouragement of the British Government, and out of the common emotional tension in the face of possible annihilation, the arts in Britain in general witnessed a tremendous upsurgence of activity. But this information, even with the aid of books and magazines, however plenteously illustrated, has remained for the most part unverified. This is probably more true of the United States than it is of Canada.. .67 [my emphasis]
Compared to the Massey Collection of English Painting at the National Gallery, and certainly the VAG's own founding collection, the 37 artworks chosen for this exhibition were strikingly more abstract and experimental. Shadbolt's Introduction to the exhibition closes with a positive forecast and vote of confidence for British painting: "The comparative youth of many of these painters and their fine achievement displayed here, augurs well indeed for the future of British painting."68 The twenty-one strong artists in this exhibition included: Francis Bacon, Edward Burra, Robert Colquhoun, Lucien Freud,
William Gear, Barbara Hepworth, Patrick Heron, Ivon Hitchens, Frances Hodgkins, Peter
66 Ibid.
67 Doris Shadbolt, "Introduction," Twenty-One Modern British Painters, Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery with the British Council, 1951.
Ibid. 72
Lanyon, Wyndham Lewis, L.S. Lowry, Robert MacBryde, Henry Moore, Ben Nicholson,
John Piper, William Scott, Matthew Smith, Stanley Spencer, Graham Sutherland, and
Keith Vaughan.
I have chosen to focus on Morris' efforts with Twenty-One Modern British
Painters, but I do not mean to suggest that Morris solely promoted the British arts.
Morris promoted contemporary art; a point which will be proven even more substantially in Chapter 3, when I will discuss the Morris International Gallery in Toronto. One important precursor to this phase in the history of Morris in Canada is another VAG- organized exhibition - Two Hundred Years of American Painting, which ran from 8
March to 3 April 1955. The cover of the tidy catalogue boasts a proud eagle delineated in red and set within a circle of white on a sharp blue background.69 The summer before the newly expanded VAG opened, the Gallery played host to the Western Association of Art
Museum Directors and they convened in Vancouver for the first time with Morris acting as Chair. Morris' early foray into the North American museum world proved to be most fruitful for it helped to secure significant future lends to the VAG that exposed
Vancouverites to the important shift that was happening in the art world at large - namely that New York was now in the spotlight. What's more, Morris brought advanced artworks into the VAG with a virtually non-existent operating budget, and he managed to pull off impressive exhibitions out of pure personal tenacity. Reporter Mac Reynolds makes a succinct and telling summary of Morris' curatorial methods in 1955:
The cover was designed by Robert Hume. Two Hundred Years of American Painting, Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 1955. 73
The present 200 Years of American Painting show was dreamed up by Morris when in New York last July negotiating for the Guggenheim Collection [another Morris feat that opened at the VAG in the winter of 1954]. He noticed first that much of the American collection in the Metropolitan was in storage. He asked for 10 paintings. 'That was the winning bet that parlayed,' he says. Then he went to the Museum of Modern Art and said 'look what I've just got from the Metropolitan.' They looked, promised to lend 40 canvasses of American modern.7
Among the many American works in this exhibition, a good number of progressive contemporary artists were represented, including Hans Hofmann, Stuart Davis, Milton
Avery, Yves Tanguy, Arshile Gorky, Ad Reinhardt, and Robert Motherwell. Morris was sensing the shift in what should be looked to as a model of modernity and his curatorial approach made this apparent. A few months after the close of Two Hundred Years of
American Painting, in early April of 1956, the newspapers in Vancouver announced
Morris' intention to leave his post as curator of the VAG for a new opportunity to be the chief curator of the San Francisco Museum of Art.71 But the impact of Morris in Canada does not end with this move; Chapter 3 will turn briefly to the significance of private art dealing in Toronto in the gestation of a new cultural emphasis on America and the development of an international profile. This, of course, was in sharp contrast to the long run of close kinship that had prevailed between Canadian and British culture.
70 Reynolds, "Gets Big Displays At Low Cost." However, the catalogue to the exhibition, Two Hundred Years of American Painting, pays special thanks to the Whitney Museum of American Art for lending an impressive 39 paintings to the VAG.
"Curator Takes Post in U.S." Vancouver Sun (6 April 1956). 74
Enriching a Nation: The Beaverbrook Art Gallery
Modern British painting was not going to go away in Canada just yet. Although Jerrold
Morris began to expose important American contemporary art to audiences in Vancouver, the apogee of modern British painting collections in Canada was to open in Fredericton,
New Brunswick, on 16 September 1959. As one newspaper announced, the opening of the Beaverbrook Art Gallery (BAG) was a day that enriched a nation.72 The job of cutting the ribbon at the opening of the Atlantic Provinces' first ever public art gallery went to
W.G. Constable,73 just one of the many British advisors to Lord Beaverbrook's collection of British and Canadian paintings. This collection was not unlike the Vancouver Art
Gallery's founding collection. Looking to Lord Beaverbrook, Constable concluded his inaugural speech: "Let me paraphrase perhaps the greatest words uttered by an
Englishman 'This day Lord Beaverbrook you have lit such a candle in New Brunswick as by God's grace will never be put out'."74
Ian Aitken, "The day that enriches a nation," Daily Express (17 September 1959). Lord Beaverbrook owned this newspaper and it is possible that the author of this article was related to him, since he was born Maxwell Aitken. It was not uncommon for Lord Beaverbrook to promote himself through his own newspapers.
73 "Original Press Coverage of the Opening of the Beaverbrook Art Gallery, September 16, 1959," Parliamentary Recording Unit, House of Lords: BBK/K/2/187, Formal Opening of the Gallery.
W.G. Constable quoted in Aitkin, "The day that enriches a nation." 75
The following sections will outline the nature of the BAG's opening collection, the man who made it happen, Lord Beaverbrook, the British art advisors and artists he commissioned, including Beaverbrook's special relationship with artist Graham
Sutherland, and the significance of Beaverbrook's aversion to abstract art. At this late phase in the renaissance of British culture in Canada, Beaverbrook's resistance to non- objective art indicates his personal preference, no doubt, but there is also evidence to suggest that it was asserted in opposition to the growing trends that were becoming hard to ignore in the art of the US.
For the Youth of Fredericton
In December of 1954, newspapers announced Lord Beaverbrook's intentions to not only build an art gallery for the city of Fredericton but to outfit it with an impressive collection of British and Canadian art.75 The Province, under Premier Flemming, accepted the generous offer. Beaverbrook held previews of his collection intended for the Province at the University of New Brunswick's Bonar Law-Bennett Library in 1954 and 1955 - likely whetting the appetite for art of many people in the area. These exhibitions are an indication that Beaverbrook had always wanted his gallery to be connected to the
University of New Brunswick (UNB) for the benefit of students. Figure 4 shows part of
Beaverbrook's collection - specifically the studies of Winston Churchill by Graham
Sutherland - on display in a UNB classroom (ca. 1955). A draft of Beaverbrook's
75 "Lord Beaverbrook Gives Art Gallery to N.B." Daily Gleaner (3 December 1954); and "Great Stimulus to Art Appreciation," Evening Times Globe (4 December 1953). 76 intended speech - to be delivered at the mid-September 1959 opening of the BAG - expresses his ultimate hopes for the impact of the collection:
Most art galleries are records of the art of bygone years. I believe, and certainly hope, that this gallery may be something different. It belongs essentially to the frontier. The frontier between the lands where the arts have long been practiced and a land where, only in our time, have painting and sculpture begun to assert themselves among our people. But the purpose of this Gallery is to inspire Canadian artists of the new generation. The past must be seen. The work of other nations must be inspected. .. .76
Similar to the purposes of the founding collection at the Vancouver Art Gallery, and the gift of the Massey Collection of English Painting to the National Gallery of Canada,
British art is exposed to Canadians in an effort to inspire the arts of Canada; in the minds of Lord Beaverbrook, Henry Stone and Vincent Massey, it would take the art of another nation to propel the art of Canada.
Upon the opening of the BAG, Beaverbrook announced, "I wish to acknowledge a hundred and forty-five gifts to the gallery. Of these hundred and forty-five gifts, eighty- five are paintings."77 An inaugural catalogue of paintings, including studies, was published by the gallery in 1959 and must have also included the many external gifts to
76 Excerpt from a draft of Lord Beaverbrook's speech for the opening of the Beaverbrook Art Gallery (7 August 1959), Beaverbrook Collection, House of Lords Record Office, quoted in Ian G. Lumsden, "Beaverbrook's Patronage of Modern British Artists," Sargent to Freud: Modern British Paintings and Drawings in the Beaverbrook Collection, Fredericton: Beaverbrook Art Gallery, 1998, p. 58, published to coincide with the exhibition by the same title held at the Beaverbrook Art Gallery 24 May - 13 September, 1998.
77 Lord Beaverbrook quoted in "Original Press Coverage of the Opening of the Beaverbrook Art Gallery, September 16, 1959," Parliamentary Recording Unit, House of Lords: BBK/K/2/187, Formal Opening of the Gallery, p. 9. 77 the Gallery that Beaverbrook pressed his friends and colleagues for; at its opening, donors to the BAG's collection included Dr. and Mrs. Boylen, the Sir James Dunn
Foundation, John Bassett, Mrs. Pillow, Miss Hosmer, Joseph Hirshhorn and Mrs. John
David Eaton.78 Of the 288 artworks catalogued, 178 were British and 110 Canadian.79
Aside from artworks, Beaverbrook also contributed a $1,100,000 endowment for the
Gallery.80 The newly constructed Gallery, on the banks of the St. John River, cost more than half a million dollars to construct and it was state-of-the-art for the time, with air- conditioning and fireproof standards. The lighting, however, was another matter. One of
Beaverbrook's biographers recounts the let down that occurred in lighting the gallery for the first time:
Beaverbrook, surrounded by local celebrities, supervised the dusk switching-on ceremony, which, wrote Tweedie, the secretary of the gallery's board of governors, 'had many of the characteristics of a seance [sic]: expectations were high; results, non-existent. The great moment arrived. Beaverbrook gave the command to light up. Disaster! Complete and unmistakable.' Paintings and walls were bisected by shadows.81
Beaverbrook attended to the matter immediately, as he did with all details to do with the
Gallery. Despite the minor glitch, all reports were positive, even finding that the Gallery
78 Michael Wardell, "The Beaverbrook Art Gallery," The Atlantic Advocate (September 1959).
79 Beaverbrook Art Gallery, Paintings, Fredericton: Beaverbrook Art Gallery, 1959.
80 Stuart Trueman, "An enduring gift to New Brunswick: The Lord Beaverbrook Art Gallery," Canadian Art, 15: 4 (1958): p. 280.
81 Anne Chrisholm and Michael Davie, Beaverbrook: A Life, London: Hutchinson, 1992, p. 484. 78 was ".. .probably one of the most modern and beautiful in the world."82 The BAG would, of course, expand in the years following the opening, both in the direction of Canadian and British painting.
Just one year later, at a public celebration of "the Beaver," as some people referred to Beaverbrook, the man at the centre of it all reiterated the collection's emphasis on edification: "Now to come to the policy of the Gallery. I want to enunciate the policy of the governors of the gallery and it is to educate the young people of the province and to create an element of culture among those who are grown up."831 will elaborate on the special place of artist Graham Sutherland in the collection of the BAG below, but will now list some of the more prominent 20th-century British painters in the opening collection, foregoing the more historical exemplars, to lend an idea of just which modern artists stood to influence the citizens of New Brunswick: Francis Bacon, William
Brooker, Edward Burra, Jacob Epstein, Lucien Freud, Duncan Grant, Tristram Hillier,
Ivon Hitchens, Wyndham Lewis, Paul Nash, Ben Nicholson, John Piper, Walter Sickert,
Stanley Spencer, Philip Steer, Graham Sutherland, Edward Wadsworth, Denis Williams, and Christopher Wood, among others. This assembly of artists is impressive and the force behind its formation will now be addressed.
Max Aitkin
Max Aitkin (1879-1964) became First Lord Beaverbrook in 1917 when King George V of England bestowed a hereditary peerage upon him. Although born in small-town
82 "Pride" [subtitle, full title unknown], Daily Express (15 September 1959).
83 "Art Gallery's Role Expanding," The Daily Gleaner (2 July 1960), p. 2. 79
Ontario (Maple), Beaverbrook spent his childhood in New Brunswick. He made his initial mark as a talented moneymaker in Canada through business mergers and, most significantly, he founded the Canada Cement Company. After moving to Great Britain in
1910, when he was just into his thirties, Beaverbrook made an even bigger name for himself, and a fortune, as a newspaper man who came to own the Daily Express, Sunday
Express and the Evening Standard?* He befriended and patronized the talented writers that he encountered in Great Britain, including Rudyard Kipling, H.G. Wells, Rebecca
West and Arnold Bennett.85 It was WWI that would lead Beaverbrook to become a patron of the visual arts, including both Canadian and British artists.
In 1916, together with another newspaper baron, Lord Rothermere, Beaverbrook set to work establishing the Canadian War Memorials Fund, which would, much like the collection at the BAG, eventually bring Canadian and British artworks to the people of
Canada. However, the fate of the artworks resulting from the Canadian War Memorials
Fund was distinctly different from the BAG's collection, since the former never received its own dedicated housing.86 One source argues that their homelessness was due to a failed promise on the part of W.L. Mackenzie King to build a structure to display the works.87 What the Canadian War Memorials Fund did for artists during wartime was of
Ian Lumsden, "A Living Legacy" in The Beaverbrook Art Gallery Collection, Selected Works, Fredericton: Beaverbrook Art Gallery, 2000, p. 12.
85 Ian G. Lumsden, "Beaverbrook's Patronage of Modern British Artists," Sargent to Freud: Modern British Paintings and Drawings in the Beaverbrook Collection, Fredericton: Beaverbrook Art Gallery, 1998, p. 39.
86 The Canadian War Memorials collection is now split between the National Gallery of Canada and the Canadian War Museum, both in Ottawa.
Lumsden, "Living Legacy," p. 11. incalculable value. In as little as eighteen months, there were more artists commissioned to paint than to fight;88 their mission was to record the events of war, both everyday and monumental. Even more, the War Memorials Fund provided a sense of artistic purpose and pride to the many artists who would have been forced to abandon their practice without its support. It has been pointed out that this Fund for artists during such hard times anticipated, by many years, the oft-cited rewards of America's Works Progress
Administration under President F.D. Roosevelt beginning in 1939. In 1918, when
Beaverbrook was appointed to the wartime cabinet as Minister of Information, he established the British War Memorials Committee and together with the Canadian War
Memorials Fund, he managed to employ "almost every significant modern British artist," except for Walter Sickert.89 From the artworks produced as a result of the Canadian War
Memorials Fund, the Beaverbrook Foundation acquired Augustus John's oil sketch for
Canadians at Lievin Castle (1918).90 The paintings resulting from this fund made an impact on the home front, too; the Canadian War Memorials collection was first exhibited in Canada in 1919 at the Canadian National Exhibition - a venue that was the source in Canada for annual shows of European, and especially British, art for the early part of the twentieth century.91 Beaverbrook's patronage of the artists employed by the
Canadian War Memorials Fund would extend to his own private collection, too.
Lumsden, "Beaverbrook's Patronage of Modern British Artists," p. 40.
89 Lumsden, "Beaverbrook's Patronage of Modern British Artists," p. 41.
90 Ibid, p. 43.
91 Sybille Pantazzi, "Foreign Art at the Canadian National Exhibition 1905-1938," The National Gallery of Canada Bulletin, 22 (1973): pp. 21-41. 81
It is worth noting that the Canadian War Memorials Fund did not initially commission Canadian artists, owing, as Ian Lumsden argues, to the complete lack of any
Canadians on the official committee to administer the Fund. Recognizing this lack, Eric
Brown and Sir Edmund Walker were eventually invited to sit on the committee and soon the Fund became patrons of Canadian artists such as David Milne and F.H. Varley. The
Canadian war artists' programme of the Second World War would come under the direction of Vincent Massey and H.O. McCurry of the National Gallery.
Another manner in which Beaverbrook managed to be in close contact with modern British artists was through a number of exhibitions held in London in conjunction with his Daily Express newspaper. Known as the Daily Express Young Artists'
Exhibitions, these shows were limited to artists between the ages of eighteen and thirty- five and were irregularly scheduled. According to Michael Wardell, this series of Daily
Express exhibitions for young artists was ".. .moved less by a desire to render service to art than by his constant preoccupation with helping young men and women to assert themselves and claim their place in the sun."93 In 1955, with the plans for the
Beaverbrook Gallery by then on his mind, Beaverbrook held another Daily Express
Young Artists' Exhibition, this time juried by Herbert Read, Anthony Blunt, Graham
Sutherland and Le Roux Smith Le Roux. The top ten winners in the show, including
Lucien Freud's Hotel Bedroom (1954), were purchased by Beaverbrook.94 Among the list
Ibid, p. 46.
Wardell, "The Beaverbrook Art Gallery," p. 46.
Lumsden, "Beaverbrook's Patronage of Modern British Artists," p. 49. 82 of esteemed jurors for this 1955 exhibition, it is likely the name Le Roux Smith Le Roux that does not ring a bell to the learned reader in art history. Le Roux was just one of the many advisors that Beaverbrook would turn to in the formation of the BAG's collection.
The Import of Advisement to the Beaverbrook Art Gallery
Just as Beaverbrook micro-managed the operations, and even the stationery, of the
Beaverbrook Art Gallery, he also insisted on personally approving all artworks that were acquired for the collection during his lifetime, no matter who recommended them.95 That being said, Beaverbrook was equally eager to work with art advisors in this process. That he worked well with them is not necessarily the case across the board. Wardell comments on the matter: "True, he [Beaverbrook] had his advisers. The art galleries of London,
Paris, New York, Toronto and Montreal are littered with the bodies of his discarded experts, some in chagrin, some in anger, and some, it must be said, in relief."96
Le Roux Smith Le Roux was an early advisor to the establishment of the collection and building for the BAG. Beaverbrook had hired him to write for the London
Evening Standard after he had been deposed from the Tate Gallery as their deputy director.97 In short, Le Roux was ineffective in trying to usurp the power of John
Rothenstein as director of the Tate. Graham Sutherland, who was at the time a trustee at the Tate, joined Le Roux in his charges of mismanagement against Rothenstein, and left
Wardell, "The Beaverbrook Art Gallery," p. 50[?].
Ibid.
Lumsden, "A Living Legacy," p. 14. 83 the Tate altogether, although Le Roux left by strict dismissal.98 Biographer Roger
Berthoud suggests that Sutherland recommended Le Roux to Beaverbrook, considering the close ties they had on the board of the Tate." It was June 1954 when Le Roux began to work for Beaverbrook's Evening Standard and it was not long before he began to advise the operations surrounding the establishment of the BAG. It was Le Roux who suggested to Beaverbrook that they use the Daily Express Young Artists' Exhibitions to garner works for the BAG collection.100 It was also Le Roux who pressed the issue of just where the Gallery should be located, eventually convincing Beaverbrook to situate the building close, and parallel, to the banks of the St. John River.101 The result of this idea was perhaps typical of Le Roux's advice - disasterous; the Gallery later suffered floodwaters from the river and at least two of Le Roux's recommended purchases, a
Constable and a Turner, turned out to be inauthentic.102 In 1956, when Beaverbrook began to become suspicious of Le Roux, he hired one of his Daily Express crime reporters, Percy Hoskins, to investigate his advisor.103 Le Roux was found to be South-
African born, living out of wedlock, and, as Beaverbrook would later admit to
Rothenstein in 1961, had very likely stolen £40,000 and dishonestly taken commissions
98 Roger Berthoud, Graham Sutherland: A Biography, London: Faber and Faber Limited, 1982, p. 172 and 179.
99 Ibid, p. 180.
100 Lumsden, "Beaverbrook's Patronage of Modern British Artists," p. 48.
101 Lumsden, "A Living Legacy," pp. 14-16.
102 Chrisholm and Davie, Beaverbrook: A Life, pp. 485-486.
103 Ibid, p. 485. 84 on top of deals that he had arranged for BAG acquisitions.104 Le Roux aside,
Beaverbrook also had a great many highly qualified and honest advisors.
The most public advisor to Beaverbrook's BAG project at large was W.G.
Constable (a descendent of the famous English artist John Constable), first director of the
Courtauld Institute, and recently retired curator of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts.
Constable advised on three very key aspects of the establishment of the BAG: the building, the catalogue and the collection. First, he advised on the appropriate style of architecture and layout for the BAG's building.105 Constable's rapport with Beaverbrook and the city of Fredericton was so good that an honourary degree of doctor of laws was conferred on Constable from the University of New Brunswick in 1956. Constable was also behind the BAG's opening catalogue of paintings, published in 1959. While working on the catalogue, Constable was able to gain a good sense of what artworks were needed to improve the collection; as a result, Constable wrote to Beaverbrook:
I have spent three days at Fredericton working on the catalogue of the collection and checking this against all the paintings which are in Fredericton. As a result of this and of various visits to the Gallery, I am venturing to make a few suggestions concerning the paintings that should be included in the collection when it is finally handed over to the Gallery. [...] In answer to your telegram about the representation of contemporary English painters, this seems to me very good. I think, however, it might be improved somewhat. A later and more characteristic BEN NICHOLSON would be useful [i.e. more abstract]. More important is to secure a first-rate portrait by AUGUSTUS JOHN and, if possible, one of his
[m Ibid, p. 486.
105 "Has Important Role In Planning of Art Gallery," Telegraph Journal (13 October 1956). 85
flower pieces. To increase the representative character drawings by HENRY MOORE and by BARBARA HEP WORTH would be desirable.106
Constable was more delicate than other advisors in recommending more progressive contemporary art to Beaverbrook. Interestingly, Beaverbrook forged a lasting relationship with an artist known to paint both abstract and figurative works - Graham Sutherland.
Despite Sutherland's connection to Le Roux from their days at the Tate,
Beaverbrook remained devoted to Sutherland and especially his artwork. Sutherland too showed a manner of devotion to Beaverbrook in his obvious care for how the BAG would represent British artists, and his own art, of course. Sutherland advised
Beaverbrook to invest in more works by artists already in the collection, thereby gaining a better sense of particular artists and their range of work.107 As Ian Lumsden, former long-time curator of the collection at the BAG has pointed out, Sutherland's advice to increase the number of particular artists' works, instead of the number of artists, certainly applied to his own art.108 There are no fewer than 47 artworks by Sutherland in the BAG today. Specifically, Sutherland recommend that Beaverbrook purchase more works by
Philip Steer, Walter Sickert and Matthew Smith.109
106 W.G. Constable to Lord Beaverbrook (20 July 1958), copy filed with Mclnnes Cooper, lawyers for the Beaverbrook Art Gallery. I began my research on the BAG in November of 2006, when the Beaverbrook Foundation vs. the BAG case was still in arbitration. Now, appeals are in arbitration and therefore many BAG files remain with the lawyers. Since so many BAG files were with the lawyers, part of my research had to be conducted in the offices of Mclnnes and Cooper in Fredericton.
107 Lumsden, "Beaverbrook's Patronage of Modern British Artists," p. 53.
109 Ibid. 86
Beaverbrook came to know Sutherland between 1950 and 1951, when the artist began to paint Beaverbrook's portrait, now in the collection of the BAG (Figure 5).
Sutherland recalled the process of painting this portrait: "I've been through hell over
Beaver's portrait and haven't finished it yet. Completely demoralized."110 When preparing for the portrait, Sutherland found Beaverbrook's expression to be constantly changing.
Surely their relationship solidified when Beaverbrook became the passionate collector of nearly all of Sutherland's sketches and studies for his portrait of Winston Churchill (a final oil that was ultimately destroyed by Churchill's wife, Clementine). Replying to
Beaverbrook's letter requesting to purchase the preparatory work for the Churchill portrait, Sutherland writes: "I need not tell you how very delighted I am that you have these paintings of mine, and how honoured I feel to be included in your Collection destined for new Frederickstown [s/c]."111 The BAG is widely recognized as holding a most impressive collection of the artist's works. Perhaps telling, though, is the obvious bias for figurative works in this particular collection. Beaverbrook was eager to snap up
Sutherland's best portraits, including those portraying Somerset Maugham in 1949,
Edward Sackville-West in 1953, and Signy Eaton in 1957, just to name a few.
Sutherland's more abstract or 'organic' works are, however, underrepresented. A minor advisor to Beaverbrook who had a major impact on the nature of the BAG collection was
Sir Chester Beatty. Beatty made a point of suggesting that Beaverbrook amass a
Graham Sutherland quoted in Lumsden, "Beaverbrook's Patronage of Modern British Artists," p. 52; and Berthoud, Graham Sutherland, p. 150.
111 Graham Sutherland to Lord Beaverbrook (11 May 1955), Graham Sutherland files, Fredericton: Beaverbrook Art Gallery. 87 collection of fine English portraiture.112 A conservative approach was appealing to
Beaverbrook. When Le Roux wrote to Beaverbrook about recommendations coming from Sutherland regarding artists that should be considered for the BAG's collection, he warned: Sutherland "is also letting me have a list of painters he would advise us to have represented but I fear the list will contain the names of men whose work you have already turned down on the grounds of style."113 The recommendations for more abstract art were not going away and, as I will now demonstrate, Beaverbrook just would not have it - in fact, he would rather have it disposed from the Gallery.114
Another early advisor to the acquisitions made for the BAG was Sir Alec Martin.
Besides being a well-known authority on art, Martin was the Chairman of Christie's in
London from 1940 to 1958. It was Martin who guided the selection committee in choosing artworks for display in the section of the BAG dedicated to Maritime art; these artworks were offered for sale and the BAG reserved the right to first purchases.115
Martin also advised the format and nature of the first BAG catalogue as early as 1957 and suggested that works displayed from the permanent collection be regularly rotated to
Lumsden, "Beaverbrook's Patronage of Modern British Artists," p. 57.
113 Le Roux Smith Le Roux to Lord Beaverbrook (25 August 1954) quoted in Lumsden, "Beaverbrook's Patronage of Modern British Artists," p. 53.
114 The "Dead Files" - or files on deaccessioned artworks from the BAG collection, are most revealing and suggest Beaverbrook's distaste for abstract art. Fredericton: Beaverbrook Art Gallery. Confidentiality prevents detailed discussion.
115 Trueman, "An enduring gift to New Brunswick: The Lord Beaverbrook Art Gallery," p. 281. 88 keep viewing interest high.116 Martin's advice for acquisitions tended to be on the side of experimental art, which led one of the BAG's employees to write in a memorandum to
Beaverbrook, "The dustbin business in art Sir Alec thinks, must be exhibited in the
Gallery in modest measure because after all it is the current production and it is the duty of a Gallery to show every type."117 Even before the BAG had actually been established,
Beaverbrook's acquisitions for the collection were firmly rooted in the more traditional manners of representation. For the 1955 Daily Express Young Artists' Exhibition,
Beaverbrook agreed to have Le Roux buy the top ten entries for the planned BAG, but stipulated that he was not allowed to purchase "futurist stuff."118
Against Abstract Art
Beaverbrook's opposition to abstract art was often vicious, once leading him to write: "I send warning of the insidious cunning of the picture groups pushing abstract art."119 In response to W.G. Constable's recommendation to purchase a more up-to-date example of
Ben Nicholson's work, Beaverbrook confessed, "I saw three or four paintings by BEN
NICHOLSON at GIMPELS last evening. They are extremely difficult for me to
Alec Martin to Lord Beaverbrook (11 December 1957), copy filed with Mclnnes Cooper, Beaverbrook Art Gallery.
117 Memorandum from Mrs. Ince to Lord Beaverbrook (7 June 1960), Beaverbrook Collection, House of Lords Record Office, quoted in Lumsden, "Beaverbrook's Patronage of Modern British Artists," p. 57.
118 Lord Beaverbrook to Mrs. Ince (30 March 1955) -No. 71081. Beaverbrook Papers, Harriet Irving Library, UNB, quoted in Lumsden, "Beaverbrook's Patronage of Modern British Artists," p. 49.
Chrisholm and Davie, Beaverbrook: A Life, p. 487. 89 understand."120 It is now regrettable to find what the BAG could have acquired but did not because of Beaverbrook's personal convictions. One revealing correspondence between Mrs. Ince, on behalf of Beaverbrook, and the BAG's curator Edwy Cooke, demonstrates a lost opportunity in March of 1960:
You mentioned the BORDUAS painting which was in the Canadian Group of Painters' Exhibition. Lord Beaverbrook says he is not interested in this artist. He thinks all that type of painting is nonsense and as you know, he is not in favour of it. He thinks it will die.121
The letter ends there, save for a polite "yours sincerely." Considering the fact that Paul-
Emile Borduas had died just the month before, on 22 February 1960, this final statement against the art of Borduas was not so polite at all. Clearly, there was no room for abstract art at the BAG under Beaverbrook. Borduas was the author and organizer of the previously mentioned Refus global from 1948. Borduas was certainly an avant-garde painter and he spent the years 1953 through 1955 in New York City, leaving his native
Quebec behind. Paris was his last city of residence. Borduas is a prime example, along with Jack Bush, of the turn in the Canadian cultural compass toward an American direction in painting especially. Two years later, in 1962, Beaverbrook pressed the point again, asserting to Cooke that there should be no exhibitions of abstract art at the BAG:
120 Lord Beaverbrook to W.G. Constable (25 July 1958), copy filed with Mclnnes Cooper, Beaverbrook Art Gallery.
Mrs. Ince to Mr. Cooke (10 March 1960), copy filed with Mclnnes Cooper, Beaverbrook Art Gallery. 90
I am very much opposed to exhibitions of abstract art. It is my view that we should limit our exhibitions to traditional art and what is sometimes called 'figures'. The Whitney Museum promoted abstract art to ridiculous heights, and now the structure is tumbling down.122
History would prove Beaverbrook wrong, as the Whitney remains a force for advanced art and ideas in the museum world. Although he does not allude to nationalism,
Beaverbrook does attack the credibility of the Whitney Museum of American Art in particular. By this time, in 1962, American art had firmly established itself as the model for modernity and the BAG's permanent collection of Canadian and British art was out of touch. Reflecting on the aim of the BAG's collection to edify the young and enrich the old, this first public art gallery in the Maritimes was directed to go British in being modern, by prescription of its benefactor.
It was also by 1962 that the Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO) in Toronto could be seen to resist no longer - abstract American art had made a mark on the permanent collection. The transition at the AGO from acquisitions made with a British bias to acquisitions made with an eye on New York will be considered in my next chapter.
Lord Beaverbrook to Edwy Cooke (15 June 1962), Fredericton: Beaverbrook Art Gallery. Chapter 3
From Blunt to Barr:
The Shift in Cultural Authority from British to American
at the Art Gallery of Ontario
Side Barr
This chapter will focus on the art advisement received, and often commissioned, by the
Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO), with particular attention being paid to the impact of
Anthony Blunt (1907-1983) and Alfred H. Barr, Jr. (1902-1981). Since the AGO did not consult advisors or consider possible acquisitions within a closed frame - that is, museums often consult with other museums and art officials when making policy and acquisition decisions - this chapter will necessarily relate the relevant goings on in the other museums and galleries that ran parallel to the AGO. The National Gallery of
Canada's (NGC) relationship with Blunt and the later significance of private art galleries selling international art in Toronto are important factors to consider. While Chapter 2 assessed the nature and impact of the founding collections of the Vancouver Art Gallery and the Beaverbrook Art Gallery, this chapter considers the significance of just how a pre-existing permanent collection is built upon and how its acquisition priorities tend to shift over time. For the latter half of the twentieth century, the best indicator of changing
Q1 92 currents in the art purchases of the AGO has been the activities of the Women's
Committee. It should also be noted that the AGO, before 1966, was known as the Art
Gallery of Toronto (AGT), and, from its founding in 1900 until 1919, the Gallery was called the Art Museum of Toronto (AMT).1
This preamble is also intended to clarify what I mean by designating Blunt and
Barr as "cultural authorities." Although they may be from Great Britain and the US respectively, this does not necessarily mean that they solely promoted the art of their native land. Blunt was, after all, an authority on Nicholas Poussin above all else. It does, however, remain the case that Blunt's advice to Canadian museums represents the high point of a British perspective and approach to the arts in Canada, and that Barr's participation with the AGT in 1961 signals an acceptance of American authority in art.
For example, although Blunt helped to bolster the representation of modern French art at the AGT, his persuasion remains an example of British authority at work, especially if we consider the degree to which England began to embrace French art after the turn of the century. Samuel Courtauld - the namesake and co-founder of the Courtauld Institute of
Art in London (established in 1932), which Blunt directed from 1947 to 1974 - donated a large sum of money to the Tate Gallery in 1924 towards the purchase of French artworks of the late nineteenth century. The artworks purchased by the Tate with Courtauld's funds were by artists such as Manet, Degas, Renoir, Seurat, Cezanne, Pissarro, Bonnard and
Van Gogh. As early as 1906, the English Bloomsbury artist, Roger Fry, who was also well known as a critic and general authority on art, promoted French modernism in
Britain and abroad. In 1906, Fry was the curator of paintings at the Metropolitan Museum
1 All acronyms will be used according to their period of use. 93 of Art in New York City. It was Fry's authority on art and his London market connections that made him so attractive to the Met, not unlike what Blunt meant to the major galleries in Ontario. Most notably, back home in England, Fry organized the exhibitions Manet and the Post-Impressionists in 1910 and the Second Post-Impressionist Exhibition in
1912, which rocketed modern French art out of the continent and into the laps of many
Londoners for the first time. Publications such as Vision and Design (1920) forwarded
Fry's formalist approach to the visual arts, a method of regarding art that would, decades later, become the forte of American art critic Clement Greenberg. It was this milieu in
England, including the thoughts on 'Significant Form' by Fry and his fellow artist-writer
Clive Bell, that would nurture Blunt's early years in art.2 As a professional, Blunt was best known as an expert on the seventeenth-century French artist Nicolas Poussin.
Alfred Barr, Jr. was certainly the Modern American museum director par excellence of the early to mid-20th century, but this is not to say that he championed only
American art when it came time for him to make recommendations. Barr was the first director of the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York City, which opened on 7
November 1929. In October of the previous year, Barr published an article in The Arts journal called "Modern Art in London Museums," where he remarked on the forward thinking of London's museum and contemporary art community.3 Barr was particularly excited by the London museums' willingness to invest in the more progressive, living
2 For Blunt's early inspiration from Roger Fry and Clive Bell see: Miranda Carter, Anthony Blunt: His Lives, Oxford: Macmillan, 2001, pp. 29, 31-32.
3 Alfred H. Barr, "Modern Art in London Museums," The Arts. XIV: 4 (October 1928): pp. 187-194. 94 artists of Great Britain.4 Barr was completely in favour of the gamble involved in collecting contemporary art, stating: "England takes its chance of being wrong in purchasing paintings by its most extreme modernists... Several American galleries nearly eliminate their chance of being right by selecting almost entirely from the work of
Academicians."5 During his days as a doctoral student at Harvard - an occupation he would abandon in favour of teaching - Barr was bothered by the lack of living artists available to be seen in the galleries of Cambridge and Boston. He even expressed this regret in an article called "Boston is Modern Art Pauper - Barr" for the Harvard
Crimson. It was a research fellowship arranged by Paul Sachs that allowed Barr to travel to London in July of 1927, where he found fodder for his 1928 article on London art museums and was struck by the admirable level of attention being paid to French art of the Impressionist and Post-Impressionist period.8 Barr was mostly enamoured with the
Tate's collection, but he also made many entries on all the galleries he visited in a personal travel notebook. His notebook reveals his excited astonishment at the number of modern French paintings held in London collections, as well as his regret that the same
4 Ibid.
5 Ibid, pp. 190-191.
6 Alice Goldfarb Marquis, Alfred H. Barr Jr.: Missionary for the Modern, Chicago: Contemporary Books, 1989, p. 39.
7 Alfred H. Barr, "Boston is Modern Art Pauper - Barr," Harvard Crimson (October 1926).
8 Goldfarb Marquis, Alfred H. Barr Jr.: Missionary for the Modern, pp. 46-47. 95 was not true in the US museums.9 Also in his notebook, Barr mentions the skills of Roger
Fry in relating the work of the best modern painters to the public.10 In his article on the
London art scene, he wrote: ".. .the American visitor [was] green with envy..."'1 but he might as well have said "inspired" since Barr's greatest achievements at the MoMA were in the areas of local contemporary art and French modernism. The MoMA opened under
Barr's directorship just eleven months after he published his London article, which asserted from the outset: "Today the modern collections in London museums are so transformed that certain American museums, especially on the eastern coast, may well seek instruction."12 One more observation made by Barr in "Modern Art in London
Museums" deserves attention: "England and America turn their backs to one another and their faces towards Paris. As a result each is profoundly ignorant of the other's activity and is easily, perhaps willingly, misled by traditional prejudice."13 Anthony Blunt's assistance with purchases for the AGT is a case in point. For example, Blunt was essential in helping the AGT to purchase a number of important continental works, notably Picasso's Head of A Woman (Ferdnande) (ca. 1909) and Matisse's Jeannette V
(ca. 1916) - both bronzes acquired in 1949. As I will elaborate below, Canada never did turn its back to any of these great cultures and in fact, in 1949, the AGT celebrated each
9 Afred H. Barr, notebook (1924[?], 1927, 1928[?]), Alfred H. Barr, Jr. Papers, AHB 9.F.73, mf 3263:40, The Museum of Modern Art Archives, New York.
10 Ibid.
11 Barr, "Modern Art in London Museums," p. 190.
12 Ibid, p. 187.
13 Alfred H. Barr, Jr., "Modern Art in London Museums," The Arts. XIV: 4(October 1928): 187. 96 one with the exhibition Contemporary Paintings from Great Britain, the United States and France with Sculpture from the UnitedStates.
Anthony Blunt, Art Agent
"Blunt, Anthony, London, Eng., Agent for NGC" is what appears on the files related to
Anthony Blunt at the NGC.15 His tenure as an art advisor to the NGC began in 1948 but he acted first for the AGT, beginning in 1947. This was not the first time that the AGT and the NGC had shared a British art advisor, and so I shall digress briefly. Known as a painter, illustrator, designer and collector, Charles Ricketts began advising the NGC in
1923 and the AGT in 1926, until he died shortly thereafter, in 1931. Jean Sutherland
Boggs discusses Ricketts in her history of the NGC and finds that he only came to
Canada once, in 1927.16 Boggs does well to find aspects to praise in Ricketts, such as his good taste in fine furniture,17 and he did secure some important works for Canada, including Rubens' oil sketch The Elevation of the Cross (ca. 1638) for the AGT,18 but he did not have an eye, or care, for the kind of modern art that the generation after him
Contemporary Paintings from Great Britain, the United States and France with Sculpture from the United States, ex. cat., Toronto: Art Gallery of Toronto, 1949, produced in conjunction with an exhibition by the same title, AGT, 10 November - 26 December 1949.
15 For example, see: "OILS PURCHASED/FOREIGN PURCHASES, 1.11-B File 1, Blunt, Anthony, London, Eng., Agent for NGC," from NGC Box 15, file 12, National Gallery of Canada Archives.
16 Jean Sutherland Boggs, The National Gallery of Canada, Toronto: Oxford University Press, p. 18.
17 Ibid, p. 19. 18 Art Gallery of Ontario: Selected Works, Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1990, p. 30. 97 would celebrate in England. In 1921, Ricketts wrote privately to one of his contacts:
".. .Gauguin and Monet.. .were physically deficient: Van Gogh a lunatic, Cezanne mentally deficient. It is a sad world."19 Perhaps in return, modern artists in England did not think too highly of Ricketts. In a novelty book in the possession of Roger Fry in the mid to late nineteen-teens, called The Connaught Square Catechism or Confessions to
Mrs Robert Witt, guests were invited to respond to fun art-related questions, such as:
"The worst living English painter of any repute?" and "The worst living critic or expert?"
To both, Clive Bell answered "Charles Ricketts."20 Although Anthony Blunt certainly had his detractors, too, the length of his tenure and his acceptance of modern art has led me to focus my attention on his role as a British advisor to the AGT and NGC.
Karen Finlay aptly suggests that the return of Vincent Massey from his London post as High Commissioner in 1946 may have been the impetus for these two Ontario galleries to seek out a representative for their interests in Great Britain.21 Massey, who was then the Honourary President of the AGT and Chairman of the Board of Trustees at the NGC (1948-1952), did extend the first official gesture to Blunt to act as an agent for
Charles Ricketts to Sydney Cockerell (3 November 1921) quoted in Boggs, The National Gallery of Canada, p. 20.
20 'The Connaught Square Catechism or Confessions to Mrs Robert Witt' in the Papers of Roger Eliot Fry, REF/7/6, former reference: REF iii/1.27, 1916 and undated, 1 volume, King's College Archives (Modern Archive), Cambridge, UK. Inscribed in pencil in the front of the book it is written: "This book belonged to my father, Roger Fry, who filled in the answers dictated by his friends as an after-dinner entertainment. Pamela Diamand. Presented to King's College Library. 25/9/79.
Karen Finlay, 2(f -Century British Art from the Collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario, exh. cat., Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1987, p. 6. 98 the AGT and NGC, but it was a conversation between Peter Brieger and Blunt that got the ball rolling.23 Fleeing Nazi persecution, Brieger had been one of the talented emigre art historians at the Courtauld Institute of Art beginning in 1934, but he soon left for
Canada to secure a full-time position at the University of Toronto's Department of Art and Archaeology (now the Department of Art) in 1936. In 1947, the same year as his fateful conversation with Blunt, Brieger would earn the rank of full professor. At that time, Brieger was also a member of the Exhibition Committee and Chairman for the
Education Committee for the AGT, which prompted him to discuss the Gallery with
Blunt while he was on a visit to London. Brieger recalled the conversation to H.O.
McCurry, then director of the NGC:
While looking at the picture market in England I found that the prices are much lower than in the United States, and the paintings which one can acquire were of much better quality. In discussing the problem at the Courtauld Institute, I found that Anthony Blunt, now director of the Courtauld, and late Keeper of the King's Pictures, is willing to act as an advisor in the purchase of paintings for the Art Gallery [of Toronto]. I did not feel entitled to speak for the National Gallery, but I have no doubt that Blunt would extend his offer to the National Gallery. Since his position does not allow him to ask for a commission or a fee, I suggested that every time a picture is bought through him for the Art Gallery, a certain sum be
Vincent Massey to Anthony Blunt (14 October 1947), Accession file: Poussin, Venus, mother of Aeneas presenting him with arms forged by Vulcan, Art Gallery of Ontario. Copy also filed with the National Gallery of Canada Archives; copies of many, if not all, of the Blunt-AGO communications exist in copies with the NGC archives.
23 Peter Brieger to H.O. McCurry (29 September 1947), "OILS PURCHASED/ FOREIGN PURCHASES," 1.11-B File 1, Blunt, Anthony, London, Eng., Agent for NGC," from NGC Box 15, file 12, National Gallery of Canada Archives. 99
paid to the Courtauld Institute to be used as a bursary for our students when they go to study at the Courtauld.24
Not only does Brieger's letter shed light on the beginnings of Blunt's relationship with
Toronto, and then Ottawa, it points to the fact that London's art market, despite its great distance from Canada, was more desirable to Ontario's galleries than the US market in the late 1940s. McCurry's response to Brieger was eager: "I should like very much to have a talk with you and find out a little more about the art market in England. ... Did you see any really good pictures that we ought to go after now? Do tell me about them."25 Back in
Toronto, Brieger must have tabled the matter with the committee at the AGT, since the next piece of evidence in the matter of 'Agent Blunt' for Canada is a lengthy letter from
Massey to Blunt. What the letter from Massey reveals is that it was actually Blunt's idea to act as a representative in London for the AGT:
Let me say again how delighted I was to hear of the suggestion you made to Professor Brieger. It would be a tremendous thing for us if we could regard you as our representative. The community here has far too few contacts with Great Britain in the field of art, and such a personal link as you would provide would be of the greatest value. The hope was expressed at our recent meeting of the Gallery in Toronto that you might be induced to come and pay us a visit some time in the near future. I very much hope that this may come about. In the meantime perhaps you could be kind enough to let me know in a little greater detail about the suggestion you were kind enough to make to Professor Brieger, and also as to
25 H.O. McCurry to Peter Brieger (1 October 1947), "OILS PURCHASED/ FOREIGN PURCHASES," 1.11-B File 1, Blunt, Anthony, London, Eng., Agent for NGC," from NGC Box 15, file 12, National Gallery of Canada Archives. whether you felt it possible to act as the representative of the National Gallery in Ottawa on the same terms.26
Blunt replied to Massey enthusiastically, saying that he had received permission from the
Management Committee at the Courtauld to go ahead with this "scheme."27 Blunt also clarifies a point, mentioning that Brieger had suggested that his funds for services rendered would be paid to the Courtauld to be reserved for student scholarships, but that
Massey's communication had suggested that it go to Canadian students specifically.
Owing to the lack of Canadian students regularly attending the Courtauld at that time,
Blunt therefore suggested that Canadians be prioritized for the scholarship, but that if there is not a Canadian to award, then the fund would be paid to the next worthy student. Blunt then went on to suggest how he might operate:
There seems to me to be two categories of paintings which the Art Gallery [of Toronto] might profitably acquire. The first consists of really important works of art, which would be expensive and might well absorb the greater part of a year's income; the second consists of much less important works, which however would fill gaps in the collection. With the first type it would obviously be necessary to proceed slowly, to obtain good opinions in this country... and to get full agreement from your Committee before any action was taken. For minor paintings, however, it may very often happen that some interesting bargain may turn up at Christie's to be sold within three or four days. In this case... it would not be possible to go through the full formalities necessary for important purchases,
Vincent Massey to Anthony Blunt (14 October 1947), Accession file: Poussin, Venus, mother of Aeneas presenting him with arms forged by Vulcan, Art Gallery of Ontario.
27 Blunt to Massey (3 November 1947) Accession file: Poussin, Venus, mother of Aeneas presenting him with arms forged by Vulcan, Art Gallery of Ontario.
28 Ibid. 101
and I believe that it would be greatly to the advantage of the Gallery if I could be allowed a certain discretion in buying such paintings on my own authority.. ,29
Going to work straightaway, Blunt recommends in the same letter that the AGT consider purchasing eighteenth-century English portraiture, since the prices and availability were good. Blunt admits to his haste, while recommending a major purchase:
I do not wish to seem to be jumping ahead and to be starting my work before I got the job, but it just so happens that there is one picture in London at the moment which may be available and which, I think, might be of interest to either Toronto or Ottawa ... It is a newly discovered Poussin of'Venus and Aeneas' painted about 1635. ..31
As noted by Blunt, the painting could be purchased by either Toronto or Ottawa, but in a communications between Blunt and Martin Baldwin - then curator of the AGT, and soon to be director - Baldwin insists that due to the fact that Brieger, acting for the AGT, made first contact with Blunt, then the AGT should always have first claim over artworks proposed to both the AGT and the NGC.32 The AGT did in fact purchase the Poussin painting in 1948, specifically identified as Venus, Mother of Aeneas, presenting him with Arms forged by
Vulcan (ca. 1636-1637), and it is still a part of the Gallery's collection today. Unfortunately, the painting has a significant gap in its provenance - that is, no record of its ownership -
29 Ibid.
30 Ibid.
31 Ibid.
32 Martin Baldwin to Anthony Blunt (8 December 1947), copy, "OILS PURCHASED/ FOREIGN PURCHASES," 1.11-B File 1, Blunt, Anthony, London, Eng., Agent for NGC," from NGC Box 15, file 12, National Gallery of Canada Archives. 102 between the years 1841 and 1945, so the AGO now has the painting posted on its website under the category of "Spoliation Research."33 Publicly posting paintings that have a problematic provenance is now a common and ethical practice for many museums that desire to make sure that objects in their collection were not inadvertently acquired as a result of wartime looting or other forms of theft or dishonesty. Nothing concrete can be assumed about just how this Poussin painting came to be on the art market in England in 1945, where its provenance picks up again. What is certain is that it is an authentic Poussin painting and that it was an important acquisition for the AGT, made possible by Blunt. As it stands now, there is no definite evidence that Blunt misused his position, as a representative for either the AGT or the NGC, yet there is now ample evidence, and general public awareness, that Blunt had a complicated life owing to his secret work in international intelligence for not one, but two nations: the USSR and the UK. Just whom else Blunt was advising, and seeking advice from, should be addressed.
British Intelligence?
The definitive biography on Anthony Blunt to date is Miranda Carter's Anthony Blunt:
His Lives, published in 2001.35 Importantly, Carter does not turn the story of Blunt's life into a spy novel, but instead acknowledges his many roles over the years, both personal
33 "Nicolas Poussin. Venus, Mother of Aeneas, presenting him with Arms forged by Vulcan," Spoliation Research, Art Gallery of Ontario website, < http://www.ago.net/nicolas- poussin>, accessed 7 April 2009.
34 More information may soon surface on Anthony Blunt, since his previously sealed personal memoirs just became available at the British Library in the summer of 2009.
Miranda Carter, Anthony Blunt: His Lives, Oxford: Macmillan, 2001. and professional. One of those roles was art historian. Blunt's art historical work was, and continues to be, accomplished and relevant. He was never a strict communist, but he did have a passion, which was fueled by his youth and an interest in Marxism, to stamp out fascism. Marxism is a political leaning shared by many people working in the arts, including Blunt, but beyond his Marxist methodologies used in his early days as a writer and art critic, it should not be considered a factor that affects the work or reputation of
Blunt. His life was terribly split, especially if we think about his long-standing position from 1945 to 1972 as Surveyor of the King's, and then Queen's, Pictures - an impressive private collection of art that could be described as the anti-thesis of communist sentiments regarding 'art for the people' and shared ownership.36
On 15 November 1979, Great Britain's then Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, rose from her seat at the House of Commons and proceeded to announce publicly that in
1964 Anthony Blunt had confessed to being a Soviet spy in exchange for immunity from
British prosecution. Although Blunt's start- and end-dates as a Soviet spy continue to be debated, it is certain that he was active in this role throughout WWII and even after
1945.37 It is also certain that Blunt worked from 1940 to 1948 for Great Britain's MI5, the nation's Military Intelligence, Section 5.38 Subsequent to his 1964 confession, MI5 interviewed Blunt eleven times and found that he had given the NKVD (Soviet intelligence, later known as the KGB) information from his position in high society and
36 It was William Withrow, former director of the AGT/AGO (1960-1991), who brought this dichotomy of roles to my attention. See Sarah Stanners interview with William Withrow (27 May 2008), digital recording, transcribed in Appendix B.
37 Carter, Anthony Blunt: His Lives, pp. 165 and 459.
38 Ibid, pp. 250 and 285. 104 with MI5, as well as acting as a "talent spotter" for the Soviets.39 Since 1964, many
British officials, including the Queen, had known about Blunt's past associations with the
NKVD and MI5, but preserving a sense of national security with the public outweighed the need to prosecute Blunt.40 It is not known exactly when Blunt became the "fourth man" of the Cambridge (Soviet) spy ring, but it was certainly before Blunt became a member of MI5. Blunt made one public statement after his secret past had been revealed, which shed some light on his own point of view:
I was persuaded by Guy Burgess that I could best serve the cause of anti-fascism by joining in his work for the Russians. ... the Communist Party and Russia constituted the only firm bulwark against fascism, since the Western democracies were taking an uncertain and compromising attitude towards Germany.41
Even Soviet Intelligence, according to Yuri Modin - who was a translator for the Foreign
Intelligence Directorate in Moscow - admitted that Blunt's contribution of information to the NKVD was close to useless and that much of it went unread on the Soviet side.42
Regardless of his usefulness, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in the US was interested in Blunt's activities as early as 1953.43 When Blunt came to North America in 1956 for a three-month long lecture tour, the FBI tracked him.44 When Blunt toured
39 Carter, Anthony Blunt: His Lives, p. 472.
40 Ibid, p. 448.
41 Anthony Blunt quoted in Carter, Anthony Blunt: His Lives, p. 165.
42 Carter, Anthony Blunt: His Lives, p. 288.
43 Ibid, p. 396.
44 Ibid, p. 396. parts of both the US and Canada, he sometimes lectured on the risks of going too abstract. Of course, this was the Cold War period - a time when abstraction was equated with freedom in the US.46 Since Blunt's position as an advisor to the National
Gallery was abruptly terminated in the spring of 1956, it is tempting to think that perhaps the NGC was somehow tipped off to Blunt's less-than-honest profile,47 but there is no evidence, other than timing, to suggest this. It was during Blunt's 1956 lecture tour that
Alan Jarvis, then director of the NGC, advised Blunt of his termination.48 In a November
1955 meeting of the Board of Trustees, the idea of replacing Blunt with Philip James of the Arts Council was tabled.49 Jarvis must not have been clear, or formal enough, when he met with Blunt, since Blunt apparently complained to the NGC's Charles P. Fell, then
Chairman of the Board, prompting Fell to write to Blunt on 20 June 1956 to say that he
5 "Blunt Speaking: Londoner Gives Abstract Artists Concrete Advice," Globe- Democrat, St. Louis (30 March 1956).
Serge Guilbaut, How New Stole the Idea of Modern Art: Abstract Expressionism, Freedom and the Cold War, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983.
47 Stanners interview with Withrow, (27 May 2008), Appendix B.
48 "Excerpt from the minutes of the eighty-fourth meeting of the Board of Trustees of the National Gallery of Canada held at the National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa, May 23 and 24, 1956, at 10:00 a.m." filed in "OILS PURCHASED/FOREIGN PURCHASES, 1.11-B File 2 Blunt, Anthony, London, Eng., Agent for NGC," from NGC Box 15, file 13, National Gallery of Canada Archives.
49 "Extract from the minutes of a meeting of the Board of Trustees of the National Gallery of Canada, November 2 and 3, 1955," filed in "OILS PURCHASED/FOREIGN PURCHASES, 1.11-B File 2 Blunt, Anthony, London, Eng., Agent for NGC," from NGC Box 15, file 13, National Gallery of Canada Archives. was sorry that "normal procedure was not followed." By Fell's suggestion, Jarvis wrote to Blunt on 5 July 1956, to apologize and clarify:
As I explained to you when we talked in Ottawa and London, this action is being taken simply because we wish to make a completely new set of arrangements both for purchasing from abroad and also for seeking professional advice regarding purchases from abroad, and it seemed advisable to clear the way.51
The AGO, on the other hand, continued relations with Blunt right through to the end of the 1970s when it was finally revealed to the world that Blunt had been a spy. When the news broke, the AGO did not need to make the effort to formalize the end of their arrangement with Blunt; the director of the AGO from 1960 to 1991, William Withrow, recalled: "You see, everybody knew it was the end. I didn't even have to write a letter to say you're finished."52 In any case, Blunt's advisory role with the AGO had slowed in pace by the early 1970s.
Most of the damage done by Blunt was felt in the embarrassment that friends and colleagues, not to mention art institutions, had to suffer by their association with him.
Withrow recently recalled, with visible discomfort, the difficulty he had in coping with the news that Blunt had been a traitor.53 Withrow's thoughts on the matter reveal what
50 Charles P. Fell to Anthony Blunt (20 June 1956), filed in "OILS PURCHASED/FOREIGN PURCHASES, 1.11-B File 2 Blunt, Anthony, London, Eng., Agent for NGC," from NGC Box 15, file 13, National Gallery of Canada Archives.
51 Alan Jarvis to Anthony Blunt (5 July 1956), filed in "OILS PURCHASED/FOREIGN PURCHASES, 1.11-B File 2 Blunt, Anthony, London, Eng., Agent for NGC," from NGC Box 15, file 13, National Gallery of Canada Archives.
52 Stanners interview with Withrow (27 May 2008), Appendix B.
Stanners interview with Withrow (27 May 2008), Appendix B. many people at the time must have felt when they learned that Blunt had potentially risked the security of his own country during the War:
It upset me considerably because I'm sort of old fashioned, patriotic. My Grandfather was killed at Vimy in the First World War. My Father was very badly wounded in the First World War where he went over at age fourteen because they didn't check ages in those days... So when I joined the army in the Second World War, he was torn between not wanting me to go but wanting me to. So I had this exaggerated patriotism that when I learned of [Blunt's] double life.. .it really threw me.54
This Canadian perspective on the matter of Blunt's betrayal says a great deal about the way in which Canadian citizens felt closer than ever with Great Britain during the War.
As the Canadian artist Fred Hagan declared, "once the war started, we were British."55
Backing Britain at the AMT/AGT/AGO
In 1906, the AMT purchased its first work of art and it was British. This inaugural purchase was a painting by Edward A. Hornel titled The Captive Butterfly (1905) and it became available to the Museum when it hosted its first ever loan exhibition, Glasgow
Painters (20 April - 15 May 1906).56 The exhibition originated from what was then
54 Ibid.
55 Fred Hagan quoted (p. 26) in Christine Boyanoski, The 1940s: A Decade of Painting in Ontario, exh. cat., Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1984, produced in conjunction with an exhibition of the same title at the AGO (25 May - 30 June 1985), which toured throughout Ontario.
56 Finlay, 20th-Century British Art from the Collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario, p. 1; Pictures by the Glasgow Painters (20 April - 15 May): exhibition held by the Toronto Art Museum and the Ontario Society of Artists - which provided the venue, since the 108 called the Albright Art Museum in Buffalo, New York, and it would not be the last show of British art that the US would send up to Toronto. For example, British Contemporary
Painters came to the AGT in 1947 via this cross-border relationship with the museum in
Buffalo. The really significant influx of British art into Toronto would come later, via the
British Council. Keeping in mind that the British Council was formed in 1934, and that its first ever show in North America was not until 1939 at the New York World's Fair, the
Council contributed the following exhibitions to the AGT before the year 1966:
Contemporary British art (January 1940), Children's drawings (December 1941),
Modern British crafts (September 1943), Contemporary British drawings (November
1948), Paul Nash (October 1949), Scottish painters (April 1951), Five contemporary
British painters (September 1952), Sculpture and painting from Britain (January 1956),
British painting in the eighteenth century (January 1958), Recent British sculpture
(January 1962), and Some aspects of contemporary British painting (November 1963).
Notably, nearly all of the British Council shows to go to Toronto were of modern British artists. The AGT was therefore able to 'go Modern' by going with the British Council.
Helping to usher in this era of British Council shows at the AGT was Anthony Blunt.
In response to the suggestion of a retrospective exhibition of English painting,
Blunt wrote to Martin Baldwin on 26 April 1949:
I think that by far the simplest solution would be to make use of the British Council mechanism. They occasionally organize exhibitions either illustrating the
Museum did not yet have its own quarters - originating with the Albright Art Museum, Buffalo, New York. Also see Karen McKenzie and Larry Pfaff, "The Art Gallery of Ontario: Sixty Years of Exhibitions, 1906-1966," RACAR, VII: 1-2 (1980): pp. 62-91.
Karen McKenzie and Larry Pfaff, "The Art Gallery of Ontario: Sixty Years of Exhibitions, 1906-1966," RACAR, VII: 1-2 (1980): p. 85. 109
whole of English painting or, say, a particular century of it, and these they do in my opinion efficiently. I feel certain that this method would have every advantage in that, first of all, we should find an exhibition more or less ready made, and secondly, owners would be more likely to lend to the British Council than they might be to an ad hoc commitee [sic] of which they know very little.58
It seems that Blunt flicked the switch on the British Council mechanism for the AGT.
Subsequent to this communication, a British Council show did arrive at the AGT, but it was a retrospective of one English painter: Paul Nash, 1889-1946: paintings and drawings (8-24 October 1949). Greater efforts would be put towards not only a survey of contemporary British art, but two other nations as well, in a major exhibition organized by the AGT for the end of 1949: Contemporary Paintings from Great Britain, the United
States and France with Sculpture from the United States (10 November - 26 December
1949). When Martin Baldwin became the director of the AGT in 1948, the Gallery hired its first fine-arts-trained curator, Sydney Key, who held the post for five years.59
Although Key's area of expertise was British painting, when it came time to produce the
Contemporary Paintings from Great Britain, the United States and France exhibition, both the committees on the British and French components of this show were organized by Blunt. Once the committees were assembled, Blunt reserved his efforts for the
"London Committee," which also included Basil Taylor - the Organizing Secretary to the
58 Anthony Blunt to Martin Baldwin (26 April 1949) quoted in Finlay, 20 -Century British Art from the Collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario, pp. 8-9.
5 Art Gallery of Ontario: Selected Works, p. 26 110
National Art Collections Fund in Great Britain. The overriding mandate for the exhibition was that the choice of artworks was to be limited to those made within the last ten years and that they be examples of quality.61 The committee for the United States was requested to select eighty to ninety paintings and approximately fifteen sculptures; the committee for British works was to choose no more than sixty pictures; and the committee for France was asked to limit their choices to about forty to fifty pictures.62
Officials representing the AGT wrote the Forward to the catalogue, where it is stated:
Thus France, Great Britain and the United States are the three dominating influences which enter into the shaping of this country which, for over 400 years, has become a constantly growing factor in the world. It is our own responsibility to see that our intellectual development must come from within but it must feed on what it finds both in history and the contemporary scene. This exhibition therefore is an enquiry into the progress and present thinking of our two great founders and our closest friend, and we may expect to find in it, underlying the variations due to history, temperament and individualities, some firm accepted ground which is common to us all.63
Similar to the mission statements associated with the Massey Collection of English
Painting, and the founding collections for the Vancouver Art Gallery and the
Beaverbrook Art Gallery, the AGT's Contemporary Paintings from Great Britain, the
Contemporary Paintings from Great Britain, the United States and France with Sculpture from the United States, ex. cat., Toronto: Art Gallery of Toronto, 1949, p. 3, produced in conjunction with an exhibition by the same title, AGT, 10 November - 26 December 1949.
61 Ibid, p. 2.
62 Ibid, p. 3.
Ibid, p. 2. Ill
United States and France exhibition asserted the idea that Canada's cultural identity was to be found in the art of the countries that dominated her. The first two paragraphs of the catalogue's Forward, part of which is quoted above, say a great deal about Canada for an exhibition that did not show any Canadian art. Blunt's essay for the British section of the catalogue is by far the most extensive of all the entries but, owing much to logistics of moving artworks - and especially sculpture, the art of the US was the most represented in the actual exhibition.
Although Blunt would continue to make excellent connections with modern
British art for the AGT in the late 1940s and into the 1950s - such as the Gallery's first
Henry Moore work, a drawing called Group ofShelterers During an Air Raid (1941), acquired by way of Great Britain's Contemporary Art Society (CAS), as well as a Moore bronze in 1955, which will be addressed extensively in Chapter 5 - it was at Blunt's encouragement that the AGT would make an acquisition of an oil by Ben Nicholson that would be the first of many more remarkable contributions of the Women's Committee, beginning in 1950.64
The Women's Committee and changing tides
Ben Nicholson's Still Life, June 6, 1948 (1948) was the first gift of the Women's
Committee Fund to the AGT in 1950 (Figure 6). The painting's fine lines and shifting planes reveal a still life arrangement that, nonetheless, remains in the realm of abstraction. The Women's Committee was introduced to the painting in Toronto, as it was
64 Blunt wrote to Baldwin on 21 June 1949 that he was looking for a Ben Nicholson work for the AGT; as discussed by Finlay, 2(fh-Century British Art from the Collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario, p. 7. 112 one of two works by Nicholson in the AGT's Contemporary Paintings from Great
Britain, the United States and France exhibition. 5 Since the British Council lent the work to the exhibition, Blunt was asked to approach the Council's Fine Art Department to inquire about the painting's availability for sale.66 Although its first purchase was made in
1950, the Women's Committee had been established since 1945, when Lady Jane Kemp recruited eight of her own friends, and AGT Members, to form the Women's Committee
(later known as the Volunteer Committee).67 Besides being a social outlet for members, the main drive of the Women's Committee was to raise funds for purchases to be made for the permanent collection at the AGT. Acquisitions made as a result of this generous effort are always noted on object labels and identifications as "Gift of the Women's
Committee" or some variation on that. Many of the women on the committee, over the years and at its inception, were the wives of well-standing Toronto men; they therefore had an existing social network to approach for donations and the general support of fundraising events.
It was due to Blunt's advisory role with the AGT that the Women's Committee struck a policy to purchase contemporary British paintings, which inspired the establishment an English Committee.68 The English Committee's members were an
Contemporary Paintings from Great Britain, the United States and France with Sculpture from the United States, ex. cat., no. 27, p. 10.
66 Finlay, 201''-Century British Art from the Collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario, p. 7.
67 Catherine Logan, "Acquiring Authority at the Art Gallery of Ontario and the Agnes Etherington Art Centre: Canadian Women and the Cultural Volunteer Experience," MA thesis, Carleton University, 1997, p. 44.
68 Art Gallery of Ontario: Selected Works, p. 38. 113 expert group, including the artist Edward Bawden, Philip Hendy, who was the director of the National Gallery in London, and K.L. Somerville, secretary of the British Council's
Fine Art Department. From time to time, the Women's Committee also took the advice of
Kenneth Clark.69 In the short frame of time between 1951 and 1953, this committee added sixteen works of art to the AGT's permanent collection, representing artists such as
Ivon Hitchens, John Piper, Graham Sutherland and another work by Henry Moore, this time a sculpture called Working Model for Upright Internal and External Forms (1951) - purchased in the very year it was made. Although purchases such as this are proof of
Blunt's strong backing of British modern art, he remained resistant to examples of abstraction that - as he would have put it - left the realm of nature.70 Henry Moore, with his multitude of references to the vitality of nature was an acceptable model of abstraction for Blunt; more extreme forms of abstraction would take some time before
Blunt warmed to them. For example, it was not until 1959 that Blunt would recommend the work of Francis Bacon, who, by that time, was already 50 years old.71 However, as
Finlay has pointed out, the AGT turned down Blunt's idea of buying a work by Bacon in
1959, since "by then the commitment to collecting contemporary British art had waned in favour of acquiring works from the New York School."72 The dawn of the 1960s at the
69 Logan, "Acquiring Authority at the Art Gallery of Ontario and the Agnes Etherington Art Centre," p. 57.
70 "Blunt Speaking: Londoner Gives Abstract Artists Concrete Advice," Globe-Democrat (St. Louis), 30 March 1956.
71 Finlay, 20th-Century British Art from the Collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario, p. 1.
72 Ibid. 114
AGT marked the beginning of a new-found respect at the Gallery for the art and art authorities of America.
During the decade of the 1950s, thirty-five works of art were purchased by the
Women's Committee and then donated to the AGT. Of that group, twenty-two were bought within five years of the artwork's production.73 The habit of purchasing contemporary art would continue into the 1960s. William Withrow's tenure as the director of the AGT also began with the onset of the 1960s. This new leadership proved to be liberating for the members of the Women's Committee. Withrow was not a highbrow art official, but rather a modest man with a background in education. Members of the Women's Committee felt a greater sense of equality with this new leadership and therefore began to assert their own opinions on purchases with a greater sense of confidence.74 In an MA thesis on the topic of Canadian women and their experience as volunteers in the cultural sector, Catherine Logan summarizes this sea change in the purchasing habits of the AGT's Women's Committee (WC):
Many members of the 1960s WC were involved in the New York art scene in relation to their personal collecting and social interests. Elise Meltzer, particularly knowledgeable and well-known to the New York art world, was also Chairman of the Purchase Fund Committee from 1961-63. These personal connections, along with Withrow's initial lack of experience... and willingness to learn, allowed the WC of the 1960s to take on a more public role and forward their personal acquisition agendas.75
73 Logan, "Acquiring Authority at the Art Gallery of Ontario and the Agnes Etherington Art Centre," p. 58.
74 Ibid, p. 62.
75 Ibid, p. 63. 115
Thinking more broadly about this change in the Women's Committee after 1960 - it was not only the increase in the personal will of a group of women, but also an increase in the authority of a group of Canadians who began to look with their own eyes at the art that was much closer to them in New York.76 As one past member of the Women's
Committee has recalled, as soon as Baldwin had retired from his position as director, the ladies of the Women's Committee took Withrow down to New York City to meet a number of art dealers and other art experts in the city.77
The AGT's first acquisition of a contemporary American painting was Sam
Francis' Untitled (1959) - a purchase made possible by the Women's Committee Fund in
1960. This Fund enabled other important acquisitions of contemporary American painting, including the purchase of Mark Rothko's No. 1 White and Red (1962) in 1962, and Andy Warhol's Elvis I and II (1964) (Figure 7), which was purchased in 1966. This shift to American contemporary art in the purchases made by the Women's Committee was more like a sea change; from 1960 on through to the early 1980s, this committee would exclusively buy the work of contemporary American artists.78
1961 - The year the AGT "bagged" Barr
76 A similar move towards more independent acquisition decisions occurred in the late 1950s and early 1960s with the Hart House Art Committee and its student members. See Sarah Stanners interview with David Silcox (3 February 2009), digital recording, transcribed in Appendix A.
77 Logan, "Acquiring Authority at the Art Gallery of Ontario and the Agnes Etherington Art Centre," p. 64. It was Valliere Cronyn that recalled this in an interview with Logan.
78 Barbara Fischer, "Toronto File: Alfred Barr, November 1961" MA thesis, Toronto: York University, 1999, pp. 16-17. 116
Alfred Barr, Jr. is, for the purposes of this Chapter, a subject through which to illustrate my argument that the beginning of the latter half of the twentieth century signaled a shift in cultural authority from British to American.79 Barr's invitation to Toronto was based on the Women's Committee's request that he judge a show of Canadian artists at the AGT and with the idea that they would then donate the winning work to the Museum of
Modern Art in New York. Yet, inviting Barr to the AGT was more than just a matter of making sure a task was fulfilled by an expert, as Barbara Fischer has pointed out in her
MA thesis, and related exhibition, on this very topic ("Toronto File: Alfred Barr,
November 1961"): "... it was Barr's authority as a collector and tastemaker, and with him the prestige of MoMA that was called upon."80 The respect that Barr commanded is captured in the letter of thanks that Jeanne Parkin sent to Barr after his visit, which lasted two short days (2-4 November 1961) but still left quite the impact on Toronto:
When the Women's Committee invited you to come to Toronto we did so with the idea that we had some interesting and talented artists whom we wanted you to see, and we hoped you would accept the gift of one of their pieces. We were overcome when you accepted our invitation; the realization that we had "bagged" the most significant man in the modern art field left us somewhat dazed by our own daring.81
A similar rise to authority happened in the career of art critic Clement Greenberg, whose American authority made a considerable and positive impact on the artistic career of Jack Bush; see Chapter 4.
80 Ibid, p. 20.
81 Jeanne Parkin to Alfred Barr, Jr. (10 November 1961), Alfred H. Barr, Jr. Papers, AHB 1.353a, mf 2188:173, The Museum of Modern Art Archives, New York. 117
Parkin, whose husband was the architect John C. Parkin, has been a vibrant fixture of the
Toronto cultural scene for years. At the time of Barr's visit in 1961, Jeanne Parkin was with the AGT's Women's Committee and Chairman of the Sale of Canadian Art
Committee. Her letter to Barr is glowing, to say the least, and it is a testament to how
American authorities on art had become so important in determining what was modern.
Jeanne continued in her letter of thanks to Barr:
The excitement over this event had Toronto keyed up for weeks prior to your arrival. Never, however, in our wildest dreams did we anticipate such a success. I wish I could describe to you the impact that your visit has had here. Artists, collectors, dealers, and the public at large - all have felt your presence very deeply.82
One of the instrumental people in Barr's visit was the cultured Cuban architect and emigre, Emilio del Junco. The decision to invite Barr to Toronto, and the scheme of awarding a Canadian artist with the chance to be in the collection of the MoMA, may very well have been at del Junco's suggestion. A MoMA memo from curator Dorothy
Miller to Barr - titled "Visit from del Junco and latest news from Toronto" and dated 14
September 1961 - indicates that del Junco was, as Miller put it:
.. .terribly upset and embarrassed that he has been unable to persuade Canadian art patrons, as he expected, to put up the money for Canadian acquisitions to our collection. .. .[and that he found that] they see no reason why they should donate examples of Canadian art to the 'very rich' Museum of Modern Art in New
83 Memo from Dorothy Miller to Alfred Barr (14 September 1961), Alfred H. Barr, Jr. Papers, AHB 1.353a, mf 2188:173, The Museum of Modern Art Archives, New York. 118
Del Junco's failed plan seems very similar to what the Women's Committee hosted - an event that would enter a Canadian artist into the MoMA. It says a great deal about the international repute of an institution that has a foreign community rallying to essentially gift a work to their permanent collection. It was a way to baptize the work of a contemporary Canadian artist as a success.84 Since del Junco wrote his letter of regret regarding his unsuccessful scheme to enter a Canadian work into the MoMA's collection just a couple of months previous to Barr's actual trip, del Junco could have suggested that the Women's Committee try their luck at it. Barr's itinerary for his Toronto trip, as produced by the AGT, shows that del Junco was to accompany Barr at several occasions throughout his second day,85 therefore suggesting that del Junco had some sort of stake in
Barr's visit. Regardless of whether or not he did, del Junco was one of the few in Toronto who had a pre-existing relationship with Barr; del Junco had been an advisor to Barr on
Latin American artists.86 Part of their day together in Toronto included a tour of commercial galleries, joined by Withrow.87 What surprised everybody about Barr's visit to Toronto was the outcome of the art competition - Barr chose three winners instead of just one and none of these winners were expected to be candidates; the accolades and
84 Jeanne Parkin describes the situation of earning MoMA vote of confidence as "the laying on of hands" in Fischer, "Toronto File: Alfred Barr, November 1961," p. 20.
85 Art Gallery of Toronto itinerary for Alfred Barr, Jr. for 2-4 November 1961 (24 October 1961) Alfred H. Barr, Jr. Papers, AHB 1.353a, mf 2188:173, The Museum of Modern Art Archives, New York.
86 Fischer, "Toronto File: Alfred Barr, November 1961," p. 19.
87 Art Gallery of Toronto itinerary for Alfred Barr, Jr. for 2-4 November 1961 (24 October 1961) Alfred H. Barr, Jr. Papers, AHB 1.353a, mf 2188:173, The Museum of Modern Art Archives, New York. 119 promised deposit to the MoMA collection went to De Vest a I'ouest by Ulysses Comtois,
Cellule Ocre by Jean McEwan, and Hailstorm in Alberta by William Kurelek.88
Extending the invitation - New York in Toronto
Just four months after Barr's trip to Toronto in November of 1961, Jerrold Morris, former curator of the Vancouver Art Gallery (VAG), partnered with Emilio del Junco in
February 1962 to open the Jerrold Morris International Gallery at 130 Bloor St. West in
Toronto (Figure 8). One minor detail on an address, but a major deal symbolically, was the fact that the gallery was on the 6th floor - high in the sky like so many New York galleries at the time. The vibe from Barr's visit must have still been in the air, since
Toronto Telegram reporter Nancy Phillips announced the gallery's opening by outlining the links between del Junco and Barr:
'Is it possible for an amateur art collector to become a dealer and still keep his faith, enthusiasm and integrity?' Alfred Barr, director of New York's Museum of Modern Art, says 'Absolutely. And what's more, a positive contribution is being made to society.' Mr. Barr is an old friend of Cuban architect Emilio del Junco, the man who asked the question. 'When Barr told me this I felt reassured about the whole thing. He had given me his blessing.'89
Del Junco was exercising his potential as an art dealer even before opening the gallery with Morris, since he had apparently left slides of Kazuo Nakamura's abstract paintings
88 Fischer, "Toronto File: Alfred Barr, November 1961," p. 22.
89 Nancy Phillips, "Dealer to Keep Faith," Telegram (7 February 1962). with Dorothy Miller at MoMA in 1961, suggesting that Barr take notice of this promising artist. The work must have registered well with Miller and Barr, since three works by
Nakamura, variously called Inner Core or Inner Structure, were purchased at the Laing
Galleries with the help of Jerrold Morris.91 When Morris arrived to Toronto in 1957 to work for the Laing Galleries, he may have been asking himself a question similar to del
Junco's: Is it possible for professional curator to become a dealer and still keep his faith, enthusiasm and integrity? The Laing Galleries was one of the first galleries in the city to offer artworks from Europe and Great Britain in particular. Morris' association with the
Laing Galleries did not last long, and he actually took the job due to an unexpected change of plans. Morris had originally come to Toronto to pursue an arrangement to work for the AGT, which ultimately fell through.92
Similar to the shows that he mounted at the VAG, Morris' ability to assemble a group of quality artworks from a broad range of international artists was to his community's benefit. One of the best exhibitions, of many, held at the Jerrold Morris
International Gallery was called The Art of Things, a clever name for a brand of art that was only just beginning to earn its name - Pop Art. The exhibition ran on the 6th floor at
130 Bloor Street West from 19 October to 6 November 1963 and offered for sale a host
90 Memo from Dorothy Miller to Alfred Barr (14 September 1961), Alfred H. Barr, Jr. Papers, AHB 1.353a, mf 2188:173, The Museum of Modern Art Archives, New York.
91 My research at the MoMA Archives found the circumstance of Nakamura's introduction to MoMA, but it was Barbara Fischer's MA thesis that alerted me to the eventual purchase of the paintings. Fischer, "Toronto File: Alfred Barr, November 1961," p. 30.
92 The details around this are unclear, although Jerrold's son John remembers that his father had plans to work at the AGT, which never materialized. Sarah Stanners interview with John Morris (14 January 2009), digital recording, transcribed in Appendix C. 121 of remarkable post New York school artworks by Andy Warhol, Jasper Johns and Roy
Lichtenstein, just to name a few. Before this high-style and high-quality private gallery was forced to close in the summer of 1966, owing to the extremely expensive overhead costs,93 the AGO's Women's Committee purchased, as previously mentioned, Warhol's
Elvis I and II (1964) - a strikingly American double panel containing four screen-printed images of Hollywood's Elvis (Figure 7). What the AGO did not purchase from the Jerrold
Morris International Gallery, and therefore missed out on, is much more astounding than the few gems they did decide to buy. For example, a photograph of the Morris
International Gallery shows Andy Warhol's Silver Liz As Cleopatra (1963)94 up for sale
(Figure 9), and another photo shows Roy Lichtenstein's Pistol (1964) available for sale
(Figure 8). 5 Similarly, David Mirvish now has arguably the best collection of colour field art in the world because very few people took the leap to purchase from his David
Mirvish Gallery, which ran from 1963 to 1978 and carried works by Anthony Caro,
Frank Stella, Jules Olitski, Kenneth Noland and Jack Bush, to name a few. The international art world, via New York City, had been available to Torontonians since the early 1960s but there was a chasm between what was in the private galleries and what was in the public institutions. As my Chapter devoted to Henry Moore will demonstrate, the urge to go modern by going British persisted at the AGO to the extent that the Gallery was forever shaped by the power of Moore's work in Toronto. Jack Bush's frustrations
Stanners interview with Morris, Appendix C.
94 In the end, the AGO received Warhol's Silver Liz As Cleopatra as a gift in 1979 from Mrs. Else Landauer, in memory of her husband, William Landauer.
Stanners interview with Morris, Appendix C. 122 with the contrast between the Toronto art scene and his pro-league circle of New York contacts will also shed light on the deferred emergence of an American model of modernity in Canada.
As a foil to my next chapter, an encounter between Bush, Clement Greenberg,
William Withrow and a painting by Franz Kline will prove helpful in grasping a sense of the disconnect between what was happening in the art world at large and what was not necessarily happening in the public galleries of the 1960s. In 1962, the Women's
Committee Fund made possible the acquisition of a large Franz Kline painting, but this time, a particularly vocal American art authority would express his displeasure with the acquisition.
On 24 January 1962, Jack Bush went to the AGT with Clement Greenberg to see what was on view, and to view recent acquisitions with Withrow. Bush wrote about their experience viewing the new Kline painting in his diary:
[Withrow] phoned Dean Cooper to open up and bring out the Kline. We went to the basement, and the man with white gloves brought out the 10ft. Kline & set it up. Clem looked, looked at me, at Withrow, puzzled and said 'But it's lousy! It's terrible! You don't mean to say you've bought this!' Withrow was shaken, mumbled that he thought so - that Sidney Janis had recommended it. Clem said 'Oh hell - you can't believe him!' ... 'And did Jack say you had another & discarded it for this?' 'Yes - but it's still here.' [they brought the other Kline out]... 'Now that's better - this is much better than your new one. You don't mean to say you are returning this in favour for that! 'Yes' said Withrow. ... Poor Withrow. He announced we would have to go - a Dr. Somebody or other was waiting for him in his office. We went upstairs - thanked him & held out our hands. He did not shake them, but smiled faintly & excused 123
himself. Clem was still fuming & upset as we drove home. 'What's the matter with Toronto?'I said...96
The painting was Kline's Cupola (1958-60) (Figure 10) and the candid evaluation that
Withrow endured was from one of the best advisors of American abstract art, even if it was unsolicited. Still, some Torontonians also found this particular gift from the
Women's Committee to be anything but avant-garde, especially considering that they had just returned a canvas by Barnett Newman. Robert Fulford reported on this acquisition of
Kline and the pass on the Newman: "[They] backed away nervously when they saw the serene and intransigent glory of the painting itself.. .[and instead] settled on a new painting by Franz Kline who has been imitated enough to be respectable."97
Fulford's report reveals the catching up that the AGT still had to do in order to be in line with the savvy tastes of New York's cultural elite. It was outside the institution - in the private commercial galleries of Toronto - that the pace of New York's art world was followed more closely. Despite the lag, the AGT's history of art advisors, exhibitions and acquisitions has manifested this distinctive shift in the model of cultural authority from British to American in Canada.
96 Jack Bush, Diary (24 January 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
97 Robert Fulford, The Daily Star (31 December 1961) quoted in Catherine Logan, Acquiring Authority at the Art Gallery of Ontario and the Agnes Etherington Art Centre: Canadian Women and the Cultural Volunteer Experience, Masters thesis, Ottawa: Carleton University, 1998, p. 65. Chapter 4
Jack Bush - Canada's Shift in Cultural Influence Personified
Primer
Art historian Ken Carpenter opens an extensive essay on the art of Jack Bush (1909-
1977) in a way that captures precisely why I have chosen to explore this artist. Carpenter writes: "The Development of Jack Bush as an artist is something of a model for the history of Canadian art as a whole."1 In a current Canadian art historical study of the
Group of Seven and the later generations of Canadian artists that would go beyond wilderness, John O'Brian asserts, "Jack Bush was an intermediary figure in the transition."2 In addition to his career as a commercial artist, Bush began by painting traditional subjects and landscapes, mostly in watercolour. He eagerly followed the methods of the Group of Seven, who enjoyed venturing out into the Canadian back country to produce sketches, which would later be worked up into large oils on canvas in the studio. Most recently Leslie Dawn has challenged the apparent Canadianness of the
1 Ken Carpenter, "Triumph over Adversity," in Jack Bush, ed. Karen Wilkin, Toronto: McClelland and Stewart in association with Merritt Editions Limited, 1984, p. 84.
2 John O'Brian, "Wild Art History," in Beyond Wilderness: The Group of Seven, Canadian Identity, and Contemporary Art," eds. John O'Brian and Peter White, Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, p. 35.
194 125
Group's work in an essay called "The Britishness of Canadian Art."3 In exploring the question of whether the works of the Group were a "recapitulation" rather than a
"repudiation of British landscape conventions..," Dawn concludes: "Thus the mythic claim that the Group's works came from an unmediated and uninfluenced response to a raw and untouched nature was modified by the mediation of colonial practices and the sites they actually chose, just as its 'Canadianness' is modified by its dependence on
British traditions." Dawn shows us that the Group had a rather picturesque eye for landscapes. The painting career of Bush exemplifies the move in Canadian art from a past of inherited European tradition toward a future of international exchange.
Chapter 4 is composed of three sections: "Recounting Jack Bush," which critically examines the historiography surrounding the artist - that is, the way in which Bush's fine art career has been portrayed in Canadian art history; secondly, "The beginning of a new era," which focuses on the years 1962 through 1966 as a pivotal period, where Bush solidifies his relationships with American contemporaries and begins to secure solo exhibitions of his work on an international level; and "Jack Bush, World Artist," a final section on the artist that demonstrates the unique 'elsewhere condition' of much of
Canadian art after mid century - that is, defining an artist's success outside of Canada is
3 Leslie Dawn, "The Britishness of Canadian Art," in Beyond Wilderness: The Group of Seven, Canadian Identity, and Contemporary Art'," eds. John O'Brian and Peter White, Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, pp. 193-201. Although not as recent, Dawn's second chapter called "England in Canadian Art" from his 2006 book is a much more extensive account of the English school-tendencies of the Group of Seven. Leslie Dawn, National Visions, National Blindness: Canadian Art and Identities in the 1920s, Vancouver: UBC Press, 2006.
4 Dawn, "The Britishness of Canadian Art," pp. 194 and 200. 126 paramount to securing a reputation within Canada. Bush perfected an American model of painting - post painterly abstraction - before he belatedly became a part of the canon of
Canadian art. Understanding Bush's unwavering self-consciousness regarding who he was as an artist is fundamental to revealing this shift. Extensive research of the Jack Bush fond at the Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO) has provided ample evidence in this regard.
The personal diaries of Bush, held at the archives of the AGO, span the years 1952 through to the artist's death in January 1977, and were motivated by the recommendation of his psychotherapist Dr. Allan Walters. From 1947 through to the very last days of his life, Bush consulted with Dr. Walters on issues of life and, interestingly, art.5 Dr. Walters encouraged Bush to paint freely and to pursue his dream of international success as an abstract painter. As an art collector, friend and general life coach to Bush, Dr. Walters' relationship with Bush was not strictly professional.
The other pivotal figure in Bush's life was the preeminent New York-based art critic Clement Greenberg. Greenberg met Bush on Painters Eleven turf in Toronto in June of 1957. Born in the same year, 1909, the initial rapport and respect between Bush and
Greenberg grew into a life long friendship. Besides Dr. Walters, Greenberg was the most significant mentor in Bush's mature life. The extent to which Bush reflected on his position as an artist and the value that he placed on the advice of Dr. Walters (Dr. W) and
Greenberg (Clem) is captured in the following diary entry from mid March 1966:
The attachment to Clem: approval? Yes -1 want it & I get it. The same with Dr. W. How much do I do just to get their approval? In the main, nothing special -
5 A North York General Hospital report of the artist's death states that Jack Bush saw Dr. Walters because of severe pain and Dr. Walters brought him into the hospital. Ultimately, Jack died of a ruptured left ventricle on Jan 24, 1977. Dr. Allan Walters fond, Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 127
nothing much against my grain. I owe them both so much - is it a desire to repay? No - it's to be patted on the head & protected.
With Clem - I've painted all out - done them all myself with a 'sounding board' suggestion now & then from him. I know the work is good - as good as Jules [Olitski] & Ken's [Noland] - and different from theirs. So I'll have to take my place on the platform, in the open, and not hide behind them. Allan too, is a sounding board. What I do bounces off him, like Clem. I can't hide there either. Into the open. There's no need to hide. Protect myself.6
Bush was no Sunday painter.7 He was highly disciplined in his commitment to paint as often as possible and in advancing his work to a place that seemed, at the time, to defy categorization in Canadian art. This chapter is a case study of the evolution of a Canadian painter from a tradition-bound, gentlemanly artist belonging to every reputable art club, to a globally-minded, American-inspired, artist of international repute.
Recounting Jack Bush
In 1975 Jack Bush told the story of his career in a videotaped interview. It wasn't the first time he had recounted the stepping-stones of his late-blooming success as an abstract painter. His voice is especially excited when he recalls the Canadian cultural milieu thirty years previous: "Around 1944-45, something happened in Canada. Life magazine came
6 Jack Bush, Diary (15-18 March 1966), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
7 Since Jack Bush had to work as a commercial artist up until 1968, commentaries on the artist often assert that he painted on Sundays. While this is true, the diaries reveal that Bush painted whenever he could, often preparing canvases late in the evening on a weekday. He certainly did not limit himself to painting only on the weekends. into publication.. .here, so did Time magazine and so were the Skira Art Books imported.
And Jesus, for the first time we saw what was going on in the rest of the world!"8 So, as the story goes, Canada was in the dark up until about the end of the War. For many, the narrative is nothing new: (Anglo) Canada was under the spell of the mighty Group of
Seven and that was all the art that Canadians needed to be concerned with. Bush even makes this default excuse about the Group of Seven as he goes on to say, "Now this is something that the Group of Seven, our Seniors in a way by a decade, never mentioned to us.. .They never once told us or Canada where their influence had come from."9 But
Bush's recollection just doesn't jibe with the historical facts of the time. Although Bush's early work does appear as though he had his head in the sands of the art world that thrived above ground, the out-of-touch Canadian artist is simply a stereotype of convenience to critics and historians, as Leslie Dawn has suggested in "The Britishness of Canadian Art." My preliminary section on Bush aims to dispel both the self-cast and historian-perpetuated myths about the artist's early cultural disconnectedness, and to confirm the importance of external influence in his painting practice.
First, in relation to the claim that Bush's exposure to art in the rest of the world only happened after WWII, some matters of fact must be sorted out. Life magazine was first published in 1936 and was made available to Canadians from the very first issue.
The masthead for volume 1, number 1 of Life offers subscriptions to Canada for $5.00.
Jack Bush, extracts from a videotaped interview with Jack Bush by Lesley Fry and John Newton, March 1975, transcribed in Jack Bush, Paintings and Drawings, 1955-1976, London: Arts Council of Great Britain, 1980, p. 16.
9 Ibid.
Life, 1:1(23 November 1936). 129
In the first issue of the second volume of Life, a two-page spread is devoted to celebrating the exponential growth of the magazine's readership. In 1937, a store called The
American News Company in Montreal boasted about the rush for their stock of the magazine: "little can we add in reporting on Life. The quantities allotted to us are disposed of before they are received."11 There's even empirical proof for Life's existence in Canada before Bush's said date of arrival; Figure 11 is a photograph taken in 1939 of a reader enjoying Life magazine at the Toronto Public Library's military camp branch in
Exhibition Park.12 Time magazine had been circulating in Canada since 1926, and the
Canadian version of Time was launched in 1943.13 A greater sense of the presence of U.S. magazines in Canada is gathered when considering that the value of U.S.-imported magazines grew from $2.6 million to $5.9 million between 1935 and 1937.14 More importantly, foreign magazines of specific interest to visual artists such as Bush were certainly available in Canada before 1945. For example, the Joint Catalogue of the
Periodicals and Serials in the Libraries of the City of Toronto reports in 1934 that the popular British based journal The Studio was available within the Toronto Public Library
11 Life, 2:1(4 January 1937).
12 Margaret Penman, A Century of Service: Toronto Public Library, 1883-1983, Toronto: Toronto Public Library Board, 1983, p. 46.
13 Michael Burtch, Hymn to the Sun, Early Work: Jack Bush, Art Gallery of Algoma, 1997, p. 43.
14 Isaiah Litvak and Christopher Maule, Cultural Sovereignty: The Time and Reader's Digest Case in Canada, New York: Praeger Publishers, 1974, p. 28. 130 and the University of Toronto library systems.15 The library was, especially during the depression, the everyman's centre for resources and recreation. Established with the 1916
Carnegie Foundation, the Beaches Branch of the Toronto Public Library - Bush's neighbourhood during his early career - was "a pioneer in community outreach with its
'booklovers' evenings, drama league, picture exhibits, and so on."16 As an artist with a wife and three children during the depression and war years, Bush was at the very least likely aware of his local library's resources.
Still, the myth of the isolated Canadian artist is perpetuated without question, and sometimes with motive. The chronology prepared by Jennifer Murray in Karen Wilkin's
Jack Bush (1984) - the most exhaustive and compelling book on the artist to date - takes
Bush's claim for truth, listing the years 1944-45 as follows: "Life and Time magazines and Skira Books available in Canada, giving Bush his first opportunity to see advanced
European and American painting."17 Christine Boyanoski's Jack Bush: Early Work
(1985) also accepted the artist's statements without question as she describes the artist's
'awakening' to modernism:
It was not until 1944-45 that Jack Bush became aware of the modernist tradition outside Canada. Generally speaking, he did not take an intellectual approach to his art, so that it was only when Life and Time magazines began featuring articles on modern art that he realized what he had been missing.18
15 A Joint Catalogue of the Periodicals and Serials in the Libraries of the City of Toronto, Toronto: Printed and Published by the King's Printer, 1934.
16 Penman, A Century of Service: Toronto Public Library, 1883-1983, pp. 26 and 35.
17 Jennifer Murray, "Chronology" in Jack Bush, ed. Karen Wilkin, 1st American ed., New York: Viking Penguin, 1984, p. 200. 18 Christine Boyanoski, Jack Bush: Early Work, Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1985, p. 17. Boyanoski makes this statement without citing the information's source: a videotaped 131
There is a motivation to accept this late date of artistic awareness because it serves to enhance the sense of pure origins, or originality, in the artist's work. It also serves to explain away the dichotomous relationship between Bush's early work and his post painterly late abstract work. For example, Boyanoski says, "The fact that Bush spent most of his life in Toronto has been seen in retrospect as advantageous to the development of his art, allowing for its gradual evolution free from possible pressures arising from life in a cosmopolitan art centre like New York."19 Boyanoski opts for the inspiration via pure ignorance narrative, and Terry Fenton, in the 1976 Jack Bush: A
Retrospective, asserts, "the late maturation of Bush's art...was undoubtedly a result of
Toronto's prevailing provincialism during the early years of his development."20 It is telling that the earliest painting included in this 1976 retrospective exhibition dates to
1958, although Bush began a record of his painting practice in 1930.21 Viewing the artist's supposed isolation as a positive point, Fenton argues that it is Bush's lack of awareness of cubism that makes his most famous abstract paintings so distinct and successful internationally: "However much coloured in his development by the Toronto of the 1930s and 1940s, he has turned that liability into an asset, into an art of distinction and high originality that has become a source of influence and inspiration to artists in interview with Jack Bush by Lesley Fry and John Newton, March 1975. The information is, instead, simply stated as fact.
19 Christine Boyanoski, Jack Bush: Early Work, Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1985, p. 17.
20 Terry Fenton, Jack Bush: A Retrospective, Toronto: Art Gallery of Toronto, 1976.
21 Jack Bush, Record notebook (1930-61), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 132
Canada and elsewhere."22 Interestingly, Fenton stops, just for a moment, in his consideration of the non-cubist approach to Bush's abstraction, and admits, "it is tempting to suggest that this is the product of his Canadianism."23
In 1977, writing for the Vie des arts journal whilst working as contemporary art curator for the Art Gallery of Ontario, Roald Nasgaard suggests:
Toronto has remained persistently provincial. It has been continually difficult for any "style" to strike strong, self-sustaining local roots because it has usually been adopted from outside at a relatively fully developed stage. Toronto artists, without having the understanding derived from participating in the formative steps of the imported style, have been without the preconditions to develop it meaningfully in new directions, except to fuss it up.24
Nasgaard's evaluation of the effects of being a Toronto artist are in keeping with the story of Bush's late and selective exposure to Modern art outside of the Canadian border, which has become the default excuse for the sea change in Bush's oeuvre. In another article in the same issue of Vie des arts, Nasgaard tackles the question of Bush's
'idiosyncratic' abstraction specifically. Nasgaard seems to switch gears with this contribution to the journal, suggesting that Bush's selective "echoes" of modernism's past - specifically Matisse and Miro - are an asset to the distinctiveness of his work in comparison to the works of the other post painterly artists of his time. 5 But Nasgaard too
22 Ibid.
23 Ibid.
24 Roald Nasgaard, "A Glance at Art in Toronto," Vie des arts, XXI (Spring 1977), 83.
25 Roald Nasgaard, "Jack Bush: Reductions and Retentions," Vie des arts, XXI (Spring 1977), pp. 89-90. 133 reveals his motive while he scolds the evaluations of others: "Some say [Bush's abstract paintings] are downright arbitrary and eccentric. To explain this, Canadian critics especially refer to Bush's provincial Canadian roots as determining factors which deflect what otherwise are purer modernist objectives."26 Instead of reading Bush's characteristic abstract gestures as the artist's reference to Miro (i.e. the graphic 'objects' laid upon a flat ground of colour in paintings such as Bonnet from 1961 [Figure 12]), Nasgaard adheres to a formalist view and interprets them as a "compositional schema" that reminds the viewer of Miro but is used by the artist purely as a way to play with colour.27 Essentially,
Nasgaard insists that the artist's use of this 'schema' is a painterly device and not an art historical reference. Emphasizing the idea of Bush being isolated in Toronto supports this argument that he, like other Toronto artists, brought Modern techniques alone to his works because he was "much less constrained by any need to compose according to some intuitively felt underlying cubist grid."28 Nasgaard sees this supposed provincial tendency towards adopting modern mannerisms without personal development in the style as a symptom of being a Toronto artist. I argue that Bush is a Canadian abstractionist because of the way we write about him now.
More recently, with his beautifully illustrated tome Abstract Painting in Canada
(2007), Nasgaard devotes a section of his chapter on the Painters Eleven to a
Ibid, 89.
Ibid, 90.
Ibid, 90. 134 consideration of their British influences.29 Nasgaard brings some necessary relief to what has been a lack of scholarship on the foreign media that was available to Bush, such as books and journals, and he also makes the logical connection between the advertising arts of Paul Nash and Bush.30 Yet Nasgaard's connections remain loose. His arguments are concerned with making formal comparisons, which are perfectly valid, but his remarks remain on the surface. Graham Sutherland, from this point of view, can only be best compared to the spiky compositions of Harold Town and Oscar Cahen, for example, and the door remains open to find compositional references to any number of painters. By contrast, my discussion of Bush is rooted in a less material approach to the artist's career.
Although Bush went to high school in Montreal, his exposure, or lack thereof, to
Les Automatistes is rarely discussed for more than a sentence. Also, since Bush was a key member of the Painters Eleven, who were hailed as the first definitively abstract group of painters in Toronto, the presence of abstraction in Toronto before the 1950s is rarely discussed in this context. This is particularly the case because the last high point for abstraction in Toronto was in the late 1920s. Explaining this leap does not make for a succinct, or even comprehensible, narrative. Arguably, the first exhibition of abstract art by a Canadian artist was Bertram Brooker's solo exhibition at the Arts & Letters Club in
Toronto in January of 1927. As Adam Lauder has convincingly argued with the recent exhibition It's Alive! Bertram Brooker and Vitalism, this British-born artist, who was also a commercial artist like Bush, was steeped in the same vitalist ethos that shaped the work
Karen Finlay, "Identifying with Nature: Graham Sutherland and Canadian Art, 1939- 1955," (pp.43-59) RACAR, XXI: 1-2 (1994).
30 Roald Nasgaard, Abstract Painting In Canada, Vancouver: Douglas & Mclntyre / Halifax: Art Gallery of Nova Scotia, 2007, p. 98. of Paul Nash and Graham Sutherland, for example. Also in 1927, the Societe Anonyme exhibited abstract works at the Art Gallery of Toronto, including artists such as Wassily
Kandinsky, Piet Mondrian and Max Ernst.32 In fact, it was Lawren Harris who brought this modern collection to Toronto, using his own funds to sponsor the event.33 Harris was a part of this New York foundation, which was established by Katherine Dreier. Harris's work was not included in the Societe Anonyme show in Toronto, likely because he did not want to seem removed from his associations with the Group of Seven or interested in his own promotion, since he was the sponsor. The exhibition caught a lot of press attention, with no fewer than 13 reviews and articles devoted to the show.34
In these early years of experimental painting in Canada, Hart House and the Art
Gallery of Toronto were among the few places in Ontario for a contemporary artist to exhibit their art free of commercial concerns or academy associations. Bush came to
Toronto in 1928, moving from the Montreal branch of the Rapid Grip Company to the
31 It's Alive! Bertram Brooker and Vitalism, Windsor: Art Gallery of Windsor, 10 January - 8 March 2009. Adam Lauder, the curator for this exhibition, has written an important essay (forthcoming) to accompany this exhibition, which revises the past scholarship on Brooker to aptly replace his practice in a position that is closer to vitalism rather than mysticism in general.
Catalogue of the Exhibition of the International Exhibition of Modern Art Assembled by the Societe Anonyme, Toronto: The Canadian Society of Graphic Art, and Historical Paintings and Drawings by C.W. Jefferys, April 1927. And Dennis Reid, A Concise History of Canadian Painting, 2nd ed., Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1988, pp. 177 and 188.
33 L.R. Pfaff, "Lawren Harris and the International Exhibition of Modern Art: Rectifications to the Toronto Catalogue (1927), and Some Critical Concerns," RACAR, 11: 1-2 (1984): Appendix A, Letter from Lawren Harris to the Exhibition Committee, Art Gallery of Toronto, December 1926.
34 L.R. Pfaff, "Lawren Harris and the International Exhibition of Modern Art," p. 81. 136
Toronto branch of the graphic art firm. Although Bush had planned to live in New York to gain more experience, the impact of the depression - especially in the years 1929-30 - confirmed the artist's decision to remain in Toronto.35 Again, Bush must have had an idea of modern experimental art outside of Canada before his recollected date of 1944-45 for exposure to extra-national media. In fact, media was his business, working for the Grip
Company right out of high school. It wasn't until 1968 that Bush finally quit his career as a commercial graphic artist.
There is evidence of Bush's involvement with Hart House and the Art Gallery of
Toronto in the early years of his career. Between 1929 and 1939 Bush participated in evening art classes offered at the Ontario College of Art (OCA). During this time,
Charles Comfort was one of his teachers. Comfort was a Scottish-born, English-raised, artist who had considerable ties to Hart House and whom the Grip Company of Toronto had also employed. Another key teacher from Bush's time at the OCA was the
Englishman Frederick Challener. Bush began his life as a painter in a place and time when artists wore neckties and aspired to be gentlemen. Years later, Greenberg wrote to
Bush and expressed his affection for him, telling Bush that he felt he was a true gentleman among the esteemed artists he knew.36 Interestingly, when Bush became deeply involved in the New York art scene in the 1960s, his attire became increasingly casual. By this time, there were more bohemian artists than gentlemen in the arts.
35 Jack Bush, Extracts from a videotaped interview with Jack Bush by Lesley Fry and John Newton, March 1975, transcribed in Jack Bush, Paintings and Drawings, 1955- 1976. London: Arts Council of Great Britain, 1980, p. 15.
36 Letter from Clement Greenberg to Jack Bush (27 February 1963), the letter has been slipped into Bush's diary from 1963, Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 137
There is indeed another side to Bush's work. The artist kept meticulous records of every painting he ever created or destroyed from 1930 to 1976.37 In each case, the title, date, medium, and place of production are listed, and sometimes the price paid and to which collector if sold is noted. Thumbnail sketches are employed for the abstract works whose titles help little in identification. In his notebook for the years 1930-1961, Bush lists two paintings in 1945 as "experimental." One entry is an oil on Masonite called
"Landscape." Bush writes in relation to this work: "Painted in Toronto, exhibited in
O.S.A. show 1945. Experimental - developed on the straight line form only."38 That year, the O.S.A. (Ontario Society of Artists) exhibition reserved a special section for the display of experimental works. As mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, Bush's early habits in painting included taking sketches on excursions to rural areas, a practice not unlike the Group of Seven's. An early example of Bush's outdoor painting sessions includes the 1930 watercolour called Sumach (Figure 13). Bush's tendency to sketch first and later paint a formal canvas in-studio only began to diminish noticeably in the year
1949. The artist's entries in the "sketches" section of his 1930-1961 notebook stop in
1951. In the same notebook that records all of his paintings and sketches, Bush makes a statement under the heading "1947":
Experimental works suggested by Dr. J. Allan Walters, and commenced in Sept. 1947. The idea being to paint freely the inner feelings and moods. Around March 1948 he further suggested starting from scratch on a blank canvas with no preconceived idea, and just let the thing develop in colour, form and content.
37 Bush's record books, in three neat, handwritten, lined notebooks, are now E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
38 Jack Bush, Record notebook (1930-1961), E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, AGO archives. In 1947, Dr. Wallace Graham referred Bush to Dr. Walters for problems related to tension.39 The paintings listed immediately after this statement in his notebook bear titles such as, "The Wanderer," "Tired," "Tangled," "Weary," "Stomach Pain," "Panic,"
"Tension," and "The Pit." Bush was no doubt going through a tough emotional period in his life during the late 1940s, but exploring the mental health of the artist is not the concern of this study.
Michael Burtch's 1997 exhibition catalogue Hymn to the Sun, Early Work: Jack
Bush is perhaps the only source to note the impossibility of Bush's claim to have only been exposed to foreign art after the availability of media such as Time and Life to
Canada post WWII. No more than a paragraph is dedicated to the discrepancy, and
Burtch feels, "the contradictions between Bush's recollections and actual events raise questions about his state of mind, and perhaps point to his sense of isolation as an artist."41 Burtch's essay is partially based on the artist's diaries. Burtch goes on to say,
"as early as 1942-43, Bush's work.. .exhibited an underlying anxiety, certainly from 1945 to 1948 his work was in full transition to a similar pictorial 'breakdown.'"42 It is an opportunistic analogy - suggesting that Bush's mental collapse was the watershed for his
"pictorial 'breakdown'" towards abstraction. It seems to me that this oft-neglected anachronism in Bush's version of his own history reveals the artist's historical
39 "Chronology," in Jack Bush, ed. Karen Wilkin, Toronto: McClelland and Stewart in association with Merritt Editions Limited, 1984, p. 201.
40 Burtch, Hymn to the Sun, Early Work: Jack Bush, p. 43.
41 Ibid.
42 Ibid, 44. consciousness - his historicity, if you will. Regardless of whether the artist was feeling emotionally up or down, Bush's perceived connectedness or disconnectedness to art outside of Canada has defined his career - and he knew it. My point is that it is more important to see this chronological blip in Bush's story as a seam that has broken to reveal the very crucial issue of foreign influence that turned, during the modern period in
Canada, from being received from the Mother country (the UK or the colonial hegemony in general), to something to pursue in new and, if you will, counter environments (the
US). Bush's career developed during a shift in Canada's thinking about cultural sovereignty. For this reason, his early career is hopelessly typical of the Group of Seven style, while his late career is pointedly cosmopolitan. Essentially, Bush's mis- remembrance is much more grounded in the social than in the emotional register.
Bush's career as a painter truly took a decisive turn when he decided to engage with the international market, which I would argue coincides with the first opportunity he had to show his abstract work in the US, at the Riverside Museum's 20th Annual
Exhibition of American Abstract Artists and Painters Eleven of Canada in New York in
1956.43 It was also at mid century when an international profile became markedly more attractive to Canadian artists. The Royal Commission on National Development in the
Arts, Letters and Sciences (otherwise known as the Massey Commission) tabled its recommendations in 1951. As I've outlined in the first sections of this dissertation, the
Massey Commission's Report was rife with comparisons to the arts administration of the
UK and the US. For example, the section on "Local Galleries" laments "that there is no
Bush was exhibited in the Riverside Museum's "20 Annual Exhibition of American Abstract Artists and Painters Eleven of Canada" in New York (1956). 140 gallery in Canada to compare with the wealthy and established institutions to be found in the United States and abroad."44
Bush kept up his traditional aims while simultaneously pursuing experimental avenues into the late 1940s and first couple years of the 1950s. His turn to abstraction was not so all-of-a-sudden, as has been suggested by many historians. For example, he joined the Canadian Group of Painters in 1948. The Canadian Group of Painters was a spin-off from the Group of Seven, and in its first exhibition, located in Atlantic City, New
Jersey, the catalogue forcefully stated, "Modernism in Canada has almost no relation to the modernism of Europe."45 Four years later, in 1952, Bush made open strides towards painting as an abstract artist. For example, he participated in the "First Canadian All
Abstract Exhibition" in Oshawa during the summer of 1952. The artist's next major statement in his record notebook of 1930-61 came under the heading "1952":
Preparations for one-man exhibition at Roberts Feb. 14-30 [sic]. Very successful. No painting at all following show. W.C. ex. at same time- followed by O.S.A. Won the Forster award with "Good Samaritan." Good period of digesting. No hurry to get to work. Desire for quiet period of work for five years.46
Bush's award-winning Good Samaritan (1951) is, however, a figurative painting, though full of sharp, abstracting angles. Its abstract figurations are representative of the dual
44 The Massey Commission, excerpts printed in Documents in Canadian Art, ed. Douglas Fetherling, Peterborough: Broadview Press, 1987, pp. 198-199.
45 Canadian Group of Painters 1st catalogue (summer 1933) quoted in Dennis Reid, A Concise History of Canadian Painting, 2nd ed., Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1988, p. 178.
Jack Bush, Record notebook (1930-61), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 141 nature of his artistic activities at the time. Michael Burtch quotes a telling section of
Bush's diary from April of 1953, where the painter writes that he felt "so far behind, yet so far out in front."47 Caught in the shift towards increasing internationalism in Canadian art, Bush's contradictory sentiments and artistic activities catch more precisely the beginning of the turning point in his career from representational to strictly abstract art.
It was in 1953 that Bush would help to form Painters Eleven - a painters' group founded on mutual abstract aims but diverse opinions and styles. As an employee of the
Robert Simpson Company in October of 1953, William Ronald arranged for himself,
Bush, Oscar Cahen, Tom Hodgson, Alexandra Luke, Ray Mead, and Kazuo Nakamura to exhibit their abstract paintings in the windows of the Toronto department store. These arrangements of home decor and abstraction were billed as "Abstracts at Home."48 The seven participants would soon join with Jock MacDonald, Harold Town, Walter
Yarwood and Hortense Gordon to make Painters Eleven complete. As previously mentioned, it was in the year 1956 that Bush was exhibited in the Riverside Museum's
20 Annual Exhibition of American Abstract Artists and Painters Eleven of Canada in
New York. The following year, in 1957, Bush would begin his twenty-year relationship with the influential critic Clement Greenberg. Let us also recall that Bush's 1976 retrospective exhibition at the AGO begins, rather selectively, with the year 1958. Yet despite the appearance of Bush's sudden blossoming into abstraction, as the retrospective and other historical accounts would suggest, Bush's development as an abstract painter was not brought about by a sudden awareness of the world beyond Toronto, but rather a
Jack Bush quoted in Burtch, Hymn to the Sun, Early Work: Jack Bush, p. 67.
"Abstracts at Home" advertisement, The Globe and Mail (19 October 1953). conscious and gradual decision to pursue abstract painting; it was an aim that solidified with his commitment to developing an international profile.
This is not to suggest that Bush's earlier work is in some way inferior - that is not at all the case. Throughout the 1930s and 1940s he was a highly active and award winning artist. He also did well as a commercial artist for nearly forty years.
Understandably, the work of an artist who moves from representational to abstract art will exhibit visual differences between the two phases, and this is why my study has not strictly focused on such obvious markers of change. What is less detectable is the way in which an artist is historicized, or even how they think of themselves historically. I have shown that Bush's propagation of the idea that he was 'in the dark' about art outside of
Canada until 1945 is in keeping with the convenient narrative of the heroic rise of the
Canadian artist out of isolation - a narrative that is still used by historians who want to emphasize originality or avoid contradictory explanations - such as an American-style abstract painter having a very traditional, if not colonial, early experience as a painter of landscapes and quasi-abstract figurative subjects. What deserves more exploration is the extent to which Bush's shift in his painting practice - dating to around 1956-57 as I've argued - is a reflection of the change in the definition of what a successful painter is in
Canada. In the days of the Group of Seven and the Canadian Group of Painters, it was undoubtedly the nationalistic soul of the adventurous artist and their chosen subject that was valued. However understated by the Group members themselves (three of which were born and trained in England; F.H. Varley, J.E.H. MacDonald and Arthur Lismer), their approaches were founded on English picturesque precedents. By mid-century the
Massey Commission would reveal the importance of internationalism to Canadian art, culminating in an outright celebration of all things cosmopolitan at the 1967 Expo in
Montreal. The Canadian artist after the 1950s was only considered truly successful if their work could translate well beyond the borders of their own country. Bush's oeuvre evolved through this shift and his admirable sensitivity to the reception of his paintings allowed him to survive this change, and flourish because of it. This first section of this chapter on Bush has concentrated on what led up to this point, around 1956-57, and how his arrival to this point has been (mis)construed, even by the artist himself. As the story goes: if Bush was ignorant of international art before 1945 then it was because he was a fine Canadian painter and upstanding member of the Canadian Society of Painters in
Watercolour, the Ontario Society of Artists, the Royal Canadian Academy and the
Canadian Group of Painters; if Bush was ignorant of international art before 1945 it was also because he was isolated in Canada and was destined to create fresh and original abstract art that would impress the art world at large. What I am trying to demonstrate with my concluding statements is how Bush's history depends on how it is constructed and from what angle it is perceived.
The beginning of a new era
On 19 February 1962, Bush met with Dr. Walters for one of his regular diary review sessions. At the end of their session, Bush recalls the Doctor's satisfaction with how far
Bush had come with his therapy, "Dr: Well, I think we could stop right here - that's 15 years - Feb 1947 to Feb 1962 - it's the beginning of a new era."49 A few days later, on 23
49 Jack Bush, Diary (19 February 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. Bush began seeing Dr. Walters in 1947, as indicated by this statement, but the diaries held in the archives of the AGO begin with the year 1952. 144
February 1962, Bush received a letter he had been waiting for - he had won a grant from the Canada Council for the Arts (a Senior Fellowship), which would provide monies for travel throughout Europe and New York.50 Since its founding in 1957, the Canada
Council had provided grants for artists to travel abroad and this was based on the assumption that there just wasn't enough culture in Canada to benefit its own artists. It wasn't until David Silcox, who began his tenure with the Council in 1965, strove to make changes to the Council's granting system that Canadian artists were able to take grants to stay or travel within Canada to inspire their artwork.51 In any case, at this time Bush was eager to travel to Europe where so many of his admired artist friends, and especially
Clement Greenberg, had gone to enlighten themselves through exposure to masterworks as well as new ideas in art. The Sunday following the good news about the grant, Bush called Greenberg to let him know.52 Bush writes in his diary about a piece of advice from
Greenberg regarding how he'd get to Europe in the first place, "Clem insisted that we go to Europe at least one way by boat, 'to get the proper feel of distance between a Goya &
Canada.'"53
50 Jack Bush, Diary (23 February 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
51 David Silcox in interview with Sarah Stanners (3 February 2009), Toronto, digital recording device, Appendix A.
52 Jack Bush, Diary (25 February 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
53 Jack Bush, Diary (25 February 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 145
Beginning in 1962, the world was also starting to take serious notice of Bush and his paintings. Just a couple of days before Bush got the good news from the Canada
Council, Robert Elkon - the New York dealer and gallery owner - asked Bush for exclusive rights to the sale of his art from 1962 on.54 After some renegotiation, at the urging of Greenberg, Bush did strike an exclusive deal with Elkon for sales in the US, but, as his growing popularity would attract more suitors (that is, eager dealers and collectors), Bush soon had to learn how to 'run his dealer.'55 The careful way in which
Bush learned to handle his dealers in the few years that followed this first proposal from a
New York dealer, and the extent to which dealers wanted to handle Bush, will be the focus of my next section on the artist. First, the emergence of Bush into the wide world of painting beyond Canada should be discussed, since it marks the turning point from which
Bush would be truly in with the New York art scene and on his way to becoming an international artist. The timing of this transition for Bush is in line with my claim that the naissance of an American sense of modernism in the visual arts of Canada began only after 1960.
On 17 April 1962, Bush's first solo exhibition in New York City opened at the
Robert Elkon Gallery. Bush notes in his diary that 22 gallery openings were listed that day in New York.56 Greenberg came to stay with the Bush family the week of January
Jack Bush, Diary (21 February 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
55 Jack Bush, Diary (22 February 1964), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. Bush notes Clement Greenberg's advice: "You run your dealer."
56 Jack Bush, Diary (17 April 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 146
22nd in order to select works for this important showing of Bush in New York. Greenberg and his spouse, Jenny, excitedly made an 'in pile', a 'possible pile', and an 'out pile' for the new canvases that they considered for the show.57 When Bush hung the exhibition with
Elkon the day before the opening, the show totaled 13 paintings. But when Greenberg stopped by to check on the progress of their work, he, with Bush's permission, re-hung the show to include only 8 works.58 The exhibition looked great, but Bush did express some dissatisfaction to his wife, Mabel, regarding the re-hang - a complaint he called a
"friendly disagreement."59 Exhibition revisions by Greenberg would in fact become a regular affair in the 1960s. Bush had another solo show at Elkon's in April 1963 and again Greenberg, though this time with the help of Kenneth Noland, re-hung the show after Bush had hung it in the first place.60 A few years later, in 1965, Leslie Waddington
(Bush's then London dealer) wrote to Bush to inform him about the progress of his first solo exhibition in London, England, and mentioned that Greenberg and Noland came by the gallery and re-hung the show with two fewer paintings. Bush recalls the letter from
Waddington in his diary: "I laughed out loud as I read it! Since 1962 - the same thing -
Clem re-hangs, and makes it better. Leslie wrote - 'I thought the way I had hung it was
57 Jack Bush, Diary (22 January 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
58 Jack Bush, Diary (16 April 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
59 Jack Bush, Diary (17 April 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
60 Jack Bush, Diary (8 April 1963), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 147 good, but when they finished re-hanging - God it was beautiful!'"61 My point in raising this habit of Greenberg re-hanging Bush's exhibitions is not to suggest that Greenberg was a bully or overbearing, in fact, quite the opposite. Bush's diaries reveal that
Greenberg cared deeply about how Bush would be received in New York and abroad, and he was consistent with this care. Probably more than anyone in New York at the time,
Greenberg knew just how to introduce an artist to the art world. When the time came for
Bush to take his Canada Council trip to Europe, a matter of days after his first show at
Elkon's, Greenberg continued to advise Bush on where to go and who to see.62
Bush and Mabel did take Greenberg's first piece of advice regarding how to best use his grant and they traveled by ship to Europe, arriving to see the hills of Scotland in early May 1962: ".. .the gulls all around us & the wonderful hills of Scotland! Bush came to life for the first time! My God - it was beautiful -1 felt wonderful."63 The Bushes disembarked at Liverpool on the 11th of May and traveled through Europe until 1 July,
Dominion Day (now termed Canada Day), when they returned home to Toronto by airplane. Their six weeks in Europe allowed them to visit London extensively; on the continent, Bush and Mabel stopped in Zurich, Rome, Sienna, Florence, and Venice, passed through Milan and Genoa on their way to Nice and then went on to Madrid,
Jack Bush, Diary (13 October 1965), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
62 While staying at Greenberg's apartment, Bush writes in his diary: "At about 10 p.m. Clem got to work making me a list of people, galleries, etc. to see in England, Paris, Zurich, Rome, Venice, etc. Exciting." Jack Bush, Diary (13 April 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
63 Jack Bush, Diary (5-9 May 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 148
Toledo, and Paris before heading back to the UK to London, Cambridge, and St. Ives
(where Bush spent time with Terry Frost) and finally back again to London. As with most anyone who travels to Europe for the first time, or even the tenth time, Bush was struck by the key masterworks, such as the Sistine Chapel, Sainte Chapelle, St. Mark's Square and the general buzz about the major city centers, but most notably, Bush was positively affected by his meeting with the British sculptor Anthony Caro. Of all the people he met while abroad, Bush writes at greatest length in his diary about his meetings with 'Tony'
Caro.64
Bush's first personal impression of Caro came after he phoned the sculptor to set up a meeting: "I expected him to be an American expatriate, but he was very
English.. ."65 It is most likely that Bush thought that Caro would be American because, by this time, Caro was highly respected by New York circles of artists and critics, Greenberg and Michael Fried in particular, and also because earlier in the year, Greenberg had absolutely denounced English sculpture in front of Bush. Bush recalls a visit to the Art
Gallery of Toronto with Greenberg: "He [Greenberg] had no use whatsoever for the
British sculpture. 'It's lousy' he said. 'Wait till you get out to England and really see it - its lousy! That fellow Meadows! Terrible!"66 Upon the same visit, however, Greenberg was
For the period of his trip abroad, Bush writes about Anthony Caro on the following dates: 25 June 1962; 26 June 1962; and 30 June 1962. Bush continues to reflect on Caro in his diary even after the trip.
65 Jack Bush, Diary (25 June 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
66 Jack Bush, Diary (24 January 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. It was in 1962 and early 1963 that a heated critical duel between Greenberg and the English art critic Herbert Read was sparked with Greenberg's "How Art Writing Earns Its Bad Name," The Second Coming Magazine (March 1962), 149 no kinder in response to the Gallery's recent acquisition of a canvas by the American abstract artist Franz Kline. Regarding Greenberg's reaction to the English sculpture at the
Gallery, Karen Finlay's short but informative catalogue 20th-Century British Art from the
Collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario (1987) attests to the relatively "dwindled" drive to collect contemporary British art during the sixties at the Gallery - a stark contrast to the previous decades that saw the acquisition of many British works of art. Yet
Greenberg's reaction to the Gallery's English sculptures is more a reflection of the critic's own taste; while Henry Moore was unpalatable to Greenberg,67 Caro's work in the 1960s was, according to John O'Brian's assessment, "...the abstract art that fulfilled Greenberg's teleological promise...," along with Morris Louis, Kenneth Noland, Jules Olitski, and, I might add, Jack Bush.68 Just over a month before Bush would meet Caro in person, Bush seems to have been wrestling between respecting Greenberg's distaste for English sculpture and his own need to develop a personal take on the matter. On 14 May 1962, while in London, Bush sees a show of Kenneth Armitage's work and later muses in his diary:
Is this stuff great? ... it could all be just awkward j azz. Yet - its pro - its good. But is it good enough? I'm sort of trying to find for myself, because Clem [says] this reprinted from this article's second appearance in Encounter (December 1962) in Clement Greenberg, Clement Greenberg: The Collected Essays and Criticism, ed. John O'Brian, vol. 4, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993, pp. 135-144.
67 In a piece on David Smith for Art In America (winter 1956-57), Greenberg writes, "Modernist sculpture's common affliction, here and abroad, is artiness, whether the archaic artiness of Moore..." reprinted in John O'Brian, ed., Clement Greenberg: The Collected Essays and Criticism, vol. 3, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1993, p. 276.
68 John O'Brian, ed., Clement Greenberg: The Collected Essays and Criticism, vol. 3, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1993, p. xxxii. these [sic] British sculptors are so bad (so said Waddington this a.m.) Certainly the work is awkward, strange - well done. It's all right.69
It's no wonder that Bush was surprised to find that Caro, one of Greenberg's favourite artists abroad, was actually an Englishman.
On 25 June 1962, Bush traveled to Hamstead to meet Caro, with very little notice.
When he arrived, Bush was first met by Caro's art and it made an immediate, positive impression:
.. .opened the door into a cobble stoned court, quite large & nearly fainted! There were at least 6 huge pieces of sculpture there, all made out of steel girders, eye- beams [sic] - painted yellow, brown, green, etc. It was like a double shot of adrenalin! I nosed around and found Tony working in a shed on a larger aluminum construction. He stopped, shook hands and asked me into his studio. He is short, beautiful, and charming, & I'd guess 35 to 40 years old.70
The importance of this meeting for Bush was clear; he was coming in direct contact with an artist that had made a lasting impression on his mentor, Greenberg. Bush continued in his diary: "It was 5 years ago that Clem came to see him, and changed his life! Here we go again!"71 Most interesting for the purposes of this study is the fact that Bush, the
Canadian artist, had come to meet a leading contemporary British artist through the recommendation and connection of a New York art critic; it was the early 1960s and the
Jack Bush, Diary (14 May 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
70 Jack Bush, Diary (25 June 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
71 Ibid. 151 channels of influence on Canada's artists were beginning to make a shift significant. Bush and Caro talked about influence and taste during their meeting. When Bush mentioned that he would have been bowled over at seeing a show of Graham Sutherland's work 15 years ago, but that he now no longer felt impressed by the work, Caro sympathized by comparing it to his break from the authority of Henry Moore.72 Still thinking about Caro's break away from the authority of Moore, Bush asked himself: "Have I broken with authority? OS A? RCA? Yes - But I haven't declared it. Do so."73 Bush would quit all of his old art club associations by 1964,74 which signals his departure from the traditional, more British, manner of being an artist. This move to break with authority was also, in part, a move to disassociate with the art scene in Toronto - to move more closely in line with Greenberg and the New York boys, namely artists Jules Olitski and Kenneth
Noland.
Two days after meeting with Caro for the first time, the Bushes traveled on to St.
Ives, England, where Bush met with the abstract English artist Terry Frost. They talked a lot about Greenberg, enough to compel Bush to state in his diary: "Another disciple!"75
Back home in Toronto, when Dr. Walters and Bush met to review his diary and trip to
Jack Bush, Diary (26 June 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. Although this conversation occurred on the 25th of June, Bush did not write about it in his diary until the next day.
74 Jack Bush, Record notebook (1930-1961), p. 1, Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
75 Jack Bush, Diary (27 June 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. Europe, the Doctor suggests that Greenberg may not be forming a cult but rather just helping to introduce artistic talent to one another around the world. Bush disagrees:
I know what the doctor means - this is part of it. But I think at this point that it's more than that. There is a vision each of these artists has, his own - and Greenberg has been the one who spurred it on, guided it, helped it to flower and take over. His role is much more than an introducer of one talent to another. There is something that he stands for that is very rare - and we sense it, & strive to achieve it. Maybe we swallow him too much, as Caro said. But there is no doubt here that we all have made great strides in reaching for that vision. We'll get it, too.77
Striving for that vision meant that Bush kept in close contact with Greenberg, as well as
Olitski and Noland; attending each other's exhibition openings and talking art whenever the opportunity allowed was a part of the process. It was Noland who turned Bush on to working with acrylic paints.78 Although Noland recommended Liquitex, Bush purchased what he could find at Curry's art supply store in Toronto; he opted for "Aqua-tex".79
Greenberg further insisted that he use a tension breaker with these new paints, but such a product was not yet available in Toronto in 1966. Bush had to have a tension breaker product sent up from New York.80
76 Jack Bush, Diary (16 July 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
77 Ibid.
Jack Bush, Diary (13 February 1966), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
7Q Jack Bush, Diary (6 March 1966), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 80 Ibid. 153
Of course, Bush made frequent trips to New York City throughout the 1960s and the Canada Council grant that he had received in 1962 also paid for an extended trip to
New York where Bush stayed at the Chelsea Hotel. This stay is a common point of reference in the art history of Jack Bush. Bush painted a significant series of gouaches, as well as four works in response to the American flag, during this stint in New York during the month of October in 1962. What has not been addressed is the fact that, although he gained a lot during his visit, Bush did not feel entirely happy staying in New York.81
Even more revealing is the fact that Bush did not spend a great deal of time in New York during this famous trip. Bush flew to New York City on 1 October 1962; he had to fly back home to Toronto for a funeral on 3 October; his diary entry for 5 October relates to a side trip made with Greenberg, Noland, and Bill Rubin to Washington, aimed at sorting through and making a record of the late Morris Louis' work stored at his house (Louis died on 7 September 1962). Artists Anne Truitt and David Smith soon joined this group in Washington, which, according to Bush's diary, seems to have ended on or shortly after
8 October.82 By the 13th of October, Bush decided to change his air ticket to leave New
York one week earlier than he had planned.83 Nonetheless, Bush felt comfortable in his decision: "Its true, I am not spending the month in N.Y. But I don't want any more - it's
o 1 Jack Bush, Diary (13 October 1963), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. "Just like the wonderful weather last year when I was in New York. How very much I gained from that period, even tho' I was unhappy there."
Jack Bush, Diary (5-8 October 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
Jack Bush, Diary (13 October 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 154 not for me. But I will win -just you watch. I will work through next week."84 New York was certainly stimulating, but perhaps too much so for the painter that was used to working alone at home, during the evenings and on weekends. Bush was no doubt attracted to the action in New York, but it was anxiety-inducing at the best of times. On
15 October, Bush attended a dinner party at Bill Rubin's where he met a young art critic named Michael Fried. Bush recalls:
Clem asked him [Fried] how he liked the Gottlieb show - he hadn't - and had just mailed out his mag. review to Zurick [sic]. Clem & Bill then let him have it & it lasted hours as they attempted to prove how stupid he was! I felt so sorry for him - but he stuck to his guns.85
Later that night, Bush counseled Fried as they shared a cab ride home, telling the young critic to hang on since the alternative is quitting.86 It seems that Bush's aesthetic was fit for New York, but New York didn't fit Bush. On 17 October he writes, "I'm sure that for me, N.Y. is a place I should come into fast - stay a few days - & get the hell out!"87 Even as late as 1966, after having a steady routine of solo exhibitions in New York since 1962,
84 Ibid.
85 Jack Bush, Diary (15 October 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
86 Ibid.
87 Jack Bush, Diary (17 October 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 155
Bush comments in his diary, "But I admit - N.Y. is still a pretty heady wine for me. I can't get used to being grouped with the top guys."88
Bush was a mature man by the time his abstract art became widely successful in the 1960s; he was in his 50s and had long since raised his three children. What I mean to suggest is that Bush was comfortable living as a Torontonian but he painted like a New
Yorker. Jack Bush represents the influx of American-style modern art into Canada. In
April 1963, Bush met with Jack Kemp, a friend who was not afraid to state what he felt was happening with Bush and his New York connections; in his diary, Bush writes:
"When I referred to 'my friend Clement Greenberg in N.Y.' he said - 'Your friend! Why, the umbilical cord stretches right from Toronto to New York! !'"89 Besides being clever,
Kemp's observation is apt: Bush lived out his years as an abstract painter in Toronto, but was sustained on a healthy diet of world art through his New York contacts; in the process, he began to lose his taste for the art scene in Toronto.
Jack Bush, World Artist
In a diary entry from 28 November 1962, Bush quotes a letter he just received from
Greenberg: '".. .if all Toronto were to go wild about any show of yours within the next three or four years it would mean, almost certainly, that you'd lost your stuff.'"9 No
Jack Bush, Diary (1 November 1966), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
89 Jack Bush, Diary (15 April 1963), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
90 Jack Bush, Diary (28 November 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 156 doubt Bush agreed; about a week previous to receiving Greenberg's sentiments on the retrograde art audience in Toronto, Bush recalls an encounter with his one-time Toronto art dealer Walter Moos in which he spoke about his new work: "I said to Moos - this work won't go in Toronto, its years ahead - its world painting - like a whole new art development."91 For about two years - from the early to mid 1960s - Bush didn't use any
Toronto dealers. By the fall of 1966, Toronto was chomping at the bit to see new canvases by Bush - by then a truly international artist, showing with Andre Emmerich in New York and Leslie Waddington in London, England. It wasn't until November 1966 that Bush would hold a solo exhibition of new work in Toronto, at the David Mirvish
Gallery.
On 14 March 1964, Bush had another of his regular meetings with Dr. Walters, but this time the Doctor startled him by saying:
'You have no place in official Canadian art. You have a place in the N.Y. trend evidently.' ...... [Then Bush in his own voice] My heart sank. No place. Here I'd thought I'd done so well.
91 Jack Bush, Diary (15 November 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
92 In 1966 Harry Malcolmson claims that "Bush has been unrepresented in Toronto since 1963..." but Bush's diary reveals that he did not officially call it quits with the Toronto art dealer Walter Moos until 10 August 1964. Jack Bush, Diary (10 August 1964), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. "Saw Moos & told him I was leaving his gallery. Why? Because I have been unhappy with the gallery this past year." It is not until the summer of 1966 that Bush officially allows David Mirvish to act as his dealer for Canadian sales.
93 Bush, on his own free will, left Robert Elkon for Andre Emmerich, who became his new New York Dealer in the fall of 1965. Jack Bush, Diary (7 October 1965), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 157
[back to Bush quoting Dr. Walters] 'Jack - I'm not telling you what to do - I'm just holding up a mirror so you can see in it. You have no place in Can. art circles, you have cut yourself off to go your own way.'
The next day, Bush writes in his diary: "I was still wound up over 'no place in Can. art - just a Sunday painter etc. I think I have a place in Canadian art. .. .And it's a good place too. But not in official Can art! [sic]" 5 Bush was in between; he was certainly not a part of any Canadian school of painting, per se, and he was adjusting to an international profile.
Harry Malcolmson, columnist for the Toronto Telegram, published an extensive article on this Bush draught in Toronto on 24 September 1966 titled "The international reputation that's the best-kept secret in Toronto." After listing Bush's extensive international accolades, including his high standing with dealers Emmerich and
Waddington, Malcolmson notes, "Through all of this Toronto has slept."96 Malcolmson goes on to demonstrate that Torontonians aren't used to Bush's style of painting, but that it was advanced enough to have at least four Toronto dealers eager to represent Bush.97
Importantly, Malcolmson gets to the heart of the matter: "The local lack of knowledge of
Jack Bush, Diary (14 March 1964), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
95 Jack Bush, Diary (15 March 1964), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
96 Harry Malcolmson, "The international reputation that's the best-kept secret in Toronto," Telegram (Toronto), 24 September 1966. 158
Bush's burst of maturity is, in part, the painter's fault."98 Bush knew that being popular in
Toronto meant that his work was no longer advanced on the world stage, just as
Greenberg had mentioned in his letter. In the Malcolmson article, a particularly biting review of Bush called "The Greenberg gospel"99 by Toronto art critic Elizabeth Kilboura is cited as a prime example of Toronto's inability to appreciate Bush's post painterly abstraction. Tellingly, Bush confides in his diary that while his family remained irked by the Kilbourn piece, he was elated by the bad review, provoking him to say out loud:
"Clem! We're in - we've made it - its great!"100 For Bush, it was a confirmation that his work had gone beyond the local standard.
Practically, Bush was also withholding his new works from Toronto so that they would appear fresh and be sought after as groundbreaking works in the hands of his New
York and London dealers. In September of 1962, Moos was excited to see new works by
Bush, but the artist insisted that Robert Elkon, his New York dealer at the time, would get
first choice from his new works.1 ' Bush's diary reveals that Greenberg frequently recommended that he not show too many works at once to dealers and collectors, which correlates with Greenberg's 'less is more' approach to hanging works in an exhibition.
Greenberg also recommends to Bush that he only sell works to dealers rather than lending
Elizabeth Kilbourn, "The Greenberg gospel," Toronto Star (1 February 1964).
100 Jack Bush, Diary (22 February 1964), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
101 Jack Bush, Diary (10 September 1962), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. In addition, the diary entry from 4 December 1963 reveals that old works, rather than new works, are shown to Moos. them to their respective galleries on consignment; all of which is in keeping with
Greenberg's primary piece of advice in becoming a sought after professional artist: "You run your dealer."103
In October of 1963, the eighteen year-old David Mirvish opened a gallery under his name on Markham Street in Toronto. The first exhibition at the David Mirvish
Gallery showed examples of Pop art, which Bush found "fun" when he first visited the
Gallery.104 On 26 March 1964, Bush writes in his diary that Mirvish asked him to be in one of their upcoming group shows, which was called XXIXInternational Artists.
Mirvish viewed works at Bush's home in anticipation of the group exhibition, but ultimately had to borrow a Flag painting by Bush (Paris #2, 1962) from a Toronto collector who had already purchased the work.105 In 1965, Bush was still unwilling to commit to a Toronto dealer, but Mirvish did well by publishing a portfolio of silkscreen prints by Bush that year (December 1965). Mirvish recalls the significance of this agreement to publish prints: "The success of this project was of real importance to me as
I wanted Jack to realize how much I cared about his work."106 Bush was playing hard to get and I surmise, from the general sentiment in his diary entries on the topic, that he felt
102 Jack Bush, Diary (6 February 1965), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
103 Clement Greenberg quoted in Jack Bush, Diary (22 November 1964), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
104 Jack Bush, Diary (16-18 October 1963), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
105 David Mirvish, "A Dealer's Memoir," in Jack Bush, ed. Karen Wilkin, Toronto: McClelland and Stewart in association with Merritt Editions Limited, 1984, p. 44. more self-confident and in control when dealing with Mirvish, a young man who was relatively new to the art world at the time. By the summer of 1965, Bush increasingly
allowed Mirvish into his home and studio, but he still held back; on 18 July 1965 he
shows "just 3" of his new canvases to Mirvish; on 20 July 1965 Greenberg recommends
that Bush not give all of his gouaches to Mirvish; On 17 October Bush shows Mirvish
"only 4 new canvases"; and the trend continues until January of 1966 when Bush shows
Mirvish and his one-time gallery director, Alkis Klonaridis, a whopping 10 new
canvases. By the summer of 1966, Bush feels that the "time may be right" to open up
to Toronto.109 Dr. Walters agrees, saying to Bush at one of their meetings in July of 1966:
"Toronto is just about to discover Bush - there will be a deluge on your time."'l0 It was, by this time, necessary for Bush to commit with a Toronto dealer and Mirvish had earned
his place with Bush. The fact that Mirvish was showing Kenneth Noland, Jules Olitski,
Anthony Caro and other 'top guys' from Bush's circle of peers made Bush's choice to go
with Mirvish logical. With the promise of a solo show at the Mirvish Gallery in
November 1966, Bush finally opens up to his new dealer, but not without some
hesitation. The day after an exciting viewing and selection session with Klonaridis and
Jack Bush, Diary (15 February 1965), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
108 Jack Bush, Diary (24 January 1966), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
109 Jack Bush, Diary (respectively 18 July 1965, 20 July 1965, 17 October 1965 and 30 May-3 June 1966), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
110 Jack Bush, Diary (14 July 1966), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. 161
Mirvish, in anticipation for the November show, Bush writes in his diary for 22 August
1966: "Up to dull rain & cool day & to thoughts of'What have I done?' I've sold my soul to Mirvish! And what am I going to do for Andre [Emmerich]? I've let Mirvish rob me of all my best children!"1" His feet were still cold for Toronto. This moment of regret had nothing to do with Mirvish, but more to do with the artist's anxiety over 'coming out' to
Toronto, and whether he could muster more new works to continue to surprise New
York, which was still first in his mind. Comparing Mirvish to the other dealers he had been in contact with in Toronto, Bush, in September of 1966, writes: ".. .David has
shown some integrity & judgment."112 The month of August 1966 saw firm commitments between Mirvish and Bush, allowing Mirvish to be his exclusive dealer for Canadian
sales."3 In remembering Bush, Mirvish states: "I was Jack Bush's dealer for eleven years. It was during this time that resistance to his work melted." Mirvish opened the
door onto Jack Bush for Canada. It was the late Jack Bush, but most importantly it was
Jack Bush the world artist that Mirvish showed in Toronto. Mirvish also speaks of Bush's
Jack Bush, Diary (22 August 1966), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
' '2 Jack Bush, Diary (20 September 1966), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
113 Jack Bush, Diary (21 August 1966 and 26 August 1966), Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. David Mirvish has recalled a different date for their agreement, claiming that "In January 1966 Jack Bush joined the David Mirvish Gallery..." in "A Dealer's Memoir," in Jack Bush (p. 46), but Bush records details in his diary on the lengthy talks on their agreement, which arises in the days of August 1966 (Jack Bush, Diary [21 August 1966 and 26 August 1966], AGO). However, Mirvish did purchase works from Bush on 24 January 1966 (according to Bush's diary entry on that date) and the portfolio of Bush prints predates their firm agreement, which may be the reasons for the confusion.
114 Mirvish, "A Dealer's Memoir," p. 46. 162 evolution as an artist: "It was his inquisitive nature and strong sense of self that I believe allowed Jack to make the major transitions of being first a Canadian landscape artist, then an abstract artist and member of Painters Eleven, and finally an independent, mature, and truly international artist."115 The career of Jack Bush personifies the shift in the modern artistic consciousness of Canada.
In Hindsight
Jack Bush, the Canadian painter, found lasting support and peers in the artists of a disciplined type of art that came after abstract expressionism and which is best described as colour field art. Colour field art is mostly associated with American artists, but the translational figures - that is, those that came to the US from elsewhere, bringing with them their own foreign talents and perspectives - were integral to the development of this group. Hans Hoffman is certainly a forefather of the colour field artists and Anthony
Caro was a key contributor to the development of the American painters and critics of colour field art. Bush was not a marginal figure in this movement; he was integral to this critical period in art history. What was going on in Toronto while Bush kept his eye on
New York is a case in point for the attractiveness of an international profile at this time, even for the Art Gallery of Ontario. My next Chapter will reveal, however, that even going international meant, for the art systems of Canada, going British.
115 Mirvish, "A Dealer's Memoir," p. 46. Chapter 5
The Cultivation of Henry Moore in Toronto
Let's give them something to talk about
The public story of Henry Moore (1898-1986) in Toronto begins in 1938, when two of his sculptures were shown in a Surrealist-themed display at the Canadian National
Exhibition. This chapter, however, is not a comprehensive account of Moore in the city of Toronto; if it were, a good number of works in private collections would have to be considered. The primary concern of this chapter is how Moore was an important agent of change in the vision and actual architecture of the Art Gallery of Ontario. This moment in
Canadian art history, when the AGO became the home to the largest collection of
Moore's work outside of the Henry Moore Foundation in England, is the ultimate example of art institution "Going British and Being Modern." The reception of Moore at the AGO is characterized by adoption and, oftentimes, controversy. The acquisition of
Moore's work in Toronto has caused debate on more than one occasion, and, interestingly, both the city and the AGO have consistently responded to the controversy with friendly plans to forge a lasting relationship with Moore; his work has been embraced in an effort to gain a greater reputation for being modern, as well as the international profile that is apparently a part of this process of cultural aggrandizement.
Toronto, now the fifth largest city in North America, made a conscious effort in the
1(S3 164
1960s to shake its reputation for parochialism and enhance its standing in the scope of contemporary arts.
Debate over a Moore sculpture first erupted in Toronto in 1955 in response to the
Art Gallery of Toronto's (AGT) acquisition of the bronze Warrior with Shield. The
Warrior with Shield was, originally called Seated Warrior} Using funds raised by an annual ball, the AGT-based Junior Women's Committee gifted the Warrior to the AGT with the assistance and enthusiastic recommendation of Anthony Blunt - a key figure of cultural authority that was discussed extensively in Chapter 3 in relation to the AGT and the National Gallery of Canada. The Warrior was executed between 1953 and 1954, and
Blunt first expressed his excitement about the Warrior soon after seeing the work in its plaster form at Moore's studio in Perry Green, England. After the Junior Women's
Committee had agreed to purchase the Warrior for the AGT, Blunt wrote with happy conviction about the bronze to the museum's director, Martin Baldwin:
The Moore, as you know, is leaving tomorrow. I went down to see it at Moore's studio and was delighted. I admired it very much in the plaster, but it has gained even more than I dared hope in the bronze. I really do think it shows that Moore is breaking new ground. The more I think about it, the more certain T am that you were right to take the bold course.
The Seated Warrior was officially renamed Warrior with Shield by Henry Moore (a note to this effect is made on 19 October 1973 and filed in Warrior with Shield accession file, Art Gallery of Ontario).
2 "Friday the 13th a Lucky Day," The Telegram, Toronto, 10 May 1955. Communications between Anthony Blunt and the AGO's director, Martin Baldwin, accession file for Henry Moore's Warrior with Shield, Art Gallery of Ontario.
3 Anthony Blunt to Martin Baldwin (7 December 1954), Warrior with Shield accession file, Art Gallery of Ontario. 165
According to the reaction of the Toronto press, the acquisition of the Warrior with
Shield was indeed a bold move by the AGO. Writing for the Globe and Mail, Pearl
McCarthy expressed a somewhat affectionate reservation, "Much Moore work is beautiful in thought as well as brilliant. But there seems to be a vogue nowadays for
picking what is a trifle repellent." Warrior with Shield was Moore's first attempt in
sculpture at a single male figure.5 Although the Warrior did indeed invoke the image of
an amputated soldier, "repellent" seems a harsh observation if compared to the sculptural
experiments that were occurring in the hands of other artists at mid century, such as
David Smith, who was shown at the AGT in the 1949 exhibition Contemporary Paintings from Great Britain, the United States and France with Sculpture from the United States.
That Moore's sculpture repelled some Torontonians is certainly related to the provincial
state of cultural mind that Toronto held at the time. McCarthy hints at Toronto's
parochial taste, and wonders if it is the reason for the Warrior's acquisition: "Does this
come from some insecurity of judgment? - some fears that if one does not honor what is
repellent, somebody may accuse the picker of wanting 'pretty' things? In short, are we
grown up, with confidence in our judgment?"6 A few pertinent points are implied by
McCarthy's statements; first, that the AGT was not yet making independent decisions
about its own acquisitions and, secondly, that the AGT was purposefully steering toward
4 Pearl McCarthy, "The Trend is to the Repellent - Seated Warrior a Case in Point," Globe and Mail, Toronto, 23 April 1955.
5 Henry Moore, Henry Moore On Sculpture, ed. Philip James, London: MacDonald, 1966, p. 250.
6 McCarthy, "Trend is to the Repellent." 166 what might create a stir. The Toronto Daily Star greeted the Warrior's arrival at the AGT with the following announcement:
A bombshell of controversy has exploded at the Art Gallery of Toronto. This one weighs 700 pounds and is bronze. It is a gruesome piece of sculpture by one of Britain's most talked-about sculptors, 57-year-old Henry Moore .... Henry Moore is no society artist.... This maimed bronze warrior of his, he admits, comes from lurid war memories. It's a blood-curdler.
It is the AGT's acquisition of Moore's Warrior with Shield that marks the first distinct move by this museum to increase its profile by way of Moore's reputation and frequently controversial work. Whether they liked Moore or not, the public would come to see what all the talk was about.
Courting and consummation
The Art Gallery of Ontario's Henry Moore Sculpture Centre was founded on an impressive gift from Henry Moore of his original artworks, including 101 sculptures, 57 drawings and a near complete set of his prints. To date, the AGO's Moore holdings total
7 Hugh Thomson, "'Gruesome' War Horror 700-lb. Bronze Statue Furor at Art Gallery," Toronto Daily Star, 11 May 1955.
8 By the time of the opening of the Henry Moore Sculpture Centre, the AGT had become the AGO. I use these acronyms in keeping with their period of use. Alan Wilkinson, Henry Moore Remembered, Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario / Key Porter Books, 1987, p. 4. 167 more than 900 sculptures and works on paper,9 making it the largest collection of Moore's art outside of the Henry Moore Foundation in Perry Green, England. The exhibition space is a remarkable example of an artist-architect collaboration in design, in this case between Henry Moore and the architect John C. Parkin (Figure 14).
The process by which Toronto became a centre for the study of Henry Moore's work began with another controversial acquisition of a Moore bronze - Three Way Piece
No. 2: The Archer (1964-65) for the new Toronto City Hall's Nathan Phillip's Square in
1966 (Figure 15). It was the brouhaha surrounding the acquisition of The Archer that provoked Moore's interest in Toronto, a city that would overcome its own municipality's miserly judgment by raising private funds to purchase this important sculpture for public display. But this is not to say that the adoption of Moore was something that just happened. A very intricate and personalized campaign for Moore's affection was an
important part of this process. Those behind the effort to win Moore's interest, and ultimately a good portion of his oeuvre, were the very upper crust of Toronto's cultural,
financial and political elite.
Toronto of the 1960s was increasingly interested in raising its international profile. In November of 1964, Viljo Revell, Finnish architect of Toronto's new City Hall, and his wife Maire, traveled to visit Henry Moore at his home and studios in Perry Green.
Revell made the trip to see Moore in order to find the perfect work of art that would act as a finishing touch in the public square adjacent to the City Hall. While there, the artist
9 "The Henry Moore Sculpture Centre," Exhibition Archive, Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario website,
Revell, Moore expressed his shock over the architect's untimely death and noted, "I think his death is a great loss to architecture."11 Revell had won out over more than 500 international entrants to design the new Toronto City Hall. Although Moore had no firm agreement from the city of Toronto to produce the large bronze Archer, he went ahead and made the monumental sculpture, in an edition of two.12 The work was completed between 1964 and 1965.
Following meetings of the Toronto City Hall's Art Advisory Committee, which included important members of the art community, such as Jean Sutherland Boggs,
Douglas Duncan, and William Withrow, among others, and the understanding that Revell had spoken with Moore and envisioned The Archer to be installed in the public square, it was agreed on 7 March 1966 to recommend The Archer to the municipal Board of
Mr. Didrichsen to Henry Moore (17 November 1964), Helsinki: The Didrichsen Art Museum archives.
"Ibid.
12 The other bronze Three Way Piece No. 2: The Archer stands outside of the New National Gallery in Berlin. Seen today, there is a noticeable difference in patina between The Archer in Toronto and The Archer in Berlin. Berlin has clearly been polishing their copy, which is actually the kind of care that Henry Moore had hoped for. Toronto's copy remains unpolished with evident oxidation occurring on its surface. A caption for some of the very first published images of Toronto's Archer states: "... Moore insists Toronto polish The Archer bi-monthly to keep its golden glow - a secret process." In "The knuckleheads said no to modern art," Star Weekly, Toronto, 2 July 1966, p. 9. Control. Although Toronto's Mayor Philip Givens and Alderman Horace Brown were
ardent supporters of the proposal to purchase The Archer, William Dennison, the
Controller, expressed strong objections along with others, who claimed that the sculpture
was too abstract for Torontonians.14 Some felt that the price tag of more than 120,000
Canadian dollars was too much money for one sculpture, especially if it was going to be paid by taxpayers. The proposal to purchase the bronze with municipal tax dollars was put to a vote by City Council the following week, on 16 March, and was rejected with 13
votes against and only 10 in favour of the acquisition. Alderman Fred Beavis claimed,
"We've got culture up to our ears."15 The New York Times reported that one Toronto
councilman was told by his wife, "If you vote for that thing, don't bother coming
home."16 Just one day after the vote, on 17 March, an anonymous citizen of Toronto pledged $20,000 to aid a private effort to purchase the sculpture, and a little more than a
month later, on 22 April, Mayor Givens announced that other citizens had promised
another $70,000.n Part of this generosity stemmed from the Stewart family, whose son
Wilkinson, Moore Remembered, p. 6.
14 "Phil vs Bill in the great sculpture affair," The Globe and Mail, Toronto, 22 October 1966. Since William Dennison became Mayor after Philip Givens, it was Dennison who had to welcome Henry Moore personally when he came to visit Toronto for the first time in 1967. It's said that Givens lost a second term as Mayor because of the controversy over the acquisition of The Archer. One slogan piped: "A vote for Phil is a vote for culture." John M. Lee, "Toronto Unveils a Sculpture by Moore," New York Times, 29 October 1966, p. 24L.
15 "The knuckleheads said no to modern art," Star Weekly, Toronto, 2 July 1966, p. 9.
16 Lee, "Toronto Unveils a Sculpture."
"Phil vs Bill," The Globe and Mail. 170
Mike would marry Revell's daughter Sonja.18 During this brief but intense fundraising period, Joseph Hirshhorn agreed to speak to his friend Moore and managed to convince him to hold The Archer for 90 days until Givens could come up with the money.19 By 7
June, arrangements had been made to pay Moore SI00,000 for the sculpture; the final, and ultimately reduced, price for the major bronze.20 It was Moore himself who agreed to reduce the price of The Archer by $20,000 in honour of Revell.
The persistence of Mayor Givens with the purchase of The Archer for Toronto was certainly fueled by the show of private and corporate support. Some high profile backers included the lawyer and former Lieutenant-Governor of Ontario, J. Keiller
MacKay, Joseph Hirshhorn, the Eaton family, the Maclean Foundation and Moore's
Toronto art dealer Blair Laing. Givens reported at the time of the controversy, "If it wasn't for the spontaneous help of certain people, I just might have given up."22 Help also
came in ways other than monetary contributions. Moore's affection for Toronto was
earned in very personal ways; certain private citizens of Toronto played a critical role in
ensuring that a special relationship be established between the artist and the city. One of the first of these players behind the scenes was the Alberta-born painter and photographer
Wilkinson, Moore Remembered, p. 7.
19 Valerie Ross, "The Wooing of Henry Moore: How Toronto money and Toronto taste helped transform the city. A portrait of the Art Establishment in action," Toronto Life, July 1975, p. 8.
20 Ibid.
21 Jeremy Brown, "Bar talk cinches Moore for city," The Telegram, Toronto, 30 May 1966, p. 9.
22 Philip Givens quoted in Brown, 'Bar talk cinches Moore', p. 9. 171
Roloff Beny. Beny had the opportunity to photograph Moore at a private preview of an
International Sculpture Exhibition held at Sonsbeek Park in Arnhem, Holland, where the
Toronto cast of The Archer was first exhibited before it made its voyage to Canada for permanent installation.23 The photographs taken by Beny on this day would be the first images of The Archer shown to Torontonians.
Beny brought The Archer to Toronto in another important way - by acting as an emissary for Mayor Givens and his efforts to acquire the work. John C. Parkin, a prominent architect linked to both Toronto's new City Hall, as associate architect with
Revell, and the 1974 expansion of the AGO that holds the Moore gift, introduced Beny to
Mayor Givens at a completion party for the construction of the Toronto Dominion Centre held on 17 April 1966.25 In May, about five months before The Archer was safely installed in Nathan Phillips Square, when the funding to purchase the bronze was still being worked out, Beny, who was already friends with Moore and, incidentally, on his way to England on a photographic mission to do with Canada's centenary, successfully
The photographer Errol Jackson was also photographing Moore on this occasion. Jackson took careful notes on the subjects he photographed, including lengthy comments on some of the events that he had captured. Regarding the images of Beny and Moore that he took that day, Jackson comments, 'This one-day expedition was organized so that Roloff Beny could photograph Moore with a cast of the large Archer, purchased by the citizens of Toronto to place in front of their new Town Hall. Roloff Beny had organized the collection of sufficient funds and Moore had made them a generous offer.' Reference HM137/1-12 (24 May 1966) from The Errol Jackson Archive, Perry Green: Henry Moore Foundation.
Beny's photographs of The Archer were first published in "The knuckleheads said no to modern art," Star Weekly (Toronto), 2 July 1966, p. 9. The article proudly announced, "Here, photographed for the first time in all its burnished glory, is Henry Moore's giant two-ton statue which he created to grace Toronto's striking city hall and honor the Finnish architect who designed it, the late Viljo Revell."
25 Ibid. 172 cinched the deal between Moore and Toronto for The Archer?6 When Beny went abroad, he made a point of finding Moore, who happened to be on holiday, but the sculptor still agreed to meet with the keen photographer a couple of days later at the Anthenaeum Club in London.27 It was at this meeting that Moore discussed Revell's role in convincing him to enlarge The Archer's scale and that, because of his respect for this architect, he intended to reduce the price of the sculpture for Toronto, where it ought to be installed.28
A handwritten note in a paperback to Beny from Moore is illustrated in an article titled
"Bar talk cinches Moore for city." The note reads, "For Roloff with admiration & thanks for today's discussion & decision about 'The Archer' for Toronto, from Henry Moore,
May 19th 1966, London."29 In a letter from Beny to Moore, written in the spring of 1969,
Beny reflects on his role in The Archer's acquisition:
I truly feel that, while my contribution to this purchase was not financial but moral, our historic meeting at the Athaeneum [sic] Club in London was the turning point in your decision to let Toronto have this magnificent piece. Of course, it has now become practically a symbol of Toronto, and for this reason, since my first Canadian loyalty is to Toronto, I feel very proud indeed.
26 Brown, "Bar talk cinches Moore," p. 9.
27 Ibid.
28 Ibid.
29 Ibid.
1A Roloff Beny to Henry Moore (23 April 1969), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive. To this day, many people close to Toronto feel a sense of pride and partnership in acquiring The Archer. ' Along with Revell's new City Hall, it signaled a new and more modern Toronto.
Responding to the unveiling of The Archer in Nathan Phillips Square, in which
10,000 people attended on the evening of 27 October 1966, Robert Fulford remarked, "It was impossible to resist the notion that last night was some kind of turning point in the history of the city of Toronto." Givens held a similar sentiment, "Toronto was a hick town, and I was interested in seeing that it turned the corner of becoming a great metropolis. Having a Henry Moore work was to be the dawn of a new era."33 In the same interview, Givens recalled that special night when The Archer was first revealed in
Toronto, "It was like the unveiling of the golden calf in the desert in front of the
Israelites." Others reflected on the positive effect that the bronze Archer would have on the perception of Toronto in the future. Jerrold Morris commented in an article called
"What kind of city is our new Henry Moore Coming to?": "So let us welcome Moore. If
Toronto is ever excavated, at least one important piece of contemporary sculpture will be
31 In researching this history, which is still alive in many ways, countless people - from those who were merely a witness to the events, to those that were instrumental - remember the purchase of The Archer as a triumph for the city of Toronto. As a researcher, born and raised in Toronto, my personal experience of exploring the story of The Archer in this city has been met with enthusiasm and eager want of recognition.
Robert Fulford, "The philistines have retired," Toronto Daily Star, 28 October 1966, p. 21.
Philip Givens to Roger Berthoud (Toronto: interview, August 1982), quoted in Roger Berthoud, The Life of Henry Moore, London: Giles de la Mare, 2003, p. 369.
Ibid., p. 371. found in the ruins." In exploring the repercussions of the purchase of The Archer for
Toronto, Moore's biographer, Roger Berthoud, noted:
The story shows how, by shaping some plaster in his studio at Hoglands, Henry could set off a chain of events which, in this instance, helped to change the image of dull, dreary Toronto and eventually make it a point of pilgrimage for the student or devoted admirer of his work.
The Archer was, in many ways, the beginning of new cultural reputation for the city.
"Wouldn't it be wonderful, Mr. Moore, if "The Archer" symbolically sparked this vast and rapidly growing feeling that we would do well at this stage to bring in the measures of beauty and art?"37 It was Allan Ross who posed this question to Moore in a letter dated 17 April 1967. Ross, former president of the Wm. Wrigley chewing gum company, is an often-overlooked individual in this history of Moore and Toronto. Born in
Chicago in 1887, Ross moved to Canada in the nineteen-teens and would later be called
"A true Canadian citizen by adoption, aspiration and achievement."38 Ross stood quietly behind Givens, giving him a list of individuals to canvas for support in the campaign to purchase The Archer?9 More importantly, Ross was a positive contributor to Toronto's
Jerrold Morris, "What kind of city is our new Henry Moore coming to?" The Telegram (Toronto), 22 October 1966.
36 Berthoud, The Life of Henry Moore, p. 367.
Allan Ross to Henry Moore (17 April 1967), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive.
"Ross, James Allan," Canadian Who's Who, eds. A.L. Tunnell and Sir Chalres G.D. Roberts, vol. 3, Toronto: Trans-Canada Press, 1938-39, p. 587.
39 Ross to Moore (6 April 1967), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive; an excerpt: "When a year ago Mayor Givens narrowly lost in City Council the golden 175 efforts to bring a substantial collection of Moore's work to the city, and the AGO
specifically.40 In fact, Ross was the first person to suggest the idea to the sculptor. On 14
March 1967, a reception to honour Moore's first trip to Toronto was held at City Hall.
Ross approached Mayor Givens at this reception and suggested that he simply ask Moore
for some of his sculpture: "Why don't you ask the old guy what he's going to do with all his sculpture? Maybe we can get it after he dies."41 Givens scoffed and told Ross to ask
instead, and he did. Surprisingly, Moore did not balk at the idea, but was in fact quoted in
Toronto newspapers shortly thereafter, saying, "I'd like the sculpture to go to London for
sentimental reasons, but offers from someone else might help the Tate Gallery to make up its mind."42 Rather fatefully, Sam Zacks, then president of the AGO, and William
Withrow, director of the AGO, were present for Ross's eager proposition to Moore at
City Hall. As it turns out, Ross's suggestion to Moore was not exactly an impromptu idea.
In a letter to Moore, Ross admits, "When you were in Toronto at the Moore reception I had just read in the New York Times of February 28th a London dispatch of your offer to the Tate Gallery of 20 or 30 of your major sculptures, and, Sir Colin Anderson's
appreciation of this generous gesture but that he feared it might be 'a long time before the
gift could be accommodated.'"43 With this letter, and the many that would follow over the
opportunity to acquire 'The Archer', I asked him to come to see me and that I would give him a list of local men to canvas, and, started him off with a substantial sum myself."
4 J. Allan Ross, to use his formal name, was also formerly the Chairman of the Executive Committee for the Toronto Dominion Bank's Board of Directors.
41 Givens to Berthoud (August 1982), Berthoud, The Life of Henry Moore, p. 374.
42 "Toronto hope of getting Moore collection dims," Toronto Daily Star, 16 March 1967.
43 Ross to Moore (6 April 1967), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive. 176 next year or so, Ross, along with several wealthy and powerful cohorts, started a very calculated campaign to win Moore's favour. Toronto, they said, would be the city that could accommodate his oeuvre by building a special gallery strictly for Moore's art. Just days after Moore set foot in Toronto for the first time, Toronto's Globe and Mail newspaper announced that Givens had Ross willing to contribute $500,000 toward a
Henry Moore Gallery in Toronto.44 Sam and Ayala Zacks, as well as other Toronto heavyweights, such as Edmund Bovey, who succeeded Zacks as the AGO's president in
1969, wooed Moore with private meetings and luncheons; the details of which were reported in a 1975 Toronto Life article titled "The Wooing of Henry Moore: How
Toronto money and Toronto taste helped transform the city. A portrait of the Art
Establishment in action."45 On 4 April 1967, Ross wrote to Withrow: "The odds against us in London are probably great but you and I like that kind of challenge."46
The timing of Toronto's proposal to host a large collection of Moore's work was critical. Toronto was able to benefit from the controversy in the London press over
Moore's hoped-for home for his oeuvre at the Tate and Moore benefited from Toronto's
interest in that it placed pressure on the Tate.47 On 26 February 1967, just a couple of weeks before Moore's first trip to Toronto, London art critic Edwin Mullins publicized
44 "$500,000 start for gallery says Givens," The Globe and Mail, 16 March 1967.
45 Ross, "The Wooing of Henry Moore," pp. 11-13, 17.
46 Allan Ross to William Withrow (4 April 1967), file: "Curator, Moore Sculpture Centre (April 1, 1967 -March 31, 1967)," box 31: "The Director: W. Withrow," Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library and Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
Berthoud, The Life of Henry Moore, p. 375 and "Toronto hope of getting Moore collection dims," Toronto Daily Star, 16 March 1967. Moore's intent to give the Tate a number of his sculptures in a Sunday Telegram article headlined "HENRY MOORE OFFERS £lm. SCULPTURES TO NATION."48 Confusing matters was the fact that the buzz about this gift had come out far in advance of the Tate
actually being able to house or properly display such a collection. The Tate did plan to
expand, regardless of the gift, but nothing was definite at that time. In interview, William
Withrow, director of the AGO from 1960 to 1991, recalled the events leading to Moore's
gift to Toronto and revealed that he had made personal trips to the Tate in London to
meet with both of their directors (Norman Reid acceded John Rothenstein during this
time) on separate occasions to make sure that Toronto was not infringing on their
arrangements with Moore. Regarding the matter, Withrow said "I got clearance from the
Tate quite early in the game."49 The Tate simply did not have the capacity to dedicate so
much space to Moore and the article by Mullins had caused a stir that implied an
expectation of a 'special gallery' for Moore.50 In reading Ross's letters to Moore, it is
quite clear that the fallibility of the Tate's acceptance of Moore's initial offer is what
inspired Toronto to try to gain its own major collection of Moore works. In a letter of 6
April 1967, Ross stated his intentions:
Edwin Mullins, "Henry Moore offers £lm. sculptures to nation," Sunday Telegram, London, 26 February 1967.
49 Sarah Stanners interview with William Withrow, Toronto, 27 May 2008, digital recorder, transcribed in Appendix B.
50 Rumours were so rife about the details of Moore's gift to the Tate that the Chairman of the Board of Trustees for the Tate, Anthony Lousada, wrote a letter to the London Times to clarify, "It should be made quite clear that when Mr. Moore offered this important gift he made no conditions of any sort." Anthony Lousada to The Editor of The Times, 19 May 1967, copy at Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive. As you and my old friend Honourable Keiller Mackay, and I stood looking from the City Hall picture window across the Plaza the afternoon of the reception to you, it occurred to me that we of Toronto, and Ontario, and Canada, should build a splendid classical structure to adequately house the collection you have in mind for Tate Gallery and which they for some years apparently cannot accommodate.51
To make the idea of a dedicated space for Moore sculpture more real for the artist, Ross forwarded Moore a copy of a letter from the architect John C. Parkin, which affirmed
Ross's "extraordinary interest in obtaining this priceless collection of Moore's work for our city..." and the many available properties that could be developed in association with the AGO for this purpose.52 Ross's point in this exchange was to show Moore that space was available in Toronto for a number of his works to be housed together, which was precisely what the Tate Gallery could not say for sure.
Ross also lined up several important contacts to help convince Moore to establish a significant collection of his works in Toronto. In his first letter to the artist, Ross
indicated that he had The Right Honourable Lord Roy Thomson of Fleet ready to meet
Moore to discuss the matter.5 A little more than two weeks later, on 21 April 1967, Ross wrote to Moore to suggest that his friend Roland Michener, then Governor General of
Canada, get in touch with the Queen of England to help alleviate his obligations to the
51 Ross to Moore (6 April 1967), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive.
52 John C. Parkin to Allan Ross (12 April 1967), copy forwarded in a letter from Allan Ross to Henry Moore (17 April 1967), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive.
53 Ross to Moore (6 April 1967), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive. Tate: "If Roly were to suggest to the royal family the timeliness of you sending your collection to Ontario it would relieve you of what might be an embarrassing position with
Tate."54 At this point, Moore was still determined to make good on his initial promise made to the Tate, especially since the British Treasury announced that it would grant
£200,000 for the construction of a Moore gallery if the Tate could raise a similar amount.55 Moore made himself clear to Ross in a letter of 3 May 1967: ".. .1 am sure you will understand that now the Government has decided to help officially, I must keep to my intention of making my gift to the Tate Gallery, and not to anywhere else."56 Ross never did get Michener to approach the Queen but he did not give up either,"... should there be any difficulty in implementing the Tate idea, my heart will always be with you over here."57 As it turned out, there would be difficulty and Moore's mind would soon be changed.
Art, and especially sculpture, was being drastically redefined in the 1960s, not to mention the very notion of how the viewer should relate to sculpture. Moore's sculpture was avant-garde in Canada but in England it was increasingly considered an antecedent to the advances made by Anthony Caro, Tim Scott and Phillip King, to name only a few.
More to the point, contemporary artists close to the Tate were concerned about so much
Ross to Moore (21 April 1967), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive.
55 "£200,000 Treasury grant for Moore collection," The Financial Times (London), 27 April 1967.
56 Henry Moore to Allan Ross (3 May 1967), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive.
57 Allan Ross to Henry Moore (8 May 1967), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive. 180 space and funding going toward the celebration of one artist alone. On 26 May 1967, this sentiment was publicly expressed in a letter to the editor of the London Times; forty-one artists became signatories to a protest, which essentially repudiated what they perceived might be a "publicly financed form of permanent enshrinement."5 Rothenstein himself made it clear to Withrow that he would face great protest from the contemporary artists that dominated the Tate scene if the gallery were to accept and display such a gift.59
Moore's experience in Toronto was quite the opposite - his work was the epitome of modernity in a city that craved international recognition about as much as he did.60
Written by hand at the end of a letter dated 9 May 1967, Ross wrote to Moore, "I do so much want you to continue to grow world-wide; you so richly deserve even greater international recognition."61 At the same time, Ross was careful to point out the logic of establishing a collection of Moore's work in the Commonwealth. Ross's letters to Moore make repeated references to his English-Irish-Scotch background62 and to the "vast number of us over here in Ontario [that] have a lot of English blood in us, in addition to
58 'Henry Moore's Gift,' Times, London, 26 May 1967.
59 Sarah Stanners interview with William Withrow, Appendix B. Withrow specified that Rothenstein had expressed this fear of protest upon his first visit to the Tate to negotiate the Moore gift.
60 Avant-garde art was brewing in Toronto during this time, with artists such as those represented by Av Isaacs but they were not yet garnering the popular attention that Moore did without effort.
61 Allan Ross to Henry Moore (9 May 1967), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive.
62 Allan Ross to Henry Moore (15 May 1967), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive. 181
Scotch and Irish."63 Years later, in 1974, when Moore's work did in fact go en masse to the AGO in Toronto, Moore reflected on the events leading to this conclusion in a terse but telling way, "It all started when the Archer came here. I came with it and felt at home straight away. Even the houses looked English and the people were extremely friendly.
The Tate Gallery in London couldn't house all my work so I said I'd give it to Toronto.
That's all."64
Moore's home away from home
"She used to be a dumpy Victorian dowager clad in grumpy red brick, scowling disdainfully at the fringes of the city's Chinatown which surrounded her. In those days she was called the Toronto Art Gallery, and the name, like the building, was typical of the old Toronto... ,"65 The nearly universal sentiment in the press at the time of the
AGO's 1974 Phase I expansion, under the architect John C. Parkin, was that the museum had gone "international big-time."66 In 1966, the same year that The Archer came to
Toronto, the AGO became a provincial institution by an Act of Provincial Parliament.
Formerly the Art Gallery of Toronto, the AGO had a responsibility to expand in order to accommodate and display exhibitions worthy of government spending and private patronage. A commitment from Moore to donate a collection of his works to the AGO
Ross to Moore (21 April 1967), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive.
64 Henry Moore quoted in Christina Gulewitsch, "Moore Helps His Two Forms Move In," The Sunday Sun (Toronto), 19 May 1974.
65 David Billington, "Ontario gallery joins international big-time," Windsor Star, 28 October 1974.
66 Ibid. 182 was essential to securing both public and private monies to fund the museum's expansion.
A memorandum from 30 March 1967, written to Ross from Withrow, regarding "Toronto acquiring the Moore bequest" stated, in part here:
I. JUSTIFICATION We estimate that with the possible exception of London, England, and the Hirshhorn Collection, there is no other centre in the world which owns more examples of Moore's work than Toronto... With the addition of the 35 pieces from Moore's own collection, Toronto would be the world centre, attracting international visitors to see the most representative and probably the only truly retrospective collection of the work of Henry Moore.. ,67
John Robarts was premier of Ontario and, as one journalist has noted, "The pitch to the
Robarts' government for the gallery expansion money was more successful because of the glamour of Moore's name..."68 Moore was getting his back rubbed, too. After Moore's first visit to Toronto in 1967, the AGO set out straight away to organize an exhibition called Henry Moore, the Last Decade. Moore lent 20 works to the show while another 42 works came from private collections in Toronto.69
That the museum was becoming more international was not merely a projected image; Moore contacted the AGO on 9 December 1968 with a firm commitment to
Memorandum to Mr. A. Ross from W.J. Withrow, "RE: Toronto acquiring the Moore bequest" (30 March 1967), file: "Curator, Moore Sculpture Centre (April 1, 1967 - March 31, 1967)," box 31: The Director: W. Withrow, Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library and Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario.
68 Ross, 'The Wooing of Henry Moore,' p. 12.
Ibid., p. 13. 183 donate a significant collection of his work70 and, shortly thereafter, top personnel from the AGO traveled to England and were able to meet with Moore in an effort to make things happen. In mid January of 1969, Sam and Ayala Zacks, William and June
Withrow, Bovey and his spouse Peg, John C. Parkin, and Premier Robarts along with his spouse Norah, all joined Moore for an important, although very informal, lunch at the
White Tower restaurant in London. Withrow remembers that they seemed to talk about everything other than art and money - the two things that were likely top in everyone's mind. Apparently Robarts insisted that money issues not be brought to the table at this lunch.71 Instead, a spirit of friendship and trust was nurtured. According to Withrow,
Robarts and Moore sat arm in arm with each other at the White Tower.72 It was during this same trip to London that Withrow visited with Anthony Blunt, who recommended one of his Courtauld students, Alan Wilkinson, to be curator of the Moore collection in
Toronto.73 Wilkinson was working on a thesis to do with Moore's drawings and, because of his contact with the sculptor, he soon became known as the AGO's "man in Much
Hadham."74 Much Hadham is the hamlet closest to Moore's home and studios. Wilkinson
70 Henry Moore to Edmund Bovey (9 December 1968), file: "Communications; Media; Henry Moore and Moore Sculpture Centre"; 1969-70, box: 4. Communications, 1968/69, 1969/70, Toronto: E.P. Taylor Research Library and Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. The key statement in this letter: " .. .this letter is to say that it is my firm intention to donate to the Art Gallery of Ontario a sufficiently large and representative body of my work, to make it worthwhile building a special pavilion or gallery for its permanent display."
71 Wilkinson, Moore Remembered, p. 13.
Stanners interview with Withrow (27 May 2008), Appendix B.
73 Ibid.
Wilkinson, Moore Remembered, p. 13. 184 is also a Canadian. The Wilkinsons were old Toronto stock, but bowed deeply to the
Queen.
All those involved in expanding the AGO to highlight the Moore gift knew that the space to house this important collection had to be something at least equal to the sculptor's expectations. The gift to Toronto hinged on the promise to build a special
Moore gallery. The Henry Moore Sculpture Centre is comprised of a large sky-lit gallery for plasters (Figure 14), and additional Moore-related spaces include an adjacent, smaller
Irina Moore Gallery, and a long bi-level ramp-way, which had at one time been reserved for the display of works on paper. The AGO had dedicated approximately 10,000 square feet of remarkable space to one sculptor. The space is Moore's in another special way, he was intimately involved in the design and details of the main plaster gallery. The plasters were a special segment of Moore's gift to the AGO. In many cases, Moore's plasters are not merely casts but rather originals in that they were shaped by direct carving. Although many of Moore's plasters were created with the brilliant help of his assistants, the plasters were still closer to the sculptor's hands than the final bronze editions. Working with
Parkin, Moore was able to insist on all particulars, including the texture and colour of the walls, as well as the precise dimensions of the main gallery (113 x 57 ft.). During a visit to Perry Green, Withrow witnessed Moore figuring out the dimensions of the gallery by trailing out pieces of string along his lawn.75 On another occasion, Moore, Parkin,
Withrow and the Zacks toured various London galleries to brainstorm about lighting possibilities for Toronto. The Whitechapel Gallery stood out to Moore because of its
Stanners interview with Withrow (27 May 2008), Appendix B. 185 overhead lighting. The final result of the plaster gallery at the Henry Moore Sculpture
Centre is a space that celebrates the way that sculpted form comes to life in natural light.
Upon a visit to see Moore's studios at Perry Green, even today one can easily gather that the artist coveted natural, overhead light for shaping his plasters. Moore even custom built a plaster studio out of clear Plexiglas on his grounds in Perry Green.
The AGO's Henry Moore Sculpture Centre officially opened to the public on 26
October 1974. Crowning the achievement was Moore's Large Two Forms (1966-69)
(Figure 16), which was placed outdoors at the northeast corner of the museum with the
careful assistance of Moore. The two immense bronze forms respect each other, working together in a way that exudes a sense of harmony in sameness and difference. "The new,
expanded, internationally prestigious Art Gallery of Ontario has transformed itself from a private club into a public inspiration," said a Toronto Life journalist. However, this international prestige also inspired public protests. A letter dated 26 November 1973
from Michel Lambeth, chairman/spokesman for the Toronto section of Canadian Artists'
Representation (CAR), blasted the AGO's spending on foreign artists instead of Canadian
and particularly Ontarian artists.77 CAR asks that Moore not let his name be used "an unwitting agent of cultural imperialism." The same letter threatens:
/b Ross, "The Wooing of Henry Moore," p. 94.
77 Michel Lambeth to Henry Moore (26 November 1973), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive.
78 Ibid. David Cohen has also observed "From a leftist perspective, the international export of Moore became emblematic of a kind of new colonialism." David Cohen, "Who's Afraid of Henry Moore," in Henry Moore: Sculpting the 20th Century, New Haven and London: Yale University Press / Dallas Museum of Art, 2001, p. 265. 186
.. .if the expansion programmed of the AGO is opened next spring and the new wing is not named the TOM THOMSON WING, and your work is placed on permanent display, CAR will have no alternative but to initiate and present the greatest cultural protest demonstration that has ever been held in Canada.
Moore received this 'open letter' via the Marlborough Gallery and did not respond until
23 January 1974 due to travel and injury.80 Lambeth's letter smacked of such a desperate need for a quick response that, just perhaps, Moore politely allowed for simmer time. In
any case, Moore emphasized his "strong belief that art is international, and should be
made available to as many people as possible, throughout the world."81 Recollecting the
time he spent in Toronto restoring and setting up the Moore plasters in situ, Malcolm
Woodward, one of Moore's assistants, remembered the antagonism with sympathy but
felt that these upset Canadian artists "were more being the imperialists rather than
Moore."82 Moore's reply to Lambeth also implied a comparison between the Rodin
Museum in Paris, as well as his home and Studio at Meudon, and the Moore Sculpture
Centre. Moore learned from the study of ".. .original maquettes and plasters, done by
Rodin's own hands... ."83 Rodin, like Moore, demonstrated friendship and affection for a
Michel Lambeth to Henry Moore (26 November 1973), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive.
80 Henry Moore to Michel Lambeth (23 January 1974), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive.
81 Ibid.
82 Malcolm Woodward, private correspondence with the author (13 February 2008).
83 Moore to Lambeth (23 January 1974), Perry Green: The Henry Moore Foundation Archive. 187 foreign country when he donated works to England's Victoria and Albert Museum.
Moore made his point clear in this letter: "Art should be about giving and exchanging between nations."84 Barry Lord, another outspoken voice for Canadian art, made a retort
in keeping with Lambeth's objection and published it on the Henry Moore Sculpture
Centre's opening day:
But the fact remains that the main emphasis of the new gallery programme is not on showing what our artists are doing, but on importing, from Europe and the U.S., the styles and subjects of those centres that either dominate us now, like the United States, or used to in the past, like Great Britain.85
The concern over cultural domination was very real for some, but the AGO did have plans to expand its Canadian galleries with the next phase of its expansion. Still
concerned about the threatened protest demonstrations at what would be a very well
attended opening of the Henry Moore Sculpture Centre, Withrow contacted the Toronto
Police for help. Officers were sent in plain clothes to keep the peace in case anything
should happen, but, aside from a handful of picketers, the opening went smoothly.86 By this point in the history of Moore in Toronto, controversy seems only fitting. About The
Archer and what it meant for Toronto, Parkin said, ".. .what was controversy then has
84 Ibid.
85 Barry Lord, "Ontario Art Gallery re-opens to a storm of controversy," Hamilton Spectator, 26 October 1974.
86 Stanners interview with Withrow (27 May 2008), Appendix B. 188 now become virtue... The Moore controversy was really a turning point - and from that eventually also came the realization of the Moore Centre."
Moore made the Art Gallery of Ontario modern, and internationally relevant, in many ways. In the thirty-five years between now and when the Henry Moore Sculpture
Centre first opened, Moore has become a fixture in the cultural minds of the Canadians that can wander around his sculptures any day that the AGO is open. As my epilogue will now demonstrate, Moore's relevance, and the association of controversy with his work in
Toronto, has not yet subsided.
John C. Parkin quoted in Alan Wilkinson, The Henry Moore Sculpture Centre, Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1974; large format introductory publication. Epilogue
Resurrection
Henry Moore was resurrected in Toronto, Canada, in 2008. For a period of 18 months,
Simon Starling's version of Henry Moore's Warrior with Shield hung suspended and
submerged in Lake Ontario (Figure 17). In sharp contrast, the Art Gallery of Ontario's
Warrior with Shield (1953-54), one of the 6 authentic bronze copies made by Moore,1
and the object of Starling's unofficial redux, was on temporary loan to the Four Season's
Centre for the Performing Arts in Toronto for 18 months, up until February 2008,
virtually the same period in which Starling's Warrior was incubating before its inaugural
exhibition. The motive for Starling's Infestation Piece (Musselled Moore) (Figure 1)
was, as its title suggests, infestation. The entire project was guided by a concerted effort
to have this Moore remake infested with zebra mussels, which are, significantly, non-
native to Canadian waters. The thrust of Starling's project had everything to do with the
historical and physical context in which it was conceived and ultimately exhibited.
Unveiled out of water at The Power Plant Contemporary Art Gallery, which overlooks
Lake Ontario from the Toronto Harbour, Starling's Moore found its final home a little
1 Henry Moore's Warrior with Shield (1953-54) was initially produced as an edition of 5 but the artist made an additional copy in 1965 for a site near Battle Abbey to stand as a permanent memorial to the Battle of Hastings.
2 "AGO's Henry Moore Sculpture Unveiled at the Four Season's Centre for the Performing Arts," Art Matters, Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 31 August 2006
18Q 190 further in shore at the Art Gallery of Ontario.3 Far from being just another banal reinterpretation of modern art proper, Starling's intervention on Moore's work has paid careful attention to the life that sculpture lives when it leaves the artist's hands and enters the museum. An exploration of the new AGO and what it means for Henry Moore's work is first in order before returning to a deeper analysis Starling's Infestation Piece
(Musselled Moore).
Transformation is the name that has been given to the most recent expansion of the AGO, led by architect Frank Gehry (Figure 18). Completed in November 2008, the new AGO remains in the same 6 acres it has occupied since a small English-style manor
(The Grange') and it surrounding land was bequeathed to the city to be used as the Art
Museum of Toronto in 1911. In a rather unusual location for a major art museum, nestled amongst old Victorian homes and Chinatown, the AGO's Transformation is yet
another stride toward gaining more international repute. This time the museum's star is
Frank Gehry, an architect who is often treated as an artist and, appropriately,
commissioned for projects that intend to gain international attention; the Guggenheim
Museum in Bilboa, Spain, is just one example. Interestingly, Gehry spent several years of
his childhood growing up in the very same neighbourhood that the AGO resides.
The main feature of Gehry's expanded AGO is a city-block long, glazed sculpture
corridor that runs along the facade of the museum on Dundas Street West, terminating on
both ends with purely external sweeping forms that twist away from facade. The height
3 The exhibition and accompanying catalogue was entitled Simon Starling: Cuttings (Supplement), exh. cat., Toronto: The Power Plant Contemporary Art Gallery, Harbourfront Centre, 1 March- 11 May, 2008.
4 Art Gallery of Ontario: Selected Works, Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1990, p. 15. 191 of this sculpture corridor, formally named the Galleria Italia, is sensitive to the height of the Victorian homes across the street and the great sweep itself is supported with custom tooled beams made of Douglas fir wood (Figure 19).
The AGO's most recent expansion commenced in March of 2005 with a very
careful first step, moving Moore's Large Two Forms about 14 feet south of where it was
first installed, at the corner of Dundas and McCaul Streets. This very slight move was undertaken to allow for the sweep of the facade and a temporary wood housing was
constructed to protect the sculpture during construction. Significantly, the AGO did not
simply remove the sculpture altogether. Instead, Large Two Forms will remain in the
same general area as a veritable cornerstone to the museum. Also significant is the fact
that the AGO's Transformation has changed very little of the Henry Moore Sculpture
Centre. The ramp-way leading to the Moore Sculpture Centre remains intact but is now
closed to the public; an unobtrusive, but necessary, fire door bisects the Irina Moore
Gallery; and, most noticeably, the sky-lit gallery for the plasters remains the same, except
for an approximately 22-foot wide portal that has opened on the north wall so that visitors
may move freely from the Moore Sculpture Centre to the new Galleria Italia (Figure 14).
Although this new opening certainly changes the lighting that Moore practically
engineered, it has, in the most positive way, brought Moore's work in touch with the new
museum. Visitors move more freely into the space and the added light exposure from the
glazed Galleria Italia creates the illusion of even more space than before. The Galleria
Italia has a total of seven portals that open on to other galleries along the length of the
museum. 192
Another small change made to the Moore Sculpture Centre, which may be considered more of a restoration, is the systematic replacement of the plinths for the plaster works, according to their original design. Malcolm Woodward, who had helped to
install Moore's plasters at the AGO in 1974, and who has now retired from his position as restorer at the Henry Moore Foundation, returned to Toronto to help in this process of upgrading the plinths and preparing the space. Woodward's expertise has shed some
interesting light on the state of the Moore Sculpture Centre after the AGO's
Transformation:
.. .I've been back since... in January [2008]... and I think it's now taken this historical perspective. .. .it's not lessened the impact of the work but just physically its made it almost like mother and child building, because this massive new building, which is fantastic and then tucked within it is this little Moore Centre that was the big thing at the time.5
When asked about the preservation of the Henry Moore Sculpture Centre, Linda Milrod,
the Senior Project Manager, Program and Installation Director for Transformation AGO,
said, "The project wanted to respect the space as an anchor of our institution." The
Moore collection is the "sacred cow" at the AGO, as Milrod put it, and the decision to
leave its dedicated space relatively unchanged ".. .came from an intellectual, emotional
and cultural point of view."7
5 Woodward, private correspondence with Stanners (13 February 2008).
6 Sarah Stanners interview with Linda Milrod, Toronto (15 May 2008), transcribed telephone conversation.
7 Ibid. 193
The Henry Moore Sculpture Centre has certainly not diminished in importance, but it has been increasingly open to intervention, even before a large opening was made
in its northern wall, which itself implies a dialogue with contemporary art, since the
Galleria Italia will often showcase contemporary art. Upon reopening on 17 June 2006
after a brief closure for repairs, the Moore Sculpture Centre was surprisingly adorned
with 17 larger than life strippers rendered in simplified lines (Figure 20). Part of a
program known as Swing Space, which was launched at the same time as Transformation
AGO, and driven by a mandate to bring contemporary works into unexpected places, the
British artist Julian Opie was invited to choose any area of the AGO to inspire his work -
and he chose the Henry Moore Sculpture Centre.8 Called This is Shahnoza, Opie used
black vinyl on the surrounding walls to delineate poles from which exotic dancers hang
and tease in seeming relation to the Moore sculptures. The press release for this jarring
intervention claimed that "The images are directly in line with the struts in the Centre's
coffered ceiling, and draw parallels to the historical use of goddesses and female statues
as support columns in classical architecture."9 The other argument for their value was that
Opie's figures conjured up sexual connotations in Moore's forms, which are presumed to
be latent or even suppressed in Moore's original work. Of course, Moore did not seek
models in strip clubs, but that does not mean that the sexuality of his figures were
repressed or denied by the artist. In my opinion, the sexuality that is in Moore's work is
David Moos, Wallworks: Contemporary Artists and Place, Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 2007. This catalogue also includes an interview with the artist: "Julian Opie interviewed by Michelle Jacques," (pp. 88-91). 9 "British Artist Julian Opie Transforms Walls of AGO's Henry Moore Sculpture Centre," Archived News Releases, 16 June 2006,
the sexuality of maternity, and all of its associations with vitalism, is not as popular or understandable as the typically narcissistic representations of sex are; that is, maternal
sexuality tends to exclude the male viewer. For example, the arrangement of a mother
nursing a child in a work of sculpture by Moore (or Barbara Hepworth is another good
example) emphasizes a self-possessed sexuality, rather than a sexuality that requires
external reassurance. As we can assume the AGO thought might happen, controversy
ensued when this Opie wall work went public.10 The positive result of this intervention is
that Moore's work was renegotiated in the minds of those who knew him well and those
who never thought to look twice.
Nevertheless, Moore's seeming neutrality in the territory of sexy women proves
irksome to artists such as Opie and even Anish Kapoor." David Cohen's 2001 essay
"Who's Afraid of Henry Moore" posited that Moore's comparatively low popularity as a
sustaining model to artists of contemporary sculpture is due to a situation best described
as "the anxiety of influence," as first termed by Harold Bloom.12 Not wanting to be too
closely associated with Moore's unmistakable aesthetic is one thing, but Cohen builds on
this argument and finds that contemporary art's unsympathetic attitude toward the art of
Henry Moore has much to do with the seismic shift that the art object underwent
10 There is an online forum relating to Julian Opie's intervention on the Moore Sculpture Centre, which is supported by the AGO's Art Matters. A good sense of the debate is gathered here. "Change is about experimentation," Art Matters, 28 March 2007,
11 Cohen, "Who's Afraid," p. 272.
12 Ibid, p. 263. 195 beginning in the 1960s: "Since minimalism, it could be argued, the intellectual work in sculpture has shifted from the artist to the viewer."13 Cohen's essay winds down with a projection that most would have agreed with in 2001: "It would be difficult to envisage a major rediscovery of Moore in the British art world in the near future. Partly this is because he is not yet neglected enough: he is still a favorite among the public, an aesthetically 'safe' taste."14 But what about a scenario where the best British contemporary artists go outside of their native Moore lands? To be clear, what happens when the contemporary British artist comes to Canada to rediscover Moore? This is just the case in Toronto, where Moore's sculpture has had a longer run in the category of avant-garde or controversial art than in the UK. In 2008, a Turner Prize-winning artist did
in fact resurrect a different sort of Moore sculpture, one that does place the onus on the viewer to recognize its significance.
Simon Starling's Infestation Piece (Musselled Moore) (Figure 1) proves that
Moore's sculpture can have a life beyond the finishing touches of the artist, or even its permanent display in a museum (historical sculpture always potentially can, and has
often). For Starling, Dreissena polymorpha, commonly known as zebra mussels, are the perfect analog for a particularly Canadian cultural phenomena: the foreign artist, the
European species in particular, effectively arrives on the shores of Canada and dominates the local art scene. When Starling sank his version of the Warrior with Shield in Lake
13 Ibid, p. 273.
14 Ibid.
15 Mark Cheetham kindly pointed out to me that mussels have historically been used as symbols for resurrection in still life painting. 196
Ontario on 2 April 2006, he was effectively bringing the history of Henry Moore in
Toronto back to life. Beginning in 1988, zebra mussels arrived to the Great Lakes of
North America (via the ballast water of transatlantic vessels) from their natural home in the Black Sea. They now proliferate in the fresh waters of Canada and the US and their impact, like foreign cultural influence on Canada, is frequently being debated as being either negative or positive.
Starling has also pointed out that his rendition of the Warrior with Shield has gone back to where it came from in the imagination of Henry Moore - back to the water.
Moore described his inspiration for making the Warrior when he wrote to the director of
an American museum in 1955, "It was evolved from a pebble I had found on the seashore
in the summer of 1952... ,"17 Moore was taken with the way that the water had worn the
stone in a manner that reminded him of the stump of an injured veteran. Starling tossed his version of Moore's Warrior back to the waters to take on another meaning - one that
is sensitive to the arrival of modernism to Canada via foreign talent, like that of Moore's.
Better still, Moore's Warrior with Shield came to Canada upon the recommendation and
arrangements made by Anthony Blunt, a double agent that allowed foreign matters of
another kind to flow between two countries. Starling's interest in global exchange reflects
Sarah Stanners interview with Simon Starling, Toronto (31 October 2007), digital recording, Appendix E.
Henry Moore, copy of a letter to the director of the Minneapolis Institute of Art, received by the Art Gallery of Ontario on 17 February 1955, Warrior with Shield accession file, Toronto, Art Gallery of Ontario. 197 on the ramifications of the push to go international after mid-century. Interestingly,
I 8
Starling has referred to his artistic process as "mapping."
In Simon Starling: Cuttings (Supplement), the companion publication to Starling's spring 2008 exhibition at the Power Plant Contemporary Art Gallery in Toronto, Mark
Godfrey asks, after a discussion of the dematerialization of the art object in the 1960s and
1970s, "... what does it mean to resurrect sculpture as a practice of object-making in a meaningful, rather than traditional or trivial way?"19 As Godfrey himself puts it, "Starling revises what we thought we understood about the modernist period, refusing to see modernist art as autonomous."20 This observation by Godfrey may explain Sir Anthony
Caro's reaction to Starling's Infestation Piece (Musselled Moore) when I described it to him in mid February 2008: ".. .1 don't want to hear the stories.. .1 want to see." Caro was, incidentally, Moore's assistant at the time that he created Warrior with Shield (1953-
54). Starling's project for Toronto may have been intimately tied to the history behind the sculpture's controversial arrival at the AGO,22 but its success was also dependent on the
Stanners interview with Starling (31 October 2007), Appendix E.
19 Mark Godfrey, "Simon Starling's Regenerated Sculpture," in Simon Starling, et al., Simon Starling: Cuttings (Supplement), ed. Gregory Burke, Toronto: The Power Plant Contemporary Art Gallery, 2008, p. A5.
20 Ibid, p. All.
21 Sarah Stanners interview with Sir Anthony Caro, London (14 February 2008), digital recording, Appendix D.
22 Starling invited me to co-write, with Reid Shier, a contribution to the publication Simon Starling: Cuttings (Supplement) (Op. cit.) that would relate to his Infestation Piece (Musselled Moore). The result was "Polymorphs," an annotated chronology of events and matters related to Infestation Piece, yet it did not once directly refer to the work of art it aimed to compliment. We wanted the effect to be a veritable resource of subtle implications. After reading "Polymorphs," Starling insisted that he choose from the 198 actual physical growth of zebra mussels on his sunken Warrior. Although the connection is serendipitous, Starling's barnacle-bound Warrior is sensitive to the notion of growth and vitality that is central to much of Moore's sculpture. In the words of David Cohen,
"... a good Henry Moore is imbued with the sensation that it is still growing."23
Also critical to the success of Starling's Infestation Piece (Musselled Moore) is
the element of self-reflexivity. Starling, like Moore, is a British import who made a
splash on the Toronto art scene. Starling's Infestation Piece, like Moore's Warrior with
Shield, was presented to the AGO as a gift. Finally, Starling, like Moore, was celebrated by a Toronto art institution aiming to better its international reputation amongst
museums. Starling's piece was the Power Plant's inaugural project for their
Commissioning Program, which, thanks to private donors, '".. .helps to cement Toronto's
claim to be a major international art city given that each major commission has the potential to attract enduring international attention.'"2 To support the exhibition, a
collage by Starling, which is illustrated in Cuttings (Supplement)^ was produced as a
limited edition print for sale by the Power Plant. The collage is comprised of a
images, which we had all collected, so that he could run them alongside the text. Starling has said to me in interview (31 October 2007) that he handles photographs like sculptural objects. For instance, Starling repeatedly placed images of his Infestation Piece collage throughout his text, each one displaying more mussels than the last. This play with 'sculptural objects' throughout our text demonstrates Starling's keen ability to marry the conceptual with the physical.
23 Cohen, "Who's Afraid," p. 264.
24 Gregory Burke quoted in a Power Plant press release (26 September 2006), "The Power Plant launches major commissioning program with Turner Prize winner Simon Starling," Harbourfront Centre,
Starling, Simon Starling: Cuttings (Supplement), figure 'r', p. CI4. photograph of Moore's plaster Reclining Figure (1951) with a seamless overlay of neatly placed mussel shells. But what lies beyond the quiet image of Moore's Reclining Figure with 7 mussel attachments is a very telling history. In Moore's biography by Roger
Berthoud, a very interesting anecdote about this plaster emerges from the context of the
AGO's opening for the Henry Moore Sculpture Centre on 26 October 1974:
It was both a domestic and international occasion, the Torontonians leavened with foreign museum directors, critics, and dealers. One Briton invited to see the custom-built Moore shrine was the Tate's director Norman Reid, who was startled to spot among the plasters the 1951 Festival ofBritain Reclining Figure. He had been most anxious to secure this for the Tate as a part of the Moore gift, only to find that it had been promised to an Australian gallery. The Tate's claim had, he thought, prevailed - yet there it was! Conveying his surprise to Henry with a cocked eyebrow, he was assured all was well: 'I had another one made for them,' the sculptor explained, no doubt with a slightly guilty giggle. The Tate duly got the original.26
It seems that Moore, like Starling, saw the value in a copy.
The legacy of Henry Moore in Toronto is deep and far reaching. With the
emergence of Starling's Infestation Piece (Musselled Moore) from the waters of Lake
Ontario, there occurred an awakening of conversation around Moore's place in Toronto.
Peter Goddard sees ".. .contemporary culture's remix mentality" reflected in Starling's
Toronto project. Yet Starling is not just re-running art history, he is adding to it.
Berthoud, The Life of Henry Moore, p. 385.
27 Peter Goddard, "Starling: Moore than meets the eye," Toronto Star, 13 March 2008, p. E10. 200
Starling's Warrior is another mollusk on the story of Moore and Toronto. As Starling was well aware, to Marcel Broodthaers, the mussel was the sort of stereotypical symbol of
Brussels that he felt was anchored in parochialism.28 Moore, the eminent example of
Britishness in British art, may have felt himself anchored to a parochial image that only increased in relation to sculpture emerging in the 1960s and 1970s. In a strangely perfect way, it was a traditionally provincial city that satisfied Moore's urge to leave a legacy behind, which is alive and well today. Out of controversy, Toronto adopted Henry Moore to construct its own sense of modernity and international repute.
Stanners interview with Starling (31 October 2007), Appendix E. FIGURES
201 202
Figure 1
Simon Starling, Infestation Piece (Musselled Moore), 2006-08, steel, wood, and mussels, on display at the Power Plant Contemporary Art Gallery (March 2008). Now in the collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario. Photo by the author, courtesy of the artist. 203
*• pii & %«- , <^2tV' Mk'wt
4 ' ilfl 4^> *#-* />
^^^ - \ -• ^^^t 4K" -
Figure 2
Paul Nash, Solstice of the Sunflower, 1945, oil National Gallery of Canada, Massey Collection of English Painting 204
#
'.*
SB. . »J.iA !&-s- :- .i:. *? -J 'AM*''-*" . .
•• • . . ^* . J.' V'
;fc:-".-S;?--bW.
tLv'i"r*i«,Sf.i;Si,
•'.-»-' "•••
it"& ?^ -v/: 'V- 'if'* .!l • i ./_' \ **«i it : >f! * 4 ^ '; ?
Figure 3
Stanley Spence, Self Portrait, 1944, oil National Gallery of Canada, Massey Collection of English Painting 205
v'h:9 ! '! \*\ !
MBS*** ^t,' Figure 4 Artworks on display in a University of New Brunswick classroom (ca. 1955). Sketches by Graham Sutherland are displayed on the right. Courtesy of the Beaverbrook Art Gallery Archives. 206 i, (F .,H "•» Figure 5 Graham Sutherland, Lord Beaverbrook, 1951, oil Beaverbrook Art Gallery 207 Figure 6 Ben Nicholson, Still Life, June 6, 1948, 1948, oil Art Gallery of Ontario, Gift of the Women's Committee, 1950 208 r.i ^U^Bi.- .:-T-*KiBf #ffp-r •••"•?- if Figure 7 Andy Warhol, £/vis / and II, 1964, silkscreen on acrylic, silkscreen on aluminum paint on canvas Art Gallery of Ontario Figure 8 Jerrold Morris and Emilio del Junco at the Jerrold Morris International Gallery in Toronto (Roy Lichtenstein's Pistol from 1964 hangs between them). Photocopy of photo in the Jerrold Morris file at the Art Gallery of Ontario, courtesy of John Morris. ft- I,. 1 'y"'' i • •'' : • '• •" , i . .., •3.. : •#) • . .'*$&;-;; • •. - - • - "M?... J Figure 9 Jerrold Morris International Gallery, Toronto (ca. 1964) (Andy Warhol's Silver Liz As Cleopatra [1964] on the far right wa Photo courtesy of John Morris 211 • a*- R*»' .f •• • • r^B"-- • ' .£-!*' •*. • — v. ^ •_• i^h •;•.*- ->yv,*yi "••.•"V^i" •a*^*--,»,-Jr-*i ••• i /;sp»»y»1^1,!"ift«Tr,*r* -,*- Figure 10 Franz Kline, Cupola, 1958-60, oil Art Gallery of Ontario 212 r Figure 11 Reading Life magazine at the military camp branch in Exhibition Park (1939), Toronto Public Library 213 Figure 12 Jack Bush, Bonnet, 1961, oil In the collection of David and Audrey Mirvish 214 J^C5—-ifcJ*,H,%fc_ *" s" » ./ is^ • i * V " ^ /.. W V / v.* Figure 13 Jack Bush, Sumach, 1930, watercolour National Gallery of Canada 215 •<- * % t-JL .>• ... • .,fta.l•••,',. Figure 14 The Henry Moore Sculpture Centre, Art Gallery of Ontario, 2008 (with new portal) Photo courtesy of Geoff Stanners 216 rv. .-—.* •••• •*•'- Figure 15 Henry Moore, Three Way Piece No. 2: The Archer, 1964-65, bronze Nathan Phillip's Square, Toronto (looking toward old City Hall) Photo courtesy of Geoff Stanners 217 ••-,., *.. - • t r * -•VubT'"**' ?JS& •( -^ lT# >» 'Vagi «, Figure 16 Henry Moore, Zarge Two Forms, 1966-69, bronze, in situ in Toronto (ca. 1975) Art Gallery of Ontario 218 »*» -• * -a P^ — V ..• Figure 17 Simon Starling, Infestation Piece (Musselled Moore), in process (2007), Toronto Harbour Photo courtesy of the artist 219 ^rvT»« '•AjY^ift ^i-* l>. r. " : l? - * Figure 18 The recently expanded Art Gallery of Ontario by Frank Gehry (November 2008) Photo courtesy of Sean Weaver 220 I I ' I •— * t 4 *W Figure 19 The new Galleria Italia at the Art Gallery of Ontario Photo courtesy of Geoff Stanners 221 ..It a'. / * •# • •VrJ 1 •" Figure 20 Julian Opie, This is Shahnoza, 2006, vinyl, installed in the Henry Moore Sculpture Centre, Art Gallery of Ontario Photo courtesy of the author Bibliography Books and articles A Joint Catalogue of the Periodicals and Serials in the Libraries of the City of Toronto. Toronto: Printed and Published by the King's Printer, 1934. Aitken, Ian. "The day that enriches a nation." Daily Express (17 September 1959). Andersson, Patrik. "Objects of Contention: The VAG and its Founders' Collection." Unpublished (n.d.). p. 2, Vancouver Art Gallery Library. Art Gallery of Ontario: Selected Works. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1990. "Art Gallery's Role Expanding." The Daily Gleaner (2 July 1960): p. 2. Barr, Alfred H. "Modern Art in London Museums." The Arts. XIV: 4 (October 1928): pp. 187-194. Barr, Alfred H. "Boston is Modern Art Pauper - Barr." Harvard Crimson (October 1926). Bcrthoud, Roger. The Life of Henry Moore. London: Giles de la Mare, 2003. Berthoud, Roger. Graham Sutherland: A Biography. London: Faber and Faber Limited, 1982. Billington, David. "Ontario gallery joins international big-time." Windsor Star. 28 October 1974. Bissell, Claude T. The Imperial Canadian: Vincent Massey in Office. Toronto: University of Toronto, 1986. "Blunt Speaking: Londoner Gives Abstract Artists Concrete Advice." Globe-Democrat, St. Louis (30 March 1956). Borduas, Paul-Emile, et. al. Refus global. Montreal, Mithra-Mythe Editeur, 1948. Brown, Jeremy. "Bar talk cinches Moore for city." The Telegram. Toronto. 30 May 1966. p. 9. Burtch, Michael. Hymn to the Sun, Early Work: Jack Bush, Art Gallery of Algoma. 1997. 222 223 Carpenter, Edmund. "Remembering Explorations." Canadian Notes & Queries, no. 46 (Spring 1992): p. 7. Carter, Miranda. Anthony Blunt: His Lives. Oxford: Macmillan, 2001. Cavell, Richard. McLuhan In Space: A Cultural Geography. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2003. Chrisholm, Anne and Michael Davie. Beaverbrook: A Life. London: Hutchinson, 1992. Cohen, David. "Who's Afraid of Henry Moore." In Henry Moore: Sculpting the 20' Century. New Haven and London: Yale University Press / Dallas Museum of Art, 2001. "Curator Takes Post in U.S." Vancouver Sun (6 April 1956). Cushing, Deborah. "Art in Dispute at the Beaverbrook Art Gallery." International Journal of Cultural Property, 15 (2008): 297-320. Dault, Gary Michael. "Jack Bush: Early Work, Art Gallery of Ontario, December 21- February 9, 1985 and Jack Bush on Paper, The Koffler Gallery, North York, Ontario, December 3 - January 30, 1985." Canadian Art (summer 1986). Dawn, Leslie. National Visions, National Blindness: Canadian Art and Identities in the 1920s. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2006. Fenwick, Kathleen M. "Revival of British Painting." Canadian Art. IV: 3 (May 1947): pp. 118-120. Finlay, Karen. The Force of Culture: Vincent Massey & Canadian Sovereignty. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004. Finlay, Karen. "Identifying with Nature: Graham Sutherland and Canadian Art, 1939- 1955." RACAR, XXI: 1-2 (1994): pp.43-59. "Friday the 13th a Lucky Day." The Telegram. Toronto. 10 May 1955. Fulford, Robert. "The philistines have retired." Toronto Daily Star. 28 October 1966. P. 21. Goddard, Peter. "Starling: Moore than meets the eye." Toronto Star. 13 March 2008. P. E10. Goldfarb Marquis, Alice. Alfred H. Barr Jr.: Missionary for the Modern. Chicago: Contemporary Books, 1989. 224 Gordon, W. Terrence. Marshall McLuhan: Escape Into Understanding. New York: Basic Books / HarperCollins Publishers, 1997. "Great Stimulus to Art Appreciation." Evening Times Globe (4 December 1953). Greenberg, Clement. Clement Greenberg: The Collected Essays and Criticism. Ed. John O'Brian. Vols. 3 and 4. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993. Guilbaut, Serge, ed. Reconstructing Modernism: Art in New York, Paris, and Montreal, 1945-1964 and Hot Paint for Cold War Symposium. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1990. Guilbaut, Serge. How New Stole the Idea of Modern Art: Abstract Expressionism, Freedom and the Cold War. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983. Gulewitsch, Christina. "Moore Helps His Two Forms Move In." The Sunday Sun. Toronto. 19 May 1974. "Has Important Role In Planning of Art Gallery." Telegraph Journal (13 October 1956). "Henry A. Stone, Art Gallery's Founder, 'Good Citizen,' Dies." Vancouver Province (28 June 1942). "J.A. Morris New Curator." Vancouver Sun (3 March 1948). Kilbourn, Elizabeth. "The Greenberg gospel." Toronto Star (I February 1964). Kilgour, David, ed. A Strange Elation, Hart House: The First Eighty Years. Toronto: Hart House / University of Toronto Press, 1999. Lee, John M. "Toronto Unveils a Sculpture by Moore." New York Times. 29 October 1966. P. 24L. Lewis, Wyndham, ed. BLAST 7(1914). Santa Barbara: Black Sparrow Press, 1981. Lewis, Wyndham, ed. BLAST 2 (1915), Santa Barbara: Black Sparrow Press, 1981. Lewis, Wyndham. America and Cosmic Man. London: Nicholson & Watson, 1948. Lewis, Wyndham. America, I Presume. New York: Howell, Soskin & Co., 1941. Lewis, Wyndham. Time and Western Man. Ed. Paul Edwards. Santa Rosa: Black Sparrow, 1993 (1927). Litvak, Isaiah and Christopher Maule. Cultural Sovereignty: The Time and Reader's Digest Case in Canada. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1974. 225 Lord, Barry. "Ontario Art Gallery re-opens to a storm of controversy." Hamilton Spectator. 26 October 1974. "Lord Beaverbrook Gives Art Gallery to N.B." Daily Gleaner (3 December 1954). Lumsden, Ian G. et al. The Beaverbrook Art Gallery Collection, Selected Works, Fredericton: Beaverbrook Art Gallery, 2000. Lumsden, Ian G. Sargent to Freud: Modern British Paintings and Drawings in the Beaverbrook Collection. Fredericton: Beaverbrook Art Gallery, 1998. Malcolmson, Harry. "The international reputation that's the best-kept secret in Toronto." Telegram (Toronto). 24 September 1966. Marchand, Philip. Marshall McLuhan: The Medium and the Messenger. Toronto: Random House, 1989. "Marshall McLuhan on the TODAY show." YouTube, < http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZF8jej3j5vA>. Accessed 28 January 2009. Massey, Vincent. What's Past Is Prologue, Memoirs. Toronto: The Macmillan Company of Canada Ltd., 1963. Massey, Vincent. On Being Canadian. Toronto: J.M. Dent & Sons (Canada) Limited, 1948. "Massey to Bring 71 Paintings to Ottawa Gallery." Ottawa Journal. 11 April 1946. McCarthy, Pearl. "The Trend is to the Repellent - Seated Warrior a Case in Point." Globe and Mail. Toronto. 23 April 1955. Mercer, Kobena, ed. Cosmopolitan Modernisms. London: Institute of International Visual Arts, 2005. McKenzie, Karen and Larry Pfaff. "The Art Gallery of Ontario: Sixty Years of Exhibitions, 1906-1966." RACAR. VII: 1-2 (1980): pp. 62-91. McLuhan, Marshall. Letters of Marshall McLuhan. Matie Molinaro, Corinne McLuhan and William Toye, eds. Toronto/Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 1987. McLuhan, Marshall, quoted in "The Global Lewis." Lewisletter, no. 5 (October 1976): p. 11. McLuhan, Marshall. "Technology and Environment." Artscanada. 24: 105 (February 226 1967): pp. 5-7. McLuhan, Marshall. "Wyndham Lewis Recalled: Marshall McLuhan Recalls Lewis." A Flexidisc recording included with artscanada. 24: 114 (November 1967): special issue on Wyndham Lewis. McLuhan, Marshall. COUNTERBLAST. Designed by Harley Parker. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart Limited, 1969. McLuhan, Marshall. COUNTERBLAST, privately printed, 1954. Moore, Henry. Henry Moore On Sculpture. Ed. Philip James. London: MacDonald, 1966. Morris, Jerrold. Adrift On Course; An Autobiographical Essay with Illustrations by the Author. Toronto: Hawthorn Art Press, 1979. Morris, Jerrold. Canadian Artists and Airmen, 1940-45. Toronto: The Morris Gallery, 1974. Morris, Jerrold. "What kind of city is our new Henry Moore coming to?" The Telegram Toronto. 22 October 1966. Mullins, Edwin. "Henry Moore offers £lm. sculptures to nation." Sunday Telegram, London. 26 February 1967. Nasgaard, Roald. Abstract Painting In Canada. Vancouver: Douglas & Mclntyre / Halifax: Art Gallery of Nova Scotia, 2007. Nasgaard, Roald. "A Glance at Art in Toronto." Vie des arts. XXI (Spring 1977): 83. Nasgaard, Roald. "Jack Bush: Reductions and Retentions." Vie des arts. XXI (Spring 1977): 89-90. Nash, Paul. '"Going Modern' and 'Being British'." The Weekend Review (12 March 1932): pp. 322-323. "'Natural' Artists Hit Gallery Ban." The Vancouver News Herald (8 June 1954). "New Acquisitions by Canadian Galleries." Canadian Art. IX: 2 (1951-52): p. 75. O'Brian, John and Peter White, eds. Beyond Wilderness: The Group of Seven, Canadian Identity, and Contemporary Art." Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2007. "Original Press Coverage of the Opening of the Beaverbrook Art Gallery, September 16, 1959." Parliamentary Recording Unit, House of Lords: BBK/K/2/187, Formal 227 Opening of the Gallery. Palmer, Alison. "The Arts Council and the Festival of Britain." Canadian Art. IX: 2 (1951-52): pp. 81-82. Pantazzi, Sybille. "Foreign Art at the Canadian National Exhibition 1905-1938." The National Gallery of Canada Bulletin. 22 (1973): pp. 21-41. Penman, Margaret. A Century of Service: Toronto Public Library, 1883-1983. Toronto: Toronto Public Library Board, 1983. Peters Corbett, David. The Modernity of English Art, 1914-30. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1997. Pfaff, L.R. "Lawren Harris and the International Exhibition of Modern Art: Rectifications to the Toronto Catalogue (1927), and Some Critical Concerns." RACAR. 11:1-2 (1984): Appendix A, Letter from Lawren Harris to the Exhibition Committee, Art Gallery of Toronto, December 1926. "Phil vs Bill in the great sculpture affair." The Globe and Mail. Toronto. 22 October 1966. Pickersgill, J.W. and D.F. Forster, eds. The Mackenzie King Record. Vol. 3. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970. "President's Report." President's Annual Report. Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 1952. "Pride." [Subtitle, full title unknown] Daily Express (15 September 1959). Reid, Dennis. A Concise History of Canadian Painting. 2nd ed., Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1988. Report of the Royal Commission On National Development in the Arts, Letters, and Sciences, 1949-1951. Ottawa: Edmund Cloutier / King's Printer, 1951. Reynolds, Mac. "Gets Big Displays at Low Cost: City Art Gallery Curator Most Expert 'Scrounger'." Vancouver Sun (16 March 1955). Robertson, Gordon. Memoirs of a Very Civil Servant: Mackenzie King to Pierre Trudeau. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000. Rose, W.K., ed., The Letters ofWyndham Lewis. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1963. Ross, Valerie. "The Wooing of Henry Moore: How Toronto money and Toronto taste 228 helped transform the city. A portrait of the Art Establishment in action." Toronto Life. July 1975. P. 8 Rothenstein, John. "The Reopening of the Tate Gallery." The Listener. XXXV: 900 (11 April 1946): pp. 455-56. Royal Commission Studies: A Selection of Studies Prepared for the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters, and Sciences. Ottawa: Edmond Cloutier, 1951. Starling, Simon, et al., Simon Starling: Cuttings (Supplement). Ed. Gregory Burke. Toronto: The Power Plant Contemporary Art Gallery, 2008. Stone, Henry A. "Notes On the Founding of the Vancouver Art Gallery." The Art Gallery Bulletin [Vancouver Art Gallery]. 9: 2 (October 1941). Sutherland Boggs, Jean. The National Gallery of Canada. Toronto: Oxford University Press. "The knuckleheads said no to modern art." Star Weekly. Toronto. 2 July 1966. P. 9 Thomson, Hugh. "'Gruesome' War Horror 700-lb. Bronze Statue Furor at Art Gallery." Toronto Daily Star. 11 May 1955. "Toronto hope of getting Moore collection dims." Toronto Daily Star. 16 March 1967. Trueman, Stuart. "An enduring gift to New Brunswick: The Lord Beaverbrook Art Gallery." Canadian Art. 15: 4 (1958): p. 280. Tunnell, A.L. and Sir Chalres G.D. Roberts, eds. Canadian Who's Who. Vol. 3. Toronto: Trans-Canada Press, 1938-39. Vancouver: Art and Artists, 1931-1983, Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 1983. Wardell, Michael. "The Beaverbrook Art Gallery." The Atlantic Advocate (September 1959). Wilkin, Karen, ed. Jack Bush. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart in association with Merritt Editions Limited, 1984. Wilkinson, Alan. Henry Moore Remembered. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario / Key Porter Books, 1987. Wolff, Janet. AngloModern: painting and modernity in Britain and the United States, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2003. Woodcock, George, ed. Wyndham Lewis in Canada, Vancouver: University of British Columbia Publications Centre, 1971. "£200,000 Treasury grant for Moore collection." The Financial Times. London. 27 April 1967. "$500,000 start for gallery says Givens." The Globe and Mail. 16 March 1967. Archives and special collections Alfred H. Barr, Jr. Papers. The Museum of Modern Art Archives, New York. Beaverbrook Art Gallery Archives. The Didrichsen Art Museum Archives, Helsinki. Dr. Allan Walters fond. E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. Jack Bush fond. E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. Various files. E.P. Taylor Research Library & Archives, Art Gallery of Ontario. The Errol Jackson Archive, Henry Moore Foundation, Perry Green. Henry Moore Foundation Archives, Perry Green. National Gallery of Canada Archives. Roger E. Fry Papers. King's College Archives (Modern Archive), Cambridge, UK. Vancouver Art Gallery Archives. Vincent Massey Papers. University of Toronto Archives. Wyndham Lewis Collection (4612). Ithaca: Carl A. Kroch Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, Cornell University. 230 Electronic sources "Change is about experimentation." Art Matters. 28 March 2007, "Charles Hepburn Scott; Artist's Biography." 75 Years of Collecting: Vancouver Art Gallery [electronic resource]. Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 2006, < http://projects.vanartgallery.bc.ca/publications/75years/>. Accessed 1 April 2009. Gallery History, Interactive Timeline. National Gallery of Canada, < http://www.gallery.ca/english/2143.htm>. Accessed 25 March 2009. Mackenzie King, W.M. The Diaries of William Lyon Mackenzie King. 2 December 1935 (page 3), Library and Archives Canada, < http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/databases/king/001059-119.02- e.php?&page_id_nbr=16678&interval=20&&&PHPSESSID=sl3k9rg2gv2dlbek mel2q477h0>. accessed 23 March 2009. "The Power Plant launches major commissioning program with Turner Prize winner Simon Starling," Harbourfront Centre. Spoliation Research. Art Gallery of Ontario website, < http://www.ago.net/nicolas- poussin>. Accessed 7 April 2009. "System." Oxford English Dictionary, second edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989. Theses Finlay, Karen. The Force of Culture: Vincent Massey & Canadian Sovereignty. PhD dissertation. University of Victoria, 1999. Fischer, Barbara. "Toronto File: Alfred Barr, November 1961." MA thesis. Toronto: York University, 1999. Logan, Catherine. "Acquiring Authority at the Art Gallery of Ontario and the Agnes Etherington Art Centre: Canadian Women and the Cultural Volunteer 231 Experience." MA thesis, Carleton University, 1997. Exhibition catalogues Beaverbrook Art Gallery, Paintings, Fredericton: Beaverbrook Art Gallery, 1959. Boyanoski, Christine. Jack Bush: Early Work. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1985. Boyanoski, Christine. The 1940s: A Decade of Painting in the 1940s. Exh. cat. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1984. Catalogue of the Exhibition of the International Exhibition of Modern Art Assembled by the Societe Anonyme. Toronto: The Canadian Society of Graphic Art, and Historical Paintings and Drawings by C.W. Jefferys, April 1927. Contemporary Paintings from Great Britain, the United States and France with Sculpture from the United States, ex. cat., Toronto: Art Gallery of Toronto, 1949. Fenton, Terry. Jack Bush: A Retrospective. Toronto: Art Gallery of Toronto, 1976. Finlay, Karen. 20 Century British Art from the Collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario, Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1987. Jack Bush, Paintings and Drawings, 1955-1976, London: Arts Council of Great Britain, 1980 The Massey Collection of English Painting, Ottawa: National Gallery of Canada, 1946. Morris, Jerrold, ed. Twenty-One Modern British Painters. Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery with the British Council, 1951. Souvenir Catalogue. Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 1931. Two Hundred Years of American Painting. Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery, 1955. Wilkinson, Alan. The Henry Moore Sculpture Centre. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1974. Appendix A Sarah Stanners interviews David Silcox, President of Sotheby's Canada Date: 3 February 2009 Location: Sotheby's Canada, Toronto Digital recording transcribed and excerpted. Sarah Stanners: I'll just remind you about what I'm doing here. My dissertation is titled, "Going British and Being Modern in the Visual Arts Systems of Canada," and I consider the period from 1906 to 1976, underlining the Britishness, if you will, of many of Canada's art institutions, as well as the advisors and directors behind them. I'm also attempting to address the shift in influence from a British to an American sensibility and approach to the visual arts in Canada, beginning in the early 1960s. I hope you'll keep these topics in mind when you're answering my following questions and perhaps speak to your personal experience of the circumstances I've described, please. First of all, because I have a special spot in my heart for this place, could you please recall how and when you became involved in Hart House and its Art Committee? David Silcox: Yes, after I graduated in 1959,1 met the Warden of Hart House in the summer of 1959, who said, would you like a job at Hart house, and I said sure, and so, I 232 233 moved in there in September. SS: In the upstairs apartments? DS: Upstairs apartments, yes. SS: Great. DS: And for the first year I did odd jobs in exchange for room and board. I can't remember much what they were. I was involved with a lot of different things. Part of the usual activities of the house, and then the next two years I was the Undergraduate Secretary. I left in the early summer of 1962. DS: There was a Graduate Secretary and an Undergraduate Secretary. There was a Warden and an Assistant Warden and they're others in charge of other kinds of activities. But basically I acted as the recording secretary for a number of committees - the Revolver Club, the Ham Radio Club, the Music Committee, the Art Committee and some others. And I was the administrative person for a lot of events. SS: You were busy. DS: Yes, it was a lot of fun. SS: That's great. I had the chance of sitting on the Board of Stewards for a year. DS: But what really interested me, because we had to organize them with the undergraduates, were the art exhibitions. Some of the shows were already set and some were in preparation when I got there. I got quite excited about them because they varied a good deal, from historical works to very contemporary. I think one of the first ones I was involved with was a one-man show of Tony Urquhart's work. I think it was the first time he showed in Toronto. A big exhibition. I know we borrowed works from around the community. There was a retrospective of David Milne, which I loved. 234 SS: Was that one of your early exposures to Milne? DS: Actually, I'd found out about him at Victoria College through Helen Frye and Jessie McPherson, and then through Alan Jarvis and Douglas Duncan. Duncan and Jarvis both said he's the best artist in Canada, so that's why I got involved with him. Hart House was a very good jumping-off place for a lot of other things too. I know that the Warden sort of lent me out to work on the Canadian Conference of the Arts at the O'Keefe Centre in 1961. So in 1960-61 I did a fair amount of work for that big event. I looked after all the physical arrangements for the conference, the panel settings, the sound systems, the seating, etc. I also did a large exhibition of paintings by previous Canada Council award winners - work came in from all over. I set all sorts of people, from Rene Leveque to Sir Julian Huxley. You get to meet everybody. It's fantastic actually. SS: That's great. Did you at one point organize a sculpture exhibition in the quadrangle at Hart House? DS: Two summers actually, 1961 and 1962. SS: What was the nature of the works? Do you remember the artists at all? DS: Henry Moore, Barbara Hepworth, Paolozzi, Fazzini, Greco, Marini. Lynn Chadwick, Alberto Giacometti, and others. Quite an amazing group but mostly English, interestingly enough. SS: Where were you borrowing from? DS: Collectors in Toronto. And big works too, like the huge festival figure by Henry Moore. A six-foot bronze. SS: You had the Festival Reclining Figure? DS: Yes, it belonged to the Raxlen brothers, at Doctors Hospital. So that was quite good. 235 I took Prince Phillip around the sculpture show when he was here. That must have been early in 1962 because he was there to lay the cornerstone at Massey College that May. SS: Great, so you're really part of Massey in that way, laying the cornerstone. DS: I was there at the beginning! SS: I was a non-resident junior fellow for a year. DS: Ah. A great place. I'm going there for lunch today. SS: It is a great place for lunch. Can you speak to the sort of Enghshness of Hart House, the sort of carryovers, or did you feel that it was ... I know that many people that come to Hart House feel like it's full of tradition and sometimes people will say, it's immovable or not wanting to head toward advancement. How did you see it? DS: Actually, it was quite strong - the Enghshness. The ghost of- well he wasn't a ghost, he was still very much alive - of Burgon Bickersteth, still hovered over the place. He had been the Warden for something like twenty-six years. He was English and when he finished his term, he went home. 'Home' for him was England. I think that's essentially the difference for a lot of people who are caught in the shift. Home for them, for those who were born here, it was here. For those who weren't, it was there. And the split was pretty obvious. There was a generation that was caught in between - Alan Jarvis is one, but there were also strong influences because of Vincent Massey. He was very much an Anglophile and Hart House was based to a significant degree on the Oxford college model. The Great Hall is actually modeled on the Great Hall at Christ Church in Oxford. SS: It's based on one of them. I can't remember specifically. DS: Either Christ Church or Balliol College. I forget which. 236 SS: I've spoken to John Massey and he said his family were such Anglophiles that he's an Anglophobe. DS: My Father just loved things English, largely because of the war. The sense of patriotism that was engendered by the war was something that everybody shared to a greater or lesser degree. Canada was fighting for the Mother Country. You could still say it was the Mother Country then. SS: Was your father born in Canada? DS: Yes he was. SS: And you were born in Canada? DS: Yes. SS: Whereabouts were you born? DS: I was born in Moose Jaw, of all places. But the interesting thing was, my Father was such an Anglophile that when he came back from the war, and finally bought a car, it was an Austin A-7, which the family could hardly fit into and it certainly wasn't made for Canadian winters, I have to tell you. So I was steeped in Anglophilia through language, literature, cars, and art. At one point, which I was at Hart House, I carried an umbrella. SS: I have an idea - well, it's not really an idea but an observation - that many people, including, I would say, certainly Jerrold Morris, were hired, because of their status as war heroes, into the arts. Sometimes they may have had no formal art background but because they were.... DS: Well they fit it in wherever they wanted to fit in. That was true of quite a number of them. I think that sense of allegiance to Britain was very strong, and at Hart House it was accentuated by the Massey influence, by Bickersteth's influence, by the way it was set 237 up originally. There were also people like .... I was going to say Robertson Davies in the theatre, but he actually didn't have anything to do with U of T that I was aware of, until he was appointed as the Master of Massey College. But he was in the Ontario community. He was certainly a part of it and he'd been very close to the English theatre. But the Hart House Theatre, strangely enough, was more tied to American influences, because I remember I used to go down to the theatre for tea practically every day. Bob Gill, the residing director was American. He brought along all sorts of people like Kate Reid and Bill Hutt and numerous other wonderful actors, including Donald Sutherland (we called him Fish because he came from New Brunswick). So he brought up important people from the United States as guest lecturers and directors. I remember them coming in and meeting them for tea. Harold Klurman was one, I think Robert Brustein, who became the head of the Yale Drama School. Some very interesting people. SS: There's certainly a thesis in the Hart House Theatre. I'm sure somebody has been studying it. It's an amazing place. DS: When I finally got to York University in 1970, the theatre department was, to a very large extent, ex pat Americans. You know, Joe Green, Don Rubin, Robert Benedetti, and a few others. Stratford, of course, was decidedly British in its origins, with Tyrone Guthrie, Tanya Moseivich, Michael Langham, Alex Guiness, and dozens more. So some theatre tilted toward the America and some tilted toward the England. SS: Back to the art related activities at Hart House. Could you speak about the controversial acquisition of Harold Town's Homage to Turner for Hart House'? And who recommended Town's work to the art committee in the first place? Do you recall? Was it yourself? 238 DS: Well, you could talk to John Burbage about that, if you can find him. He was the chairman of the Art Committee, and had recently graduated. I knew him as a senior at Middle House, at Victoria College, when I was there. But what happened basically was, the Advisory Committee, Barker Fairley, and artists Aba Bayefsky and Gus Weissman, brought forward four drawings by Thoreau MacDonald, which were not very big, four by six inches at best -a moose, a beaver, a fox, an owl, or something like that. They were nice little drawings, but they were four hundred dollars each and our budget was two thousand dollars, and so there was the budget basically gone. None of us actually liked them. So the undergraduates, led by Barry Zaid, and aided and abetted by myself, decided we didn't want the drawings, or the Advisory Committee, or their advice, any more. SS: That's an important transition. DS: It was, and actually it was quite difficult. The Warden, Joe McCully, was a little distressed by it all because we put him in a tough spot. We voted against the Advisors' selection and decided to go out on our own, so we did. I'm sure we had some support. SS: I have the minutes. I'm sorry, I didn't want to bore you by running down the minutes. DS: Oh good. I'm sure my mythical memory of it all is much more interesting. SS: But the minutes are great, actually. It's really revealing. Douglas Richardson was on the committee. DS: Oh yes, he was, you're right. SS: And part of the minutes from the 9th of February, 1959, says "Mr. Richardson asked specifically about the works of Harold Town, whose prices had doubled in the last twelve months and were increasing rapidly. Should we not buy a Town, rather than a Fitzgerald, 239 all things being equal? Mr. Bayefsky said that 'all things are not equal.'" DS: Mr. Bayefsky, talk about reactionary. SS: Yes, and essentially the minutes say that yourself, Mr. Silcox was -1 have to find it here - anyway, suggesting that it makes sense to buy contemporary when the prices are lower instead of filling the gaps of already existing works in the collection. It says that William Withrow was helping to advise? DS: Yes. SS: That Homage to Turner would be a good purchase. That must have been really in the early days of his directorship at the AGO. DS: Or maybe he was still just a curator there. SS: That's true. Oh wait, it says "Mr. William Withrow, director of the Art Gallery of Toronto, felt that Homage to Turner was a major work and its purchase could never be considered a mistake." DS: We dragged out a number of things from Harold. There were at least two or three big paintings. SS: There was another work that ... DS: We also looked at other works, perhaps one of the Tyranny of the Corner series. SS: Apparently, Alan Jarvis was also helping to advise on this purchase too. DS: Yes. So we basically cornered the Warden, fired the Advisory Committee and went off on our own. We did buy the Homage to Turner. It caused quite a scufuffle. There was a nice little write up about things. The interesting thing for me was that Bickersteth, when he started the collecting process back in 1922 (I asked him about it later on one of his visits) said the whole idea was that Hart House would have contemporary art on the 240 walls so that the faculty and students and staff could see what was happening in the art world today. So that's why they bought A.Y. Jackson in 1922 when they purchased the first painting. But Lawren Harris, J.E.H. MacDonald, and perhaps Arthur Lismer were the advisors then, and they would choose twelve or fifteen works, according to Bickersteth, - major canvases. Then the undergraduates would discuss the merits of each of them and decide on one but it actually didn't matter which one they bought. The Advisory Committee, then under Harris, primarily, controlled the range. What had happened was, we'd lost track of the contemporary, we'd lost the idea of a range of choices, and instead were being pushed into buying very reactionary stuff, not at all up to date. And so we were right to adopt a fresh course. SS: So, time moved on but the subjects and the collections weren't. DS: The Advisors weren't looking at the Harold Towns or the Michael Snows, or any of the artists making a name for themselves then at all. So we bought a big Harold Town and a big Jock Macdonald. SS: Airy Journey. DS: Yes, a wonderful painting. SS: Yes, it's beautiful. DS: It was all quite exciting. It helped, of course, that we had a really good string of exhibitions in the gallery, both historical and contemporary, that we were getting a lot of attention. I started writing for the Varsity so we'd get some publicity for the exhibitions. And there were some exhibitions where we actually got very big crowds, - five Japanese Canadians, the Milne retrospective, the Zacks collection, five Canadian printmakers, and many others. They were wonderful. 241 SS: And that early on, I'm assuming, it's one of the rare spots to catch a glimpse of contemporary art in a sort of non-commercial setting in Toronto. It was pretty much the place. DS: Yes. It was either the Art Gallery of Toronto (now Ontario), or Hart House. There were a few little exhibition places that were non-commercial. For example, there was a little group of ladies that used to hang good things in the lobby of the International Cinema, up on Yonge Street. And, after it opened, in 1961, in the lower foyer of the O'Keefe Centre. There were some interesting exhibitions there. They soon became very commercial but early on they were quite exciting. SS: Just turning your attention back to Town's Homage to Turner. Can you tell me exactly how it's an homage to Turner? Do you remember talking to Town about it? DS: He did a whole series of 'Homage' paintings. He was just taken with Turner's work and he loved the Turner's scumbled surfaces. I don't remember talking to him about it, except for one very funny thing. There was a huge piece of impasto on the canvas and I always remember Harold saying, this will really keep the restorers busy in the future, because they'll never figure out how I put it on there. It looks as if it's smeared on, but upside down. He got a kick out of it. But Harold was sort of in his heyday then. In 1962 he had a huge exhibition in the spring at the Laing Galleries, the biggest commercial gallery and there was a stampede - people were fighting over the paintings. The show sold out in fifteen minutes, or something like that. It was all quite unbelievable. SS: This is a good segue to my next question actually. Was Town also represented by Jerrold Morris, at one point? DS: Jerrold worked there then, at Laing Galleries. He set up the Jerrold Morris Gallery later. SS: The International Gallery. DS: When Emilio del Junco came up from Cuba. SS: In 1963 or so. DS: I think so. SS: Can you recall your impression of the Morris International Art Gallery on Bloor Street? DS: Yes indeed. It was the first one that was up in the clouds, not on the street. It was on the sixth floor at 110 Bloor Street West. SS: Kind of a New York approach. DS: Yes, and we all thought it was very exciting. Morris had some absolutely great shows. He had a Warhol show, Charles Gagnon, John Morris would have the list of exhibitions. SS: John's got some great photographs of Warhol's exhibition. I think we found Jeanne Parkin, which is great. I'd like to speak with her to see if it's actually her. DS: Well, you've got to talk to her, she's great. SS: I have. I met her in person, briefly, she's wonderful. And of course, the work of the Women's Committee is extraordinary. DS: Yes, you've got to get to her. She was part of that. There was Liz Gordon, Walter Gordon's wife. She was a no nonsense person. Elise Meltzer, Marnie Laidlaw, Sheila Mckenzie, Ayala Zacks, Bea Davidson. These were all amazing people, knowledgeable and very strong. SS: Some of the best works, I believe, at the Art Gallery of Ontario are because of the 243 Women's Committee, the Junior Women's Committee. DS: Indeed, they were fantastic. Of course, the one great one that they really wanted, the Barnett Newman, Spring Day, was discarded by the board. That was really kind of strange and unfortunate. Newman never allowed his work to be shown in Toronto again, if he could stop it. SS: I don't want to get off track too much because I have a few questions for you and I know your time is short. So you do remember there being a buzz about the Morris International Art Gallery and it being a great place for contemporary. Do you think it was an important factor in exposing Canadians to international art? DS: I think it was certainly a factor. I mean, he did a fair amount of Canadian stuff as well and later, when he moved from Bloor Street, to Prince Arthur, he had people like Ronald Bloore and other artists like Louis de Niverville and folks like that. There were also other kinds of excitement. In the later 1960s, when I was at the Canada Council, the Isaacs Gallery had moved from being down in what we then called the Village, at Gerrard and Bay streets, up to Yonge Street just above Bloor. He also showed international things. He had Warhol, and Oldenburg, and others, and he had Folk Art and then he opened an Eskimo art gallery, as we then called it. It's changed to Inuit now I guess. SS: And the David Mirvish Gallery opened in 1963 too. It's interesting because the first opening show that he had was a Pop Art show. DS: Oh, and Canadian artists too. Very interesting people like Ken Lochhead, Greg Curnoe, Art McKay, and a number of others for the first year and then he changed. I was actually the art critic for The Globe and Mail during that early period, 1964-65. SS: And how did you find? DS: Mirvish was certainly part of a big shift in interest. SS: What's interesting is he was bringing in American art but not a lot of people were purchasing it. Do you remember there being a buzz and excitement about it but there not being a lot of sales? DS: Initially it was tough because it was the colour field team - all Clement Greenberg. So what we all said about David Mirvish was that he'd have an exhibition (this was in the house before the gallery was built - very tight and difficult for those large paintings) - an exhibition of Ken Noland, say, and nobody would buy anything and he would buy it all and put it in the basement. And then he had an Olitski show and nobody would buy anything and he'd buy it all and put it in the basement. So he was buying at dealer prices. Of course that's what he's done all his life so far. He keeps his status as a dealer, for various tax purposes, but also because he gets special rates. You know, he'd get fifty, sixty percent off, it makes a difference. You can buy two for the price of one. SS: He's told me he has a great collection because he was a horrible art dealer because he couldn't sell the works. DS: Not exactly true. He's got a big collection because he actually has a compulsive desire to buy and in fact it may do him in one of these days because you need the doh re me, as they say. SS: Were you purchasing art in the 1960s? DS: Yes, I started when I was at Hart House. I think the first thing I bought was actually a watercolour of Hart House ($10) by Sepp, a student, but then when I started to buy things, I never paid any more than a hundred dollars because I just couldn't afford it. I think my salary at Hart House was forty-five hundred bucks, or five thousand dollars, 245 plus room and board, which was nice. I bought drawings and prints, you know, things in black and white. The first couple of prints I bought out of an exhibition I did of five Canadian printmakers: Yves Gaucher, Harold Town, Shirley Wales. Gaucher. I liked Yves' work and I bought two for something like forty-nine dollars each, framed. Before I left for Europe, I had purchased a Harold Town single autographic print for a hundred and seventy-five dollars, which was more than I usually paid. SS: Nice choice. The autographic prints are great. DS: I did buy later Gaucher prints, the Homage to Webern series, which were one hundred and twenty-five dollars each and I had to go to the bank and borrow some money to pay for that. SS: Great, good choices. What was your experience like at the Courtauld Institute in London? And did you then, or now, have a sense of a tradition of Canadians being exported for an arts education before they returned home to work in the arts? DS: Well, getting to the Courtauld was interesting. SS: What year was that? DS: I went there in 1962, and what happened was this: I wanted to study art because my degree was in English. I thought it would be good to have some actual, formal training if I wanted to continue in the art world. I'd never taken an art course or a course in art history at all, so I thought it would be a good thing to do. For three years at Hart House I was doing exhibitions and writing art criticism and having a great time without really having any kind of knowledge of the tradition of Canadian art or art in the Western world. I'd read a lot, out of interest, but it was all self-taught so I thought I'd go there. I applied to the Courtauld Institute and I applied for a Canada Council grant. I won the Canada 246 Council grant and I was turned down by the Courtauld. SS: Oh no, that's a painful moment. DS: Well, I went to England anyway, in early June. The first place I went was the Courtauld Institute and I went to see Anthony Blunt, no appointment, I just showed up. I asked him why I'd gotten turned down. He said, well we wrote to Peter Brieger the head of the fine art department at U of T and he said that he'd never heard of me. So I said, well, that may say more about Mr. Brieger than it does about me because here's what I've done. I gave him a little run down, about doing exhibitions, writing articles, reviewing books, and so on, and added that The Globe and Mail had named me Man of the Year in Art, which was kind of nice. SS: Yes, this was in 1965 or so? DS: It was in 1962 before I left Hart House and it was the Globe critic Pearl McCarthy, bless her soul. A wonderful lady. SS: She wrote great articles. I like reading her articles. DS: Anyway, I got taken on of course. I was enrolled in a graduate program for a year, at the end of which we'd decide if I was going to do a doctorate. SS: So he did enroll you, Anthony Blunt? DS: Yes, and I did a year at the Courtauld Institute and actually I discovered the Courtauld did not have what I wanted, which was to study ideas and the relationship between philosophy and art. I wasn't crazy about what the Courtauld seemed to do (at least this is my retrospective view of it) which was to train you as a connoisseur so you'd be able to tell whether this Joshua Reynolds was painted in 1749 or 1758.1 got pretty good at that. I studied 18th century English, Italian, and French painting. I enjoyed 247 some of my tutors there, particularly Francis Watson at the Wallace Collection, an absolutely fabulous place. We did some great stuff there and I found it thrilling. I did not like Michael Levy, who later became director of the National Gallery, but he and I came apart on a couple of things because I was also getting quite excited about Marshall McLuhan's ideas at the time and the Englishmen that I ran into weren't very interested. SS: What year is this around? DS: 1962-63. SS: So you were proposing McLuhan ideas to them and they were scoffing? DS: Yes, they didn't like his ideas, I think because he was not dealing with art history in the usual way. SS: They weren't used to the inter-disciplinary approach? DS: No, not at all. And I'm not sure I was brilliant about it either, which was perhaps also part of the problem. So after a year, I had a meeting with Anthony Blunt and he suggested that maybe I should go into arts administration. I actually wanted to leave. I didn't want to pursue a higher degree so we sort of agreed to part company. SS: Was this your Masters you were in? DS: Yes. So I attended the Courtauld for a year and that's all I can say. One final moment there was quite nice. I wrote a series of exams and one is a photo exam. They give you a stack of fifteen or twenty black and white photographs, eight by ten, of paintings and you are asked to identify, date, and comment on them, and give your reasons. I was good at that. My visual memory was very acute in those days. I thought that if I saw a painting I'd never forget it. It turns out I'm now forgetting at a great rate. But in fact, Blunt's parting comment was, "You did exceptionally well on the photographic exam - in 248 fact the best I've seen in many, many years. You've got a very good eye." SS: So this is like they were training for connoisseurship in a sense. DS: Yes, but that was simply a matter of knowing an artist's style or handwriting or something like that. I nailed all the little minor painters that I had gotten to know Nattier, the Van Loo brothers, artists like that in France or Italy or England. Easy to do. Then I spent the next year actually working at various and sundry freelance things. I worked freelance for the CBC. I did interviews for people with my little tape recorder, for radio. And I also got a job as a checker. SS: As a fact checker? DS: Well it was a little bit like that. It was an encyclopedia of art covering the whole world for all time. SS: That sounds fun. DS: It was being put together by a company that was part of the Beaverbrook empire. So every Monday they would hand me a raft of ten or fifteen articles that had been written by scholars, including a couple of those I knew of at the Courtauld. The job was to check the accuracy of the article and then write a little critique of it, whether it was too big or too long, too this, too that. I actually ended up rewriting a lot of them, which was good practice for later. I'd get the most eclectic assortment - everything from 18th century Russian gardens to Paul Cezanne to Duccio, Winslow Homer, or Oceanic or Benin sculpture. SS: It's an interesting way to learn it. DS: It was all over the place and it was very eclectic but it was also very exciting because I spent all my time in libraries, burrowing through all the documentary information that 249 you could find. I think it would be much more interesting today than it was then perhaps. Well, I enjoyed it as long as it lasted, a few months, and then I got a desk in the north library of the British Museum and I started serious work on my MA thesis in English, which I finally finished. SS: What was your MA thesis on? DS: It was on Samuel Johnson's concept of the poet. It had to do, basically, with the transition, or the beginning of the transition, from the artist as the servant of the aristocracy to the artist working in the marketplace. Johnson's Lives of the Poets described the beginning of that transition. SS: It's always interesting finding out what people's theses were. DS: So who or what does the artist depend upon? Through the nineteenth century the artist got pushed off to the margins in some respects and then the salons took over in Europe and so on and now it's a little bit different again. SS: It's great to know you're exposed to so many different realms of art, but that you came back to Canada. DS: I never thought that I wouldn't. But to come back to the other part of your question, there were only one or two people from Canada at the Courtauld and I can't remember who they were actually. One was Peter Mellen. I wasn't aware that people were being sent there to prepare themselves to come back. SS: There weren't many options. DS: Certainly there were people here in Canada who were saying you should go because you needed to. But I'm also not aware of those who maybe did their graduate work in the United States. I wasn't really in the graduate stream you know. I wasn't heading for a life 250 in academia. I never thought about that actually. SS: Part of the arrangement that Anthony Blunt had with the National Gallery of Canada and the Art Gallery of Ontario (I can't remember which institution he had the arrangement with), but in the early days, when he started advising around 1947-48, they wanted to offer him payment for his services. And he didn't really want to be paid directly in a kind of interested manner. And one of the things that came up in the arrangement was that monies that they would have paid him would actually be put into a fund at the Courtauld Institute to help give scholarships to Canadians who would study there. But apparently that fund wasn't tapped into very much. DS: I never heard about it. Well I liked the other students. I had a good time there. SS: Are any of them now in the arts in Canada? DS: No, not that I know of. SS: Could you talk about your experience as the first Arts Officer for the Canada Council for the Arts and did you sense at all that its British model was or was not working for the purposes of Canada? And please also relate how you initiated changes in the way that the council operated. DS: The Canada Council was set up on the model of the Arts Council of Great Britain, as opposed to the British Council, which was for foreign representation, and it was already set up and running when I joined it. SS: It started in 1957 and you joined in 1965? DS: Yes, that's right. The most interesting thing about it for me was that as far as visual artists were concerned, and artists in other disciplines too, who applied for a Canada Council bursary or award, junior and senior grants, had to leave the country. The 251 application itself was four or five pages long and had to have three reputable supporters. All these applications were then handed over to Walter Herbert, who ran the Canada Foundation. He reviewed them and then sent them to advisors in different disciplines all across the country - people he knew. They would mark these out of ten. If you got a nine you had a good chance of getting a grant. If three different advisors said nine, you'd probably get a grant. So, I thought, this isn't very good because you're not actually looking at the work, you're just looking at the application form and taking the word of those anonymous advisors who might know only the supporters, but might not know the work at all. SS: Do you know if the people who were sent to sort of approve and give a rating, do you know if these were mostly Canadian intellectuals or do you think? DS: They were. They were Canadian artists and intellectuals you know, people who were involved in the arts. SS: At a senior level? DS: They might be artists themselves or they might be people who are just involved with artistic things. SS: Basically a peer review type of board? DS: Well, I would say betters in most cases. There was no way of knowing where their biases came in or what criteria or standards they were using or applying. SS: The application they would receive to review would have no images included in the application? DS: Possibly but not necessarily. SS: Okay, interesting. 252 DS: And they might be bad photographs. They certainly limited the amount. Six photographs or six slides, or whatever it was. And the same was true with literature. In the case of music it was just written and in the case of dance it was the same thing as theatre. It was just a written application, so it would be based on what people actually thought about the application form and what was said in it and what the advisor said. The most glaring assumption about all this was, that all these grants were predicated on the assumption that if you got a Canada Council grant, you had to leave the country to take it up, because they wanted you to get some exposure to culture and the assumption was, you wouldn't get any here. So anybody who wanted to stay in Canada and simply work, wouldn't get a grant. That wasn't part of the eligibility criteria. So I thought that was sort of crazy. What I actually did was say we actually have to see what people are doing. So I formed a three-person jury to go across the country and look at all these applications. There was about, I would say, in the case of the bursaries, there was probably about four hundred applications. So we set up regional centers where artists sent work in or we made studio visits for sculptors. SS: All applicants or a short listed group? DS: Oh no, we did them all. We looked at everything because you don't know in advance what you're going to see. So we did that and the first jury was Elizabeth Kilbourn, Albert Dumouchel, and Ronald Bloore. This set a pattern for me for all subsequent juries. Two artists, someone from Quebec, and at least one woman. SS: [Laughing] Two artists, a Quebecois and a woman. That's a good mixed bag. DS: Well I think it was good because, first of all, there is a different sensibility in Quebec, and a knowledge of the metier there is important to have. Second, the sensibility of 253 women is different from that of men and also a very important. The women we did have, Elizabeth Kilbourn, Dorothy Cameron, Charlotte Lindgren, Doris Shadbolt, they all made great contributions. It's essential and it is different from the kind of sensibility of the men. And it also brings sociability into things, which is important. And we actually looked at the work. I found on the first go-around, that the application itself was much too long, like four or five pages and I couldn't believe it. People were making stuff up just to fill up the forms. SS: Especially when you have artists writing, right? [laughter] DS: Yes, and you wonder what they really mean. And then I also found that the jurors were looking at the application forms, where they couldn't decide. They're looking at the application form and saying, this person can't type, he can't spell, it's written outside the margins. You know this is irrelevant, but it's like a crutch or a reason to help make a decision. So from then on, after the first year, I wouldn't give the jurors a copy of the application form. I'd just tell them what was in it and say you have to look at the work and decide based on the work. So that worked out pretty well I think, and after the success of the first one in the visual arts, we moved along to do it in music. We made an arrangement with the CBC, so applicants could come record themselves in regional studios and we'd get the tapes. That really helped. In the case of literature, we allowed writers to send in manuscripts, up to a certain but generous number of pages. In the case of dance I think we had video as well. So that was the big change, and I also got the application form down to one page, which I count as a major contribution. There was a lot of controversy about that. My view was that the only thing that mattered was the work and the rest was only bureaucratic - basically covering your derriere in case the auditor came along. And the auditor did come along. He'd say, how do you know these people did that? Well you don't actually. You don't know if they achieved what they set out to achieve. I filled out applications for some artists, just saying "I just want to keep on working full time at my art," period. I actually filled out application forms for people like John Newlove and Bill Bissett, poets who needed the dough but couldn't get themselves sufficiently organized to make an application, or didn't know how to do it, or perhaps were afraid they would be rejected. SS: It should be a part of the art school curriculum actually. DS: Probably, because you do work in a bureaucratic world, but I thought we shouldn't penalize people for not being able to. SS: And did you help to convince them that grants could be kept in Canada? For working in Canada? DS: Oh yes indeed - whatever the artist wanted. If an artist wants to sit on the Riviera and think about things, that's the artist's choice, it's not our choice. And who's to say it wouldn't be more important? This was a big debate at the Council. Mordecai Richler applied for a grant of $15,000 or more, and we knew he'd just gotten a big advance for a film script. Some people on the Council said he doesn't need the money. We'd say that 'need' is not a criterion, that talent is the criterion. And if he was proposing to go to France, live there, and sip wine, that was his prerogative. He could do what he needed to do. But there were also artists who also just wanted to work where they were. I also organized meetings with artists in Montreal, Vancouver, and Toronto and so on, and said, it's basically your money, how do you want it? And what came out of that was a much more flexible system where there would be small grants for materials, for 255 travel, for shipping to an exhibition, for sculpture casting costs, and so on. We also provided short-term grants - something for just three months to keep artists busy between other activities they were doing. So this all became very responsive I think, to what the artists themselves really needed. SS: Do you think that the Canada Council for the Arts has, or still does, make the arts in Canada different from the art systems in the US? Because they don't have, as far as I know, a comparable American system. DS: No, there isn't. There are a number of private foundations in the States, but neither the UK nor the US has the same emphasis on the individual artist. SS: So that's how it changed. I know, as you started out saying, it was modeled on the British system but then this sort of attention to the individual artist and their individual needs, was more a Canadian emphasis. DS: It started that way and I guess got a little more emphasis during the years that I was there. We were allocating about twenty percent of the total budget to individual artists. Which was pretty big, considering all the symphony orchestras and theatres and dance companies and all the other group artistic activities we're also trying to support. And in some cases it was possible, through grants to individuals, to support other things. Not very often, but occasionally. Coach House Press applied for a grant very early on, in 1965 I think it was. They said they were going to publish four books and Council said, what four books? Well, they didn't know yet, so Council didn't approve a grant. I thought that this was being too strict, because Coach House was a veritable hotbed of literary... So I put Stan Bevington's name on the list to get an individual grant, which he did. I just put him on the list and that's largely how Coach House got started and it's still 256 going strong -just had a nomination for a Griffin Poetry Prize, in fact. It's been a great place ever since, amazingly. But there are other places like that. A Space in Toronto, Intermedia in Vancouver, even setting up CARFAC. I remember allocating travel money to Jack Chambers so they could have their crucial first meeting. SS: If you don't mind my changing to a different subject, how did you meet Alan Jarvis and what do you think he meant to the visual arts in Canada? DS: Alan Jarvis I guess had just left as Director of the National Gallery of Canada. Had been ignominiously kicked out and he moved to Toronto. Joe McCully, the Warden of Hart House, brought him along to lunch. He was ostensibly working for Canadian Art magazine at the time. Paul Arthur was helping him find things to do. He was a mesmerizing talker and he had connections with Hart House, so I probably met him in 1959 or 1960. He was also the head, the nominal head (Arthur Gelber was really the spark plug), of the Canadian Conference of the Arts and I worked with him and Arthur on the O'Keefe Centre Conference of the Arts in 1960-61. I also remember him coming to Hart House for a debate on Toronto and city planning. It was amusing to say the least. And then I saw him again when I came back from the Courtauld Institute (I saw him once in England when he visited. I saw him briefly there at his club, where he introduced me to Terry Potter, the comedian, a member at the club. He was still swilling pink gin in those days_. And then we worked on Seminar '65, which was another huge conference at St. Adele that produced a major shift in emphasis for culture. We got the Minister responsible, the Secretary of State, Maurice Lamontange, to declare that culture was the primary objective for the Centennial. I wrote the report for that event, and I set everything up, working with a wonderful lady named 257 Nadine de Montmoulin. She and I did all the work. We had an office, which Alan dutifully came to every day, although he did very little. It was, conveniently, over the liquor store, and, ominously, across the street from the morgue, on Lombard Street. SS: Lovely. DS: And Alan was absolutely in his cups all the time. He was actually incapable of doing anything. SS: Do you think that increased because of the dismissal, or the unofficial sort of resignation? DS: Absolutely, but then alcohol develops its own power and control. It's terrible and he just couldn't shake it. He couldn't bring himself to it and it was a really sad thing. But we had the big conference, so I knew him in that context as well, and then I'd see him after that when I was at the Canada Council. But he became incapable of helping himself. Too bad, great man. SS: He's been recalled as a Canadian with an English accent, but with an absolute knowledge of Canadian culture. Do you recall him being that sort of... DS: Oh yes, and he was an artist himself, you know. He started off as a sculptor. When you read about his activities as an undergraduate, he was quite amazing. He was a brilliant student, wrote the first important art review of David Milne's first exhibition in Canada when he was in second year, charmed everyone, took part in all sorts of student activities, and ended as a Rhodes Scholar. But it was difficult in those days, you know, because being a homosexual, you couldn't say so and you had to be very discrete and secretive about it all. But he was charming beyond measure. Everybody loved him, men and women alike. And he was intelligent and smart and multitalented. 258 He had a brother that died young. Did Betty ever tell you about that? SS: She may have. DS: It's interesting. Anyway, he did great things at Hart House. He actually had a little studio there and then he had a studio at the Picture Loan Society at 3 Charles Street West, where Douglas Duncan, who was his lover for many years, established the Picture Loan Society. SS: Betty Jarvis and her family gave me a bust, a plaster bust that he did of Betty. Actually, I'd like you to see it because I'd like to get it restored. It's kind of in not so great condition. She had it up in her closet because she couldn't stand to look at herself. DS: Kenneth Clark said Alan was the most handsome man he ever saw. He was funny and witty and always amusing. SS: And he was close with Clark was he? DS: Well, he got the job at the National Gallery because of Kenneth Clark. Massey, who was on the board at the National Gallery, talked to Sir Kenneth who told him Jarvis is the man you want. SS: There's a situation that happened. The National Gallery terminated Anthony Blunt as an art advisor in 1956 and it was a decision made by Alan Jarvis. DS: Quite likely. SS: That was quite early, considering that the Art Gallery of Ontario kept him on until the controversy came up in the .. .seventies when they didn't renew his retainer. I actually asked Bill Withrow about it and he said, well we didn't have to tell him he was fired. It was pretty much unspoken. I'm curious, and I haven't yet been able to find a concrete, definite answer why Alan Jarvis let him go. And whether it was because he had 259 some sort of personal disagreement. DS: I have no idea. The person who might have found out something about that would be Andrew Horrall, who's writing his biography. SS: I wish his book was published now. DS: I've got the manuscript somewhere. SS: I'd love to read it, with his permission. DS: It would be hard to dig out, it's in storage, but I'd be glad to. SS: If you have his contact and I can ask permission to read the manuscript, I'd really like to be able to read it because there isn't yet a biography on Jarvis. And there's a horrible article on him that's inaccurate in many ways. Anyway, I don't have many leads on that but that would be appreciated. DS: Where's the horrible article? SS: I call it horrible because Betty Jarvis always hated it. There's a Douglas Ord article. DS: Ah yes, in Canadian Art. SS: Betty really disagreed with what was written in the article. DS: I didn't like it either. SS: Okay. DS: Ord wrote a whole book on the National Gallery. SS: Yes, which is - it's interesting for particular little points, but as a whole, I think it's not very ... it's not that, it's not accurate, it's just that he infers a lot by joining together loose concepts. Inference isn't exactly the best way to historicize the National Gallery of Canada, so I read it cautiously. DS: I never read the book on the history but I did read the article and I thought, I don't 260 like it. I didn't like it and I didn't think it was accurate but I couldn't remember what the facts were. They were quite different from the story Alan told me. SS: Betty had disagreed strongly with the details surrounding the whole affair. DS: Concerning the Chardins? SS: Yes, that attempted acquisition and I think she also didn't appreciate that he hadn't sort of asked her directly about certain things and fact checking. DS: Yes, it would have helped. SS: In recollecting your time spent in Vancouver in the 1960s, you mentioned in an article that you and Iain Baxter thought that Marshall McLuhan was 'visually illiterate'. Could you comment on this? It's not that it's a nasty thing to say at all, but is it a reality? I think it's actually a really perceptive thing to say and I want you to expand on that, please. DS: Let me give you my retrospective view of Marshal McLuhan. He was a good friend, by the way, and I had dinner at his place a couple of weeks before he died; he'd had an awful stroke and he couldn't talk. It was awful, but I saw him from time to time. But I think he was really of the generation, in his sensibility, with T.S. Eliot, Ezra Pound, and W.B. Yeats. But he was a social commentator kind of poet. And he was so strong verbally; that it basically influenced and formed his philosophy and the kinds of ideas that he put out. Visually, to answer you question, he had no idea who the artists of the day were at all - Canadian, American, or other. He knew about Picasso and Matisse. He liked Wyndham Lewis a lot because he was also an iconoclast and an outsider. SS: Yes, and a writer and a communicator. DS: And a writer, yes, and he'd known him personally. But Lewis's sensibility or his 261 ascetic was basically established in the second and third decades of the Twentieth Century - the First World War and then the twenties. And then he came here in the latter part of his life to avoid the Second World War. So that was my view of Marshall. He didn't have a keen interest in painting or film, except as a generic art form; it was mostly written work that's tickled and inspired him. I think Iain expected him to be au courante with what was happening then. You'd never find Marshall reading Art Forum or anything like that, or going to an art gallery, he just wouldn't. SS: That's interesting. I'm interested because I'm poking around McLuhan's thoughts on the shift from a sort of visually based age to what he saw as a sort of moving back into an acoustic space with technology. I'm discovering McLuhan's ideas aren't necessarily theories, but that they're more sorts of ways to look at things. DS: Yes, modes of perception. And, in fact, it's something he shared with Ted Carpenter, you know. Ted's still alive and just did a big show for a museum in Paris on the Arctic. Actually, his real concern with the art of the Arctic, both Greenland and Canada and Russia, has to do with concepts of space. It's what fascinates him more than anything else. There's another American influence for you. McLuhan, of course, spent a lot of time in St. Louis, so it's very interesting. His wife's Texan. I wouldn't discount it, since you're going up to 1976.1 would say that the Vietnamese War probably pushed everything, or capped something, that had begun with all of the draft dodgers that came to Canada. It was quite amazing. A lot of them very talented people too, added a lot to Canadian cultural life. SS: Absolutely. DS: But it was there originally when there were neither the programs nor the scholarship support grants for masters and doctoral degrees in Canada. People went to the States. SS: John O'Brian goes to Harvard. DS: Well, he could have done graduate work here, but chose to go there, but I can remember the debates. The Canada Council, when I was there, was the Canada Council for the Arts and the Humanities; what is now the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, was part of the Canada Council. We looked after everything, and the relationship was salutary. After I went to York University I sat on academic juries for a couple of years. But I remember the debates. Should we be providing grants for scholars to do graduate work? Yes. Should we insist they do their graduate work in Canada? There were some university presidents (there were five of them sitting on the Council, out of twenty-one members), saying, you have to make it a stipulation, otherwise our graduate departments will never grow. You have to feed them and you feed them by insisting that people do at least their Masters level work here until we develop the expertise and the size to offer doctoral level support. And that view would run into those saying that these things will be decided by what people need to do and who they find to do it with. You can't always force it or make it a requirement. The debate was vigorously engaged, and the reason was that we were still in the process of developing graduate programs in all sorts of disciplines in the Humanities as well as in the Sciences. SS: A large part of my graduate career has been enabled by SSHRC. I got a Canada Graduate Scholarship in the first year they started offering them. That was a 'stay in Canada' doctoral grant. It was great, it was really fantastic. I miss it. DS: It was very contentious at the time. Of course, I never thought that we should have separated SSHRC from the Canada Council, but I was in a minority position. It was actually the only time I ever gave strong support to the Tories. I think it was Perrin Beatty who was trying to put them back together again. And from the government's point of view, and I thought also from a collegial point of view, it made a lot of sense to do that. I actually wrote a strong letter of support when Beatty was appearing before the Senate committee. SS: What's the disadvantage of having them separate? DS: I can't think of any. The only disadvantage might be perception. I said that the only reason was the only thing that matters, and that is how much money goes into the system. The reason that SSHRC got set up, was because the social sciences felt that they were being penalized by being associated with the arts, because they thought the arts weren't getting any money. Well, in fact, the arts got more money at a particular time. But by that time, the move to separation was hard to stop. It was a side issue. SS: I've finished all of my direct, specific questions and I just wanted to ask, in general, was there anything else you'd like to say with regard to the idea of Britain being a model for modernism in Canada and then the later shift to an American one? DS: I suppose the one sort of over riding thing that's kind of interesting is that historically European civilization has moved westward from the time of Aeneus. A little bit eastward now and again - India, Australia, and New Zealand, but predominantly and ineluctably westward. I was reading something recently about what is called 'path dependency,' which describes how certain human activities get established and certain paths or habits are created that are very, very hard to change - ways of thinking and acting. So when the British and the French got excited about North America, they moved m a big way. They basically established the United States and British North America after the revolution and that impulse lingered on and on. You know, Charles Dickens coming and touring around, and Samuel Butler, and Oscar Wilde, and the theatre companies that traveled across Canada, bringing us British theatre. It's amazing how much stuff we had to absorb. SS: Stratford. DS: Publishers established branch plants or just shipped things here. They weren't too interested in the native product. They were interested in exporting things. The British were expert in exploitation, and North America was a prime target. The Americans pirated things too, of course, such as Gilbert and Sullivan, and Dickens, and others, but the British were remarkable experts. I remember a quote from, I don't know who, but some wag, probably Asian, who said the reason the sun never set on the British Empire was because God didn't trust the British in the dark. In Canada, they permeated and controlled, from the days of the Hudson's Bay Company, the shape and development of this country. So it was a long history and it lasted through the Second World War. There was a surge of nationalism after the First World War, when those who were born here went there to fight felt that they were different. When, or rather if, they came back, they were proud to have come from here. It was a devastating, catastrophic event. We lost a whole generation of young men. And the Second World War did the same thing. People moved there and they came back full of admiration on the one hand for having vanquished Nazism and the affiliation with Britain was quite snug, but the converse was that they felt more strongly than ever about Canada. The war brought out nationalist feeling quite strongly and since then we've felt that we can make our own decisions. 265 What I felt, when I went to the Courtauld in England, having been very much an anglophile before I got there, even to the point of carrying an umbrella around when I was living in Hart House, I really felt that I was different. And I felt that from the Canadian scholars I met at the British Museum - John Robson and Kathleen Colburn and others who were at the University of Toronto. I thought, well, you know, we can decide these things ourselves, we don't have to follow. At the same time, at the Canada Council, I was quite keen on bringing critics and artists from the US, the UK, and France, to look at and appreciate what we had here. They were always knocked out by what they found, but they just had to come and see it. I brought people like David Thompson and the Cohen brothers, Phillip Leider and all sorts of people who were involved in the arts - Lucy Lippard and Clement Greenberg. SS: I'll have to talk to you again. There are so many people you've been in contact with, it's great. Thank you for being open with me. I appreciate your time. DS: I wonder where to find Andrew Horrall? ... SS: I'll email you a prompt to ask about that manuscript because I'd very much like to read it. DS: I know, I was supposed to send it back but I never did. SS: Jarvis's papers are at? DS: The National Archives? SS: No, they're actually on campus, which is fantastic for my travel budget. I'd like to poke around there but it would be nice to see the manuscript. DS: Well the thing that astounded me about what Horrall found out, was that I didn't know anything at all about Alan's life in the UK. He was very much involved with labour issues, you know, like bringing educational opportunities into the work place. It was amazing, it wasn't art at all; quite fascinating. A wonderful kind of idealism that ended in a great puddle of vodka. Too bad. SS: It's hard. Well thank you David, very much. I really appreciate it and do be in touch when ideas occur. ~ END OF INTERVIEW ~ Appendix B Sarah Stanners interviews William Withrow, former director of the Art Gallery of Ontario Date: 27 May 2008 Location: Toronto Digital recording transcribed and excerpted. Sarah Stanners: .. .Thank you for agreeing to meet with me. I've written down my questions but, as I know with most interviews, sometimes the conversation leads elsewhere and you may end up answering questions that I have written on the next page. Feel free if something comes to mind to just tell me. I've been told by people already, how fantastic you are as an individual. Every time I mention your name to anybody, people light up and they're very excited. People have also said you're a fantastic interview, so this is great. I'm just going to start here with the basics. During what time exactly were you the director of the Art Gallery of Ontario? William (Bill) Withrow: Oh my wife should be here not me. June, what were my dates at the gallery? 267 268 June Withrow: 1960 to 1991. Thirty-one years. SS: I'm just going to say that this is Bill Withrow's wife, June Withrow, who is speaking, who I am sure will have plenty of very good things to add. BW: Like precise dates. SS: Dates, yes, exactly. That's my job with my husband too, remembering dates. So the second question I have is.. .and feel free to criticize my questions because they may seem strange but it's because I'm thinking about my dissertation topic too. Do you feel that the events surrounding the purchase of The Archer for Toronto acted as a catalyst for the major gifted works that Moore gave to the AGO? It's often said that. BW: I think there's no doubt about it. I think it's quid pro quo, I really do. I doubt that there'd be.. .well there might be one or two or something like that, we would never have gotten that collection if it was not for the pavilion that was designed to hold them. It was done entirely under Moore's.. .1 won't say direction, but almost. Because as I think I mentioned when we first began, that we laid out, he and I, in his backyard, with string on the grass in Much Hadham, to get a feeling. He walked around that and stood and thought about it. SS: And this was for the dimensions of the Moore Centre space? BW: Yes, so he was in on that from the beginning and it was.. .1 guess your question implied what did that have to do with the gift but it had a lot to do with it because we promised a pavilion if we could have the collection. BW: Did he work with John Parkin? BW: Yes 269 SS: According to Alan Wilkinson's publication, Henry Moore Remembered, he says that you over heard a conversation between Henry Moore and Alan Ross at the reception that welcomed Moore to the city of Toronto and that reception was held at City Hall. Now, did you hear this conversation which was apparently about the possibility of Moore giving artwork to Toronto and what did you think about that? BW: Oh I thought it was great, but it was just about giving one or two. At that time the idea that a whole collection, which would fill a big gallery, was not in the air at all. It was just one or two things. I remember that conversation very well. SS: Was it between Allan Ross and Moore, if you remember? That's how Wilkinson recalls it. BW: Yes it was, but there were one or two other people standing around. The mayor and yours truly. SS: I actually have a photograph of that reception. I'm going to show it to you near the end. I'm frequently finding fantastic photographs of Moore in Toronto and I have to shop around the photographs to know who's who. BW: He felt very at home in Toronto. He liked the city. SS: This next question, and another one after it, has to do with the fact that I'm investigating an individual. And there's not a lot of information around because he wasn't an art person, per say, but he was involved in the background and he tends not to get highlighted because he actually didn't want to be highlighted. Could you tell me about Mr. Allan Ross and how he factors into the history of Henry Moore in Toronto? I sort of have an idea because I've been reading letters, but I'm just wondering what you knew of Allan Ross and how he factored into this history of Moore in Toronto. BW: Well, he hovered on the edges of the whole negotiation. I don't know what his intent was, but our intent was to get him to donate some money towards it, there was no question and I think he knew that. But that's about as far as I can go. He was an enigmatic fellow. SS: My next question was, how important do you think that Mr. Allan Ross was to the process of getting the Moore gift for the AGO, in your knowledge of his involvement, has a lot to do with financial donation, is that the idea? BW: Yeah but I don't think it was.. .it wasn't that pivotal. It wasn't Allan Ross or nothing because there were other people and he was just one of them. SS: Yes, Philip Givens, I know was huge. BW: He was one of a dozen or so. SS: That's what I'm finding with the whole history of it, is that there are many people involved at many different levels. BW: And some were very discreet and quiet about it and others boasted about their gift, what they might give and so on, different personalities. SS: To this day it's very interesting when people approach me, or, if I approach them, about this history of Moore in Toronto. There's a real urge. People want a sort of stake in it. It's amazing because I've researched other topics about other things. People want to tell me. They're at pains to tell me, how much they were involved. BW: But let me stress, that wasn't true. When we started, it was when we got rolling everybody wanted to get on board. SS: Did you ever find resistance to this idea of paying too much attention and sort of courting Henry Moore? 271 BW: No, I think if a similar thing happened today, I think there'd be resistance from a well established group of artists, and so on, that wasn't true in Toronto at that time. SS: This is a question that we touched on, but I really wanted to save it for when we were recording. Do you feel that Moore's gift to the Tate, and that the Tate's public faltering on the arrangements, had anything to do with the AGO receiving so many works from Moore? And then, I sort of paraphrased it better said, to what degree do you think the Moore gift to the Tate shaped the way in which the AGO approached and handled its own gift from Moore? BW: That's rather complex. What confused the two.. .there was a change over from, and I can't remember either of their names. There was a new director, after I started negotiations. When I say negotiations, I thought it was only proper to go and say look, if you've got something going with Henry Moore, we're out. Don't let us confuse it. You go ahead with your gift. And he admitted to me.. .1 can't remember whether it was the first fellow... SS: You're talking about the director of the Tate? BW: Yes, the older one. The new one that came in. SS: Well there's Rothenstein and then there's... BW: We started with Rothenstein but then there was... SS: Anthony Lousada or... BW: I didn't get to know him much but he confirmed that they couldn't do anything. SS: He confirmed that they couldn't create a space for Moore? BW: That's right, and Rothenstein made it clear, the very first time I went, that he would be.. .he didn't put it this way but what he was telling me was, he'd literally be murdered by the contemporary artists that sort of dominated the Tate scene. They thought that Moore was just past and gone and there were some absolutely outrageous young artists who did things that most people didn't think were art. They had Happenings, I think that's what they called them, events and so on. They all thought, all these artists thought, that Moore was something else out of another century. They didn't think of him as a Modern and that amused me so much because there were people in Toronto who thought he was one of these crazy modern artists, you know. SS: That's what's so interesting. I find, and even to this day, that there's a British Henry Moore and then there's a sort of Canadian Henry Moore. With the purchase of The Archer, or the effort toward the purchase of The Archer, there was so much more controversy, it's too abstract, whereas you have in England, at the time, Anthony Caro, who was working with steel beams. BW: It was just the opposite. The Tate said they couldn't cope with Henry Moore because the artists would all be just outraged. Then the Tate, taking notice. Even just to show another of his works was to be retrograde. SS: Right, so the directors even sensed that, because I know it was in the media, that these younger artists had sort of come out, signed a statement against the idea. BW: That's right, so I got clearance from the Tate quite early in the game. And so that settled it for Henry. He wanted to do the right thing by Britain. SS: It's a delicate situation because in reading the letters, back and forth, everybody's very, sort of.. .what's interesting is you see Toronto so eager to establish and strike a relationship but also being very careful not to get Moore into trouble, you know, so it's a really intricate thing. 273 BW: I have nothing dramatic but here are four group pictures you can look at later. That's Ayala Zacks of the Zacks Collection. SS: The AGO has a fantastic collection of photographs, really interesting ones that I don't think have really seen the light of day in a long time. You could very well do a Moore in Toronto specific type exhibition. My next question.. .I'm sorry, these may seem strange after what we've just talked about. This is something that you might be able to contribute to, June, and of course I would like your contribution too Bill. Could you please tell me about the dinner that you had in January of 1969 with Moore, Edmund and Peg Bovey, Sam and Ayala Zacks, John and Nora Robarts, John Parkin and June Withrow at London's White Tower restaurant? BW: Yes, you've got them all. You've got the Zacks. SS: From my research I've got, basically, that Mr. And Mrs. Bovey were there. BW: Well he was the president at the time. SS: And that also, the Zacks were there, both Mr. and Mrs., and Mr. and Mrs. Robarts, but did Pakin not bring Jeanne, his wife? BW: No. SS: Okay, so then yourself and June were there, and this was at the White Tower restaurant. Now, what do you remember about that dinner? BW: Not really very much because they talked international politics. They talked international business and they didn't really talk about art at all. SS: What I understand from the research is that John Robarts insisted that the topic of money not come up and that it was almost like a dinner of all the important people there, but it was an unspoken situation? BW: Well that's putting it very mildly. I was saying that the art that we were all talking about it, thinking about, it wasn't talked about because they were talking about business matters that were, in my very narrow view, out of place and you know, not what the object of the exercise was at all. But there's the other side that they were sort of anxious about being too anxious. I don't know it, was a friendly dinner but we really didn't talk about Henry Moore in Toronto. SS: This was sort of like a great exercise in Canadian politeness? BW: Yes, but especially with financial matters I think. The whole group was hesitant to discuss dollars and cents. BW: It was thought to be crude to speak about money matters. SS: But the relations were positive? BW: Oh yes, they were friendly people and most of them knew each other, including the politician, he was a great guy. SS: Now here's a strange thing, but I just want to know if it's true, did Robarts and Moore actually sing Yorkshire songs together at this dinner? Because it's mentioned by Wilkinson and it's just a bizarre thing to think about. BW: Well if Wilkinson said it, it happened. I did note they had their arms around each other. SS: This is Moore and Robarts? BW: Yes, Robarts, who was a very forthright, gruff kind of man's man, got along with Moore very well. Moore was quiet and so on but he was very manly. And because Robarts was rather anti arty-farty people and he liked Henry because he was a down to earth guy. You could imagine him farming or something and Robarts came from a farm background. It was a very pleasant dinner but we didn't talk about the Henry Moore Centre, not a bit, unless they were whispering in the corner, but I don't remember them talking about it at all. They got along well. He was a great host. SS: Now, could you please tell me about the visits that you made in January of '69 with Moore, Parkin and the Zacks to galleries around London. Where did you go and what made an impact on the AGO's expansion? Were you there too June? JW: I don't think I was in '69.1 can't recall. BW: Well it was a rather whirlwind tour. We didn't spend much time. A half an hour at the most in each, starting with the National Gallery and then to the Tate and a couple of others. There was one other rather strange operation just out of town. SS: I know the Whitechapel is mentioned BW: Whitechapel, good for you. I couldn't think of how they called it. It was an oddball and whenever I was there and I went two or three times, each time I was in London. I almost always went to see what was going on there. But sometimes there wasn't anything going on. It was strange. It wasn't like a public gallery. It was as though someone owned it privately and opened it up to let the public in and I don't think the public paid to go in. SS: From what I've gathered in the research, it said that Moore enjoyed the light there. Do you remember him... BW: Yes, and I remember the light myself. I went to the Whitechapel before the Moore thing even started, but I think I went only once after we were seriously considering the Moore operation in Toronto. I went there partly because of that light question, which I had been more or less impressed with, but I went with a view to taking some notes on how they achieved that light. Mr. Moore was.. .and this surprised me, because sculptors 276 particularly, though they should be more interested in light than painters, rarely talk about it. [•••] BW: .. .But you're right, a lot of people went there to look at the way the light was handled and I think a number of commercial galleries tried to follow suite in London. SS: When you mentioned you'd go to England on occasions, even before the whole Moore project, was it on particular assignments as a director? Was it to keep abreast of what's happening? BW: It was that and it was our advisor Anthony Blunt. SS: That's actually my next question. BW: Sir Anthony and I went around to scenes, toured galleries and, you know, he was keeper of the Royal Collection, so we had access to not just what was on display in the gallery that was open to the public on occasion, but to everything that the Queen owned. To walk through that collection was a keeper, it was something. SS: Did you go on several occasions to meet with Anthony Blunt? BW: Yes, three or four, and then there were other things. I sometimes dropped in to see him for a while, on my way to France, you know, a day or so stop over, or something like that. SS: I understand that the time that you were there, in around January in '69, that you stopped in to see Anthony Blunt. Was that when Wilkinson was recommended to be curator of the Moore Collection or was he recommended by Bowness? BW: No he was recommended first and then I think I didn't need him until Bowness got into the act. 277 SS: But it was Blunt that first sort of mentioned Wilkinson? BW: Yes. SS: Do you feel, that in general, Blunt's assistance was positive? BW: In the main it was positive. It was positive in certain ways. He was very exacting on the historical accuracy of anything written or said officially about art and artists. SS: Sort of about attributions. BW: Yes, attributions. He was a very exacting scholar. But on the emotional side he was a rather strange fellow. I'm not saying he was strange because he was a homosexual. It was a part of his life. The boy that he lived with, he actually lived with quite openly in the quarters that were assigned to him, and then of course, his final downfall with his friends. They were all homosexuals, four of them sending stuff to Russia. SS: Yeah, that factor revealed it. BW: They believed, they really believed, idealistically, that Russia was the new way that the world should be run. Because they misinterpreted.. .how do I put it, it sounds so strange.. .democracy, because it was not like London, with its steps up the ladder to the.. .and then the funny part about it was, Sir Anthony Blunt was such a communist at heart. SS: Yeah, it's very interesting. BW: He had this funny.. .because there were three of them really that acted.. .he had this funny idea of democracy, in the form of communism, was on the same level, and yet he loved to be Sir Anthony Blunt. Mixed up guy. 278 SS: It's almost like there's several different Anthony Blunts because he was also a very good art historian, a Poussin expert, and it's tempting to find.. .to try to find fault because of his spy status. BW: He seemed to keep those things separate. SS: Yes, exactly and there's a book called, Anthony Blunt: His Lives, plural, right, because he had many different lives. BW: Well said, yes, I know the book. It upset me considerably because I'm sort of old fashioned, patriotic. My Grandfather was killed at Vimy in the First World War. My Father was very badly wounded in the First World War where he went over at age fourteen because they didn't check ages in those days and he was badly wounded. So when I joined the army in the Second World War, he was torn between not wanting me to go but wanting me to. So I had this exaggerated patriotism that when I learned of this double life that he'd been.. .it really threw me. I found it very difficult to cope with, that he was a traitor. SS: Did you consider him a friend at all? BW: He wasn't the kind of guy that you got really friendly with. SS: More of an associate. BW: In a relaxed fashion. I never called him Henry. BW: You mean Sir Anthony. BW: Sorry, I never called him Tony. The lover who lived upstairs, in the institute, he had a quarter, a quarter of the quarter, and he was this young, pretty young fellow. SS: I've been to Vimy Ridge and it's a remarkable place. It changed my whole concept of.. .I'm very removed from that time but I paid a visit to Vimy Ridge and if you have a 279 Canadian passport you're allowed into certain areas that other people aren't. I spent a lot of time there. I've been once but it's burnt into my memory. It's quite amazing. Have you been to see the large memorial? BW: I've seen a lot of pictures of it. Of course it was called the Vimy Memorial but it wasn't just about Vimy, it was, well I regard it anyway as a memorial to all the Canadian soldiers who died no matter whether it was at Vimy or what other place because Vimy actually was a rather small battle. It was crucial at the time and it had a certain intrigue about it because of the way it was dug out. That was what my Grandfather did. He was an engineer and planned the trenches, the tunnels. SS: Which was vital. BW: And they all snuck up and he died in the tunnel on the day that they went up over the top. My Father at that time was in hospital, in London, because he'd been shot in the battle prior to that. The Vimy thing wasn't a big battle but it seemed to be the turning point. SS: They only allow Canadians into the trench areas and when you arrive there too, it's really interesting because France donated that section of land to Canada, so you're on Canadian soil when you're there and all the people who work there are Canadian. I did my first year of university in England, and we traveled there to see Vimy, and it was so strange to be there and see all these Canadians. And they've also planted Canadian trees so I've been in Europe all this time and everything seems oddly familiar and it was a very amazing experience. BW: They obviously put some maple trees but they put some other trees too, peculiar to Canada you know. It's very touching. 280 SS: I'm sorry to get off topic but it's fascinating. Actually, back to Blunt, because I was just doing a lot of research on Blunt at the National Gallery of Canada and I've read all their communications with him. And what's interesting is, that they took him on in about '48 and it was going swimmingly, everything's fine, everything's great, and then in '56, in 1956, his position as advisor, he's terminated. And the person behind his termination is Alan Jarvis. And what's really puzzling to me is, you can't gather a true sense of what happened through the official communications in the file. I can't understand why the National Gallery let him go in '56, but the AGO kept him on. [...] BW: I think he knew the sort of double life. SS: Well that's what I was wondering. BW: I hate to make a big thing of that you know but I believe that's... SS: Well many people knew about that because his information leaking was happening between '40 and '45 and then it stopped. Many people knew about it and it was kept under wraps until Thatcher brought it up, right? So perhaps he was aware of it and wanted to distance. BW: I think so but I didn't know that at the time, but looking back on it, yes. SS: And then nothing is said. BW: As soon as it was well known, that he had been a spy, and was sending.. .the cruel thing is, the stuff he sent as art slides, under the guise of [ inaudible 33:44 ] they were not really important secrets at all. He thought they were and that they would be helpful to the Russians when they invaded England too. To free England from that horrible monarchy under the modern age of communism. It was sad. 281 SS: Did the AGO terminate Blunt or did Blunt retire? How did that relationship stop at the Art Gallery of Ontario, between Blunt and the AGO? BW: I didn't have to fire him because it was all in the newspapers you know. SS: So that's what ended the relationship, right? BW: You see, everybody knew it was the end. I didn't even have to write a letter to say you're finished. SS: It was a given. BW: Yes, it was a given. SS: This is a vague question and I'm trying to fish for something that may come to mind, I don't know. It has to do with my dissertation topic, being this idea of British foundations in Canadian institutions and ways of doing things. Do you feel that the old Anglo connections in Toronto had anything to do with Moore's growing affection toward this city? Like you were saying, he felt at home. Do you think it had anything to do with that? BW: Well, I think he was very aware of the fact that it was a British colony and that Toronto was, in those days, still quite British. Certainly the people that he met were all ex Brits, you know. They were born in England so he felt very at home in the current.. .Lingua Franca was English of course. I think that's all. SS: From being in Toronto, besides Moore, did you feel that, maybe you're not even aware of it, because that's just the way things were. Did you feel a strong sense of Britishness or Englishness or that general sense of... BW: Well it's hard to say when one is born here you know, always lived here. SS: Exactly. BW: Once I got traveling to England regularly, I became very aware of the fact that Toronto, in those days, was still very English. English-Irish, the two. When you look at City Hall, it was, the people who were there were either English or Irish. I guess a great part was either English or Irish. SS: It's very true actually. I get more of a reaction from people who aren't born and raised Canadian. I have to start leaving the country to get a sense of my own country. This is an important question, and you may know this from mandates or missions, or things that were drummed up while you were the director at the AGO. Considering the Henry Moore gift and the expansion of the AGO in the 1970's, do you feel that the AGO was trying to achieve a greater international profile at the time of your directorship? There seems to be a theme when I'm reading the research, you know, the press releases and things like that. We're going to get international attention and we're going to be on the world stage. BW: I think we had big plans for a little gallery. And when I say we, I mean we, not just as a way of saying it. The trustees, I had the trustees with me, in spite of them being very Canadian, they looked to Britain. But they also looked to France and the bigger world. You know the collection, if you look at the dates, a lot of French painting was acquired very early when it was just a tiny little Art Gallery of Toronto. SS: It's very interesting because the way I see it too, is that a lot of that push toward collecting French or having French to show that you're a modern gallery, is actually advised by British intellectuals. SS: ... if you say to somebody, British avant-garde art, they'll look at you sideways, like, what on earth are you talking about. Or British modernism. They're like, huh? It's not taught. [...] BW: It's unfair to a lot of very good artists. SS: It gives the sense that there was never an avant-garde art scene. ... BW: There were some outstanding modernists. SS: We haven't celebrated, often times, collections that were brought over by Massey or Beaverbrook. The Vancouver Art Gallery, I was just out there, they founded their whole art gallery with a British collection. BW: Yes, Constable. [ inaudible] SS: Yeah, and so it's a strange thing that they're not taught. It's just individuals bringing small collections. But it's not quite institutionalized. What was your reaction to the protests made by the Canadian Artists Representation at the opening of the Henry Moore Sculpture Centre in'74? BW: Well I knew it was coming because there's an underground communication that goes on so I had.. .and I've never told anybody this but, I did ask for advice from the headquarters of the police. They said they would be there in plain clothes, which I appreciated. Because I didn't want a uniformed guard of any kind, but they would be there. Nothing happened that would have matter. There were people with signs and so on but there was no physical violence. SS: There's a report that was conducted for the AGO by Matthew B.M. Lawson, I don't expect you to remember right away, but in September of '69. The report had to do with 284 possible locations for a new and expanded gallery. This was in thinking where would the new gallery be. In this report, it's proposed that a public walkway between the AGO and the Toronto City Hall be highlighted with major Moore sculptures all along the way. It was going to be called Moore's Way, and I actually have an image of that. Here, I'll show you. And I found it.. .1 didn't know about it. JW: Is that along University Avenue? Is that where it was planned? BW: It was along Dundas Street. SS: Here's City Hall and then here's the AGO and the black spots are suppose to be where major Moore sculptures would be. There'd be one there and then you've got The Archer here, so the plan was to really encourage a connectedness. BW: Between The Archer. Well I knew about it but I didn't see any money and I didn't hear anybody at City Hall jumping up and down saying this is a great idea. It was a nice idea, still is. SS: It was an interesting thing to find. Actually, you could write a whole dissertation on what may have been in Toronto city planning because there's always tons of ideas but they never materialized. BW: I have to admit that I spent a lot of time, about the time that this was being discussed, in establishing the fact that we were the art gallery, not of Toronto but of Ontario and justifying that to get money from Queen's Park. And that meant that we were really servicing little galleries all over the province. June and I went to.. .she was a good sport about this.. .we went every summer for about three weeks, traveling to these little galleries way up in the hinterlands. Which, it had its nice side too, and trying to establish whether they were secure enough, fire proof enough and so on to lend things. Because we 285 were always being asked to send them exhibitions of art from the collection, so you had to go out and look at the place. BW: I guess that's the first time the small galleries had that association with the AGT really. BW: Yes, well we didn't have any money at all at the AGT. We tried as the AGT to deal with some of them. Owen Sound I remember. It depended on how active the particular director was at those places. Not until we became the Art Gallery of Ontario was there some real pressure to service the whole province. SS: To this day, people who aren't from Toronto want to say the Toronto Art Gallery. BW: Do they? SS: Yes. BW: Well it was for years and years. SS: Okay, this is.. .you might have to get your glasses out and I don't expect you to know, but it would be great if you did know. I have sort of a contact sheet, photographs that were taken at the reception that welcomed Henry Moore to Toronto the first time at City Hall. These photographs are with the City of Toronto Archives. And there's one photograph with a few individuals that I was wondering if you knew. It's miniscule, I apologize. So this is nice shots of Moore sort of looking out. BW: Yes, I know his profile so well. SS: Now, the fellow with the dark glasses, does he ring a bell with you? BW: That wouldn't be Sam Zacks would it? BW: No, it's not Sam Zacks. This is a tall fellow. SS: It looks like this person's wife is with him. 286 BW: Sam was there certainly but the Zacks were very involved with the gallery of course, but Sam was a little guy. SS: Yes, he's very identifiable. BW: I thought for a second it might have been Ayala but... SS: Do you think it might be Dennison? William Dennison? [inaudible overlapping comments from everybody] SS: This is great [pointing to a photo] because it's Moore looking out from City Hall and you can just imagine him looking at The Archer. [Shuffling through more photographs presented by June Withrow] BW: Now there's something on the back of that. SS: W.G. Constable. BW: He's a lovely man. SS: His writing is very.. .there's a lot of conviction in his writing. He's actually written quite a bit about how concepts of French art, and even in the way that French art is worked, has everything to do with British artists. It's so funny, he's got it down to a science. BW: I read this thing about the fact that, for better or worse, that English art was influenced by the French artists. Of course that's true. SS: Well he says sort of the flip side, that French art was influenced by colour theory coming out of the England. It's very interesting, his writing. [Continuing to look at photographs] BW: There's Sam Zacks. SS: Oh yes, with The Warrior, Moore's Warrior. BW: That's right. I think Sam and Ayala played a big part in obtaining that collection, did they not Bill? The Moore collection? BW: Oh yeah, they were very supportive. I wouldn't like to even suggest that they were the ones to swing it, but they were very supportive. SS: There's really no one person to say. It's really many individuals. BW: Well I think the board was very.. .because the board, at that time, were travelers pretty much. They were all top executives. BW: Yes, a lot of them were collectors. SS: Now I must say, this is a very unusual photograph. This is the Moore Centre, and you've got a hockey player and you've got Jack Bush off at the side here. What on earth is this gathering? BW: I think we're trying to prove that art isn't just for limp wristed... BW: You had an artist day, a special artist's day. BW: This was a conscious effort. SS: And you've got a dancer there too. BW: Well art is for everyone. That was the idea. SS: I love seeing the paint on Jack's shoes. He's got stained shoes. Do you remember Jack Bush? BW: Jack Bush was very modest about his own work. I can remember walking through the gallery one day with, probably New York's most famous, well known art critic. SS: Greenberg? BW: Clement Greenberg. Jack was a stout little guy and Greenberg was walking along like this and was talking, and Jack was walking along like this, listening to every word. 288 BW: In a worshipful pose. BW: It actually flipped my stomach a little. "Oh yes Clem, yes. What do you think of...ohyes Clem." SS: Bush factors into my research as a sort of transitional artist because he started out with watercolours in the manor of Group of Seven. An English idea of going out and painting in watercolours and then he shifts into the dictionary definition of American painting. So it's funny when I say to people that I'm studying Moore, Blunt, Bush, they look at me like, what on earth are you doing? BW: It was his age you see. He was older than the young artists who were doing American kind of stuff. They were ten years younger. SS: [Looking at more photographs] These are great pictures of you Bill. BW: There are some great pictures in there. Very exciting times. SS: Yes, and I love seeing Walker Court with the abstract work surrounding it. It's so nice. BW: It was a great place to show those pictures. BW: Mathew is going to give us a private tour of the gallery next week. We're very excited. SS: Next week? Oh very good. Well you'll have to be spies for me because part of my writing has to do with how the Moore Centre has stayed the same but has slightly changed as well, to do with this new renovation. Everything is pretty much remaining the same but the main change is that there's going to be this doorway, or portal, from the Moore Centre main space into this Galleria Italia. JW: As I remember it, it was a dead end. 289 BW: It was a dead end, the Moore Gallery. That's a nice extension and, in fact, I wondered if they might put some Moore sculpture there but I guess not. SS: They're going to dedicate most of that corridor to contemporary. But I'm sure conversations will be made between what's outside that room and what's there. What's going to change though, and this will be significant, that corridor is glass so the light is now going to flood in from the side, which was not at all in Moore's or Parkin's thoughts. It was always a very controlled setting. So I wonder if the experience will be jeopardized? Maybe it will be increased, it will be different. BW: We'll have to see. JW: Well I worried about that when I saw the design of it. It would be a tunnel effect. Although it faces north, there would be late day sun and early morning. BW: I was never too happy with that ramp that went down. SS: They're closing that off. They're going to maintain it for internal use. BW: Yes because it was no display place. It was steep, like this, and to try and show art on that wall, it just never worked there. SS: I understand that the idea was to have drawings and light sensitive works there, but it never really... BW: It never really worked. I struggled with various things and it didn't work. JW: Do you know if Ayala Zacks is alive? Is there any way that you have contacts? SS: I can ask around. BW: I would like to know. We used to exchange Christmas cards and I haven't heard from her in a number of years. 290 SS: My feeling is no, but I'll let you know. My feeling is no because most people know what I'm up to and have said you've got to talk to this person and that person and she has not been recommended to me to talk to. [Looking through more photographs] SS: Thank you very much for talking to me. Is there anything that comes to mind, that I haven't asked you about, that relates to Moore? BW: No, I think we've covered a lot of things that I hadn't expected to touch on. SS: Well, I do the research and I'm reading what people have come up with but there are a certain few questions that aren't addressed. BW: Well as you work away on it, don't hesitate to call me, if there's anything I can fill in. SS: I really appreciate that. It's been a great pleasure. BW: Well it's been a pleasure for us to meet you and we certainly wish you very well. ~ END OF INTERVIEW ~ Appendix C Sarah Stanners interviews John Morris, art dealer and son of Jerrold Morris. Date: 14 January 2009 Location: Toronto Digital recording transcribed and excerpted. Sarah Stanners: ... I can't help but inquire about your father's [Jerrold Morris] sense of humour, and I've sensed it in his writing, but I wonder if this is a part of your understanding of him? John Morris: Oh yeah, I mean, we were always laughing as a family and when Dad and I were at work all those years we were laughing all day, making jokes, usually at the expense of our clients, a lot of whom were given nicknames. And our poor secretary, who was a very square girl, who was a Rosedale matron who just liked working for us because she wanted to get out of the house. She was paralyzed all day with laughter. SS: Well I never met your father but I could sense this, even from just little snippets and stories of his upbringing. 291 JM: Well, it's that English, ironic sense of humour that I see very much in my English friends, you know. But we were always kidding around or dreaming up amusing things to get through the day. SS: ... A lot of families [felt] that, even hearing war stories, or depression stories, especially out of England, that humour was what kept the wheels turning, what kept people's spirits light. JM: Plus, the secret code that's the cement of every family, you know, all those secret expressions that no one else knows. SS: Well, I'm glad that I was right about that. I just sensed it. How there's this wry sense of humour wanting to come out. Okay, one of my first serious questions is, in your father's autobiography, Adrift On Course, he mentions that he went to school with, and then later worked for, Harold Varley, who was related to the Canadian painter Frederick Varley. Do you know how Harold and Fredrick were related? JM: No I don't. SS: I know, I don't either. That's why I asked you. JM: I did at some point but I can't tell you right this minute. I'll have to look it up. SS: I thought it was interesting that they're related but there's no mention of exactly how. Did your father ever talk about his experience Harold Varley? JM: No, I wouldn't know anything about it, except for that picture in Dad's bio., and of the private school he went to in Kent. You see this little boy in the middle and I always think, oh there's Dad, but that's not Dad, that's my uncle who was a year older and Dad is a microscopic little boy that you can hardly see. He's just a little dot. He was the youngest boy in the school. 293 SS: You were named after your uncle though, right? JM: Probably, I would imagine, and my Mother. I was named John Vivian Morris. SS: I didn't know that was your middle name. JM: ... I was always known by all my family as John Vivian to differentiate me from my uncle. [...] Well, in England, men named with a girl's name, it's a kind of snotty, upper class thing, which my Mom liked. Evelyn, Beverly, Vivian, you know. SS: My Father's middle name is Crispian. JM: That's fabulous! That's very snotty. SS: Exactly, and my Nana's middle name was Coates. It's the British tradition of using surnames as middle names. JM: That's lovely. Well we can all look down our noses then at everyone. SS: There tends to be random entrances to different questions, but I think this is important to note. I'd like to be able to note it somewhere along the line. Can you speak a little bit about your father's attention to the art of native Indians in B.C.? JM: Well, .. .that actually is the only exhibition that I actually remember, physically, from our time there and I remember Dad had a really nice installation guy... Bob [Hume], who ended up at the National Gallery and they either painted or wallpapered the whole interior of the gallery in black and had the masks hanging on the wall, spot-lit. Now today that would be considered rather corny but at that time there was West Coast art rotting in the forests. This was the first time I know of when it was really treated as a sort of spectacular museum exhibition. A couple of years ago, this big article, this big book, Art of the Northwest Coast, written by an American woman, and she comments on a show, which she says is the very first time West Coast art has been treated as art, rather 294 than just as artifacts. I wrote to her and said, look, like fifteen years earlier my Dad did this show and we used a catalogue called People of the Potlatch [co-curated with Audrey Hawthorn], which, in fact, I think to this day is the most comprehensive and best show of that kind of art. She wrote me back a very limp-wristed reply just saying, oh well I'm sorry but you can't cover everything. But I think it's because she looked at first an American museum show and ignored the Canadian show. But that's a great catalogue and it's really.. .the more recent catalogues have got more photographs, more colour photographs, more of an emphasis on the ethnographic aspect of it. But Dad was trying to show it as art and I don't think anything has equaled it yet to this day. SS: What I like to see it as is as an example of his forward thinking as a curator in a not so forward thinking land. JM: He had a very good collaborator whose name I also can't remember off the top of my head. I've got the catalogue ten feet away but the woman who wrote the technical entries, but that was also in a very straight up, you might say, non-scholarly way, it was a popularizing show. Dad was a very democratic guy and this was to make people look at this material. SS: Do you remember enjoying it when you saw it? JM: Yes, I thought it was great. I was just a little kid but it had such an impact on me visually that I can't remember anything else that I ever saw at the Art Gallery of Vancouver except that. SS: It stood out. Do you know what your father's attitude toward contemporary British art was, such as Anthony Caro? JM: No, I don't know. We never discussed that. 295 SS: In his autobiography he talks about there being sort of watered-down.. .that a lot of British artists that he grew up knowing were working out of continental esthetics that were then watered-down in England. An interesting perspective, which is bang on with a lot of... JM: Well it's true. I don't think anyone would deny that British art is insipid. The great geniuses are all eccentrics, there's no school you can point at and say they're all like Turner or Stanley Spencer or Francis Bacon. They're all nutbars, you know. British art on the whole is very tedious. SS: I might quote you with 'nutbar' one day. I understand that you were born in England and that your mother Vivian joined Jerrold in Canada after he was settled. When exactly did you come to Canada? JM: I was less than a year old and I was born on August 24th, 1945, so before August, the spring of '46.' In fact, when I was visiting a friend in Halifax, we went by the immigration shed and he said, well you've been here, and I said, no I haven't, but then of course I had. I'd come through there with my Mother and had taken a train out west to Vancouver. SS: When did your mother pass? JM: I'm not sure, a few years ago. I deliberately don't know the date. My Father died in 1984, which was notable because it's Orwell's year of the evil future, which now is way in the past. SS: No kidding. What is your earliest memory of your father? John had misinterpreted the question, thinking that I asked when Jerrold came to Canada, which was before John was born. 296 JM: Walking through the Shaughnessy neighbourhood in Vancouver, collecting chestnuts. You know Shaughnessy, it's like the Rosedale of Vancouver. It's where the big houses are and the streets at that time were all lined with big chestnut trees. And we had, in school I guess, inherited from the English tradition of conquerors, you know, you try to break the other guy's chestnut. I liked collecting them. I'd always come home with tons of chestnuts so I remember walking with my Father's hand. I thought about that a lot when he was dying. You know, I thought, I have a sentimental memory of this childhood. SS: He speaks about collecting too, as a child as well. JM: Well English boys always collected stuff you know. Matchbox covers, engine parts, everything. The English are naturally collecting and in his bio. he speaks sort of euphorically of how wonderful the countryside was in his youth. Collecting bird's nests and that kind of thing, which has now been spoiled by mechanical harvesting. I guess every generation sees what they knew as being ruined. SS: Yes, exactly. JM: The English are great collectors. Sometimes it's junk but they do collect. There's a natural tendency, which too bad we don't have here. I think here, in the New World, everyone arrived with nothing, basically. Most people had nothing and there was never that penchant for collecting. It was more survival. Maybe getting yourself a nice place to live, saving some money but the collecting instinct is not built into, certainly not Canada. SS: It's interesting because you can't call it hoarding or simply wanting to keep things, because your father was admittedly someone who liked to keep light and get rid of junk. JM: He didn't want to actually possess anything. SS: Yes, but had a collector's instinct. It's interesting. JM: But that turned to a curatorial bent because he didn't want possessions. He didn't want to be burdened by possessions. It may have been because of his nomadic early life. SS: You've already answered this but I wanted to ask, do you recall your father as a curator? JM: No, not really. The first I knew of it really, was when he started his art gallery in Toronto. I didn't really know what he did in San Francisco because we weren't really there very long and we were living out in Marin County so Dad commuted into the city. We were isolated from the city and really, I only know of his activities as a curator through the gallery. Except, one thing he did talk about, only briefly, was the difficulty of being a curator in Vancouver. That the board of directors, which was all made up of wealthy men who were there for the prestige of being on the board of directors. They never wanted to give him any money for acquisition or operating funds. He had quite a few acerbic anecdotes to tell about that and he worked very, very hard for ten years and it's not like my father to ever complain about work because he loved work and he also never experienced what he called despondency, depression or regret. He always looked forward but there was a chink in the armour there where Dad complained that he worked enormously hard with no support and ultimately left, I mean why would we leave? SS: That was my impression when I went through the files [at the Vancouver Art Gallery]. He did an enormous amount of work, an enormous amount. It seems that every inquiry or report that came across the gallery, [went] to his desk and he had to respond. It was mountains of paperwork. JM: Well, I knew that he had, quite aside from his curatorial duties, I knew he had no support from the upper, from above, but it was only when I read all those newspaper 298 clippings you showed me, that I realized there's this ignorant wave of complaint from the public, complaining about impressionist paintings. SS: Particularly nasty letters came in about the works of Jacob Epstein. Somebody was just on a mission to discredit him, and what your father could do about it? It didn't make any sense. He had to suffer all these ... JM: I think you have to remember that British Columbia was very British, very stuffy and very colonial. It didn't have the intelligentsia or upper class collecting taste, I mean, really, people were very isolated in B.C. so you can see Epstein being considered an outrage. SS: Well, even to English ... JM: Well, people complained about Monet. SS: It's very interesting. What I found with the founding collection at the Vancouver Art Gallery, which was established by Henry Stone, the founder, was that he was collecting British art strictly for a sense of prestige but then the quality really wasn't there and your father had to deal with this enormous founding collection which was not of high quality. There was a period of de-accessioning of twenty-two works or so, something along those lines. He was dealing with quite a lot of old skeletons. Your father, in his autobiography, mentions the difficulty he faced in becoming a Canadian citizen. Do you recall when he achieved his Canadian citizenship, assuming that he did? JM: Oh he did. I don't remember exactly when. SS: I'm just curious if he ever did. I may have recalled this incorrectly at the time, since Henry Stone received a letter of complaint about Epstein. John Ridington to Henry Stone (26 October 1931), Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery Archives. 299 JM: There was a problem with it because, if you join the armed forces in the United States, you're automatically a citizen. But when Dad asked to be made a Canadian citizen, after the war, with this enormous war record, he was told that he wasn't automatically a Canadian citizen because he entered the country for the purposes of joining the armed forces. Well, as a matter of fact, he accidentally joined the armed forces on his way through Halifax to England, so he did ultimately but he somehow thought it would just be automatic. SS: Well, I would think if you served your country... JM: And then there's some hilarious letters, which I have, trying to be demobilized from the Royal Canadian Air Force, being asked to send back his pants which he had altered. SS: Yes, you mentioned that to me. His service wear, where he was asked to send it back? JM: Yes, he said that he would send them back if he were reimbursed for them. At the end of the letter he said "And may I say, this reminds me of the good old days, the bureaucracy of being in the military." If Dad did not have such an aversion to bullshit, he would have stayed in the peacetime military. Again, with his war career, with his war record, he would have been very high up, maybe the head of a department of The Royal Canadian Air Force, earning a good salary, doing nothing except greeting royal visitors at the airport, and a great pension, and my Mother would have loved the prestige. But he just couldn't stand it. The second it was over he wanted to get out. SS: I think it's admirable that he wasn't running after money and he wasn't running after some false sense of... 300 JM: Well the peacetime military was all basically bureaucracy and as soon as the combat part of his career was over he said "I'm out of here." [...] SS: Some of these questions that I'm asking you are things that aren't coming up in the source material so I'd like to know whether he was actually Canadian. JM: Oh yes, it was soon after we'd got here that he became a Canadian. SS: Did your father ever talk to you about how he managed to make so many important contacts in the art world? Especially in New York City? JM: Yes. SS: It just seems like he just goes from military career and then, also, mining career to a curatorial and then he's a very successful dealer with important contacts. There's a blank spot for me as to how he made these contacts. JM: That is one thing that is easily explained. You're just expecting me to say I don't know, again. No, because when Dad became.. .they called him curator but it was actually curator, slash, director of the Vancouver Art Gallery. He immediately was a member of the North American Museum Curators Association. SS: Ah, right. Okay. JM: And he met all these other guys at meetings and Dad was, at that time, pretty young. My parents were very charismatic people. Everybody loved them. My Mother was beautiful and a great hostess. Dad was a great character and people adored him and he made really good friends with a lot of important people, like Sherman Lee, the great American curator who is actually more of an Oriental specialist. And Roy Strong, the then curator of the Victoria & Albert, so a lot of people who really had great influence in 301 the art world, far more than Dad. People with degrees and had written a lot of books and so on. But Dad just got along with them. SS: That makes sense. Clears that blank spot. I couldn't quite fathom how he went from relatively unknown Vancouver Art Gallery to making these connections. JM: He met all these people and at that time was able to borrow things from people he knew. Phone up and say, Sherman, would you send me your whatever, and they'd say, yeah, it's on its way. There was no insurance problems and security problems the way there is now. I mean, today, to put a collection together, first thing you've got to do is pay for the insurance. And, you know, condition, qualifications. Everything was more freewheeling then. SS: Yes, nowadays it's difficult to get anything assembled and certain museums will classify particular works as being so important to their collection they won't ever loan them. JM: Well everything he did in Vancouver was on his own recognizance through personal connections and with no money. SS: Do you think.. .some people speak to.. .what I'm about to say as a situation of the times.. .do you think his status as a veteran of war helped him in these sorts of personal relationships? JM: Yes, it did because all the men, at any rate, that he was dealing with, were of that generation. I think it definitely did. SS: In the articles surrounding his arrival in Vancouver, well his arrival at the Vancouver Art Gallery, it's one of the first things they hail him as a war hero. It's important to hiring people in that position. JM: Yeah, I think it had right after the war, particularly in British Columbia, it had a huge influence and now you've just brought up something I've never thought of before. This has probably influenced men of his generation in America too. So, I mean, he never spoke of it and was actually very modest. In fact, on the dust cover of the book we ultimately published, about his wartime experiences, he doesn't mention his decorations or any honours at all. He was too modest to do that. But people know about that kind of thing after the war. SS: Do you know anything about your father's involvement with the Laing Gallery? I understand when he came to Toronto he started working for the [Blair] Laing Gallery at first? JM: Yes, I don't know quite how that happened but my understanding is that he was initially coming here to take a curatorial position at the Art Gallery of Ontario. And that offer was withdrawn, or something went wrong with that. SS: I should look into that. JM: So, I don't know where he met Blair Lang. I think he met him in San Francisco or.. .1 don't know how that happened but they offered him a partnership in the gallery because old Mr. Laing was getting past and Blair Laing was Dad's age and Dad wanted to leave America. He didn't like the right wing atmosphere in California at the time. He wanted to come back to Canada. Well, he didn't want to go back to Vancouver. That's going back on the past, which he didn't want to do. Edmonton and Calgary were out. Quebec has got its own whole life, so if you want to come back and be an art dealer, I think he had had it with being a museum curator because he got sick of the board of 303 directors and being told what to do all the time, being constrained. For him, an art dealer was about putting on shows without having a board of directors. SS: He mentions too, at one point, that he realized that starting a little late in the game of the museum profession and also knowing that he probably wasn't going to get the sort of advancement that he desired, that it wasn't a means to make a living for his family. He was saying that. JM: I think he realized there was only so far he could go. He stayed at the Laing Gallery about two years. Found that that wasn't working out, that in fact, although he remained friends with Blair Laing, he was not given what he had been promised. He decided to leave and open his own gallery. SS: Okay. How did your father come to meet Emilio del Junco? Am I saying that right? JM: ... Emilio's family were wealthy Cuban exiles. Very cultured. I think his daughter is a violist and one is a doctor. I'm not sure about the del Junco family but Emilio was intensely interested in art. He was an architect, actually. I'd just been looking at a book on Cuban Modernist architecture and there's Emilio del Junco's house. Emilio was a tragic figure because he became ill and ultimately died young. But he was one of these exuberant, well Latin, very small, dapper guy who had quite an influence on me because Dad never cared about the trappings of being an art dealer. SS: [Revealing a photograph of Jerrold and Emilio in front of a Roy Lichtenstein work at the Morris International Gallery] Have you seen that photograph? JM: No, I never have. SS: It's in the files at the Art Gallery of Ontario. JM: No, I've never seen it. What a great picture. 304 SS: Yeah, that's what I thought, too. It's a nice big black and white eight by ten print and on the back of it says "Jerrold Morris, left, and Emilio del Junco at their exhibition, The New School of New York. October 19..." I can't read it, I think 1964. JM: At that time the term Pop Art wasn't in wide use. That's why Dad called ... [another] show, The Art of Things, and [in the photo] The New School of New York. But Emilio loved the trappings of being an art dealer. He subscribed to every luxury art magazine and I started reading The Village Voice and other things. My Father was never bothered with all of that, you know, being an art dealer and the trappings of the art world. SS: So were they friends or more business partners? JM: No, they were very good friends and Dad wrote an obituary for Emilio that was published in Artscanada after he died and he says, I can only remember the beginning of it, he said "I can not let Emilio slip away like this," because he basically killed himself. He was dying, I think, of muscular sclerosis and he'd gone almost blind with some kind of eye disease. He was very dapper, artistic, cultivated, small man. A very amiable guy, someone I really liked and I got the impression that his family wasn't interested in seeing all this investment going into this gallery. SS: What was his position? Was he a partner? An equal partner? A part partner? JM: Well, he was the financial backer. SS: In the International Morris Gallery? JM: Dad had no money at all but he was... what the legality of it was... like, were they fifty-fifty partners? I have no idea. SS: Right. 305 JM: But Emilio was essentially the silent partner, supposedly, except he just became enamoured of the whole thing and his little office in the gallery and his desk, which was piled with luxurious art publications, you know, that Art International from Switzerland. He was a very cool guy. A very likeable guy and forever after when we closed that gallery and opened a new gallery on Prince Arthur, Emilio would come in all the time to hang out and talk. SS: So just for the record, he was involved in a partnership with the Morris International Gallery and then... JM: Not with the second gallery. SS: Not with the Prince Arthur Gallery? JM: Not at all. SS: I just want to bring your attention to the year 1963, when your father showed The Art of Things, at the Morris International Gallery. On the date of the 12th of October, 1963, the Toronto Daily Star newspaper reported that your father's gallery and David Mirvish's gallery were in a, quote, "race" to get the first Pop show up in Toronto. Do you recall this being the case? That Mirvish and your father were competing? JM: No, not at all. SS: I didn't think so. JM: Not at all. I actually think David never had any interest in Pop Art. SS: And to this day I don't think he does. JM: No, I think he's horrified by the idea of being a Pop Art dealer. SS: Yes, yes. 306 JM: In fact, I even elicited a comment from David recently about.. .we were talking about [how] both galleries started sort of at the same time, to try and explain to somebody else who was present and David went into colour field, almost exclusively and our gallery was more Pop Art and figurative, generally speaking. Including all the British sculptors like Armitage and Moore and Hepworth and Butler, you know. We were always interested in the figure and there's no figure in anything that David ever did. I think David even said "Oh God forbid that I should ever have gone that way." [... / returning to the Toronto Daily Star article on the Pop shows in Toronto] SS: "Pop Art Pops Up in Toronto". So, in this article they frame it so that your father and him [Mirvish] were in a race to expose Pop Art. JM: That's a good way of putting it. SS: ... Mirvish has a fantastic anecdote about Andy Warhol coming to his gallery and seeing an exhibition, so I know that they had contact. I'll ask him whether he had a Warhol show. But this show, which I believe was the opening show for Mirvish, was Pop Art, which is kind of interesting. JM: That's extraordinary because David never mentioned it. What were the dates of that? So David's show was... SS: He opened.. .the date of that article was the 12th of October, 1963, and I think that the show was maybe [on] the 10th, or something like that. JM: Here it says "Mirvish got the first Pop show in Toronto in a race with the Jerrold Morris International Gallery." 307 SS: I think it was either the press wanted to think there was a competition between the galleries and I guess they might have perceived it that way with two Pop shows coming at once. JM: Yeah, they go on to say that the Morris Gallery had more important things but that David was first. Well I know that David.. .1 must ask David about this. This is a secret life. SS: Well look at that. That's quite the figure in his tux. [referring to the photo of Mirvish in the newspaper article from 1963] JM: Extraordinary. I've never heard David mention this at all. Of course, I wasn't really paying attention to what was going on. David Mirvish, nineteen [years old]! SS: I know, it's incredible. And all the accounts in the media of them.. .well, first of all, unfortunately, he's framed as the tycoon's son, you know, and forever framing him that way but they also mention in all the articles how incredibly thoughtful, quiet and smooth he was in his manner, so nothing's changed. JM: Well, when I was that age I was wasting my time studying English at the University of Toronto. SS: Yeah, wasting your time. That's funny. JM: I would drop into Dad's gallery every now and then but I wasn't... SS: I was in England when I was nineteen and twenty, studying art history and, well, other things, but that was my first year of university. Yeah, loving it. Well okay, I'm glad to know there wasn't some sort of heated competition between them. JM: Oh no, not at all. I mean, this is the first I've ever known of it. I think it was probably completely different things and not really related, but that was a flash in the pan for David because he's never been interested in.. .1 don't think there's a figurative thing in David's house or in any of his warehouses that I can think of. SS: There is actually. [...] .. .So, I enjoyed the anecdote about your father's gallery on Bloor by Jane Urquhart, you sort of mailed me and told me about that. That was nice, what you sent to me. Do you recall this gallery, the Morris International Gallery? JM: Oh yes. SS: Can you give me your impression of it? JM: It was spectacular. I wish I had appreciated it more when it was there and I was young. Dad thought he would run a New York style gallery so of course, many New York galleries are off the street. It was enormous. SS: It was up on the second level or the third? JM: Yes, it was on the sixth floor. SS: Sixth floor? JM: It was huge. I can show you some photographs of it. I'll dig them out afterwards. SS: Yes. JM: And totally modern. We used to call it the tin gallery. The walls were all enameled steel panels and we couldn't put a nail in the wall, we had to glue picture hooks on. You know, those glue on picture hooks? SS: That's interesting. Did you hang framed works that way? JM: Yeah, everything had to be hung that way. SS: Did he design it that way or was the space rented and it was that way? 309 JM: Well, the space was.. .it was one of those modular spaces. You could put it anyway you liked but that's how the building was built. It was all modern furniture, which had been custom made from.. .there was a store in Toronto, which was called Shelia's, I think, which was the avant-garde store for Danish furniture. So all of the beautiful storage cabinets had beautiful teak fronts and gray corduroy curtains. It was gorgeous. It's the kind of gallery I would like to have now but I was a bit of a young fogy, as the English called them at that time. I mean my ideal was Georgian. I felt much happier in the Victorian house that we moved to. It's only now in retrospect I look back, having become a Modernist in my old age, under the influence of my wife basically, that I think if I had a gallery now, that's what I'd want, my Dad's gallery. But I didn't appreciate it at the time. I mean, look at the pictures of stuff in there! ... SS: Do you remember your impressions of that? Feeling that this was advanced art, or were you feeling that... JM: No, because it was a kind of.. .mostly it was a sort of art that was, people of my generation grew up looking at it as what abstract art should look like. I mean, it was still painting and sculpture, whereas now it's gone completely off on many different tangents. SS: Yes, well it's conceptual. JM: But it was very luxurious. No money had been spared in making everything just beautiful. There was also a lot of stuff. There was a half a dozen people working there, secretaries and assistants. SS: Was it multiple rooms or one room? 310 JM: Several rooms. It was huge and it rambled on and.. .they got involved in all kinds of nutty things. They had a factory turning out artist's jig saw puzzles and toys and a Harold Town jigsaw puzzle. SS: Very interesting. JM: And no end of expense in importing things from all over the world... pottery from Israel, or Botaro canvases from South America. SS: I can't help but keep thinking about a Harold Town jigsaw puzzle. JM: There must be some still around. SS: Did they take one piece out just to frustrate everybody? To keep a sense of Harold Town in it? JM: Yes, well he was such a bastard really. You'll see from the photographs. I've got some pictures of Dad unpacking [inaudible] pottery and I'm looking at it. The cost of running a gallery was immense. SS: Yes, that's what I understand reading the articles explaining the closure of the gallery. That over and over again he was saying it was the overhead that did it. JM: It was killing him and they closed it in a rational manner. They said we can't go on with this so let's pay everybody and shut it. I don't know what Dad intended to do at that point but when we reopened it was on a much more rational scale. SS: Do you remember what the gallery on Bloor Street.. .if there was some sort of mission or some sort of mandate, or some sort of reason why they.. .the purpose for the gallery? He's called the Morris International Gallery... KM: Yes, that was really deliberately and the logo, they had a really nice logo, a modern print with a red globe in the middle of it. You know, showing the world. And they did 311 bring art from everywhere. So in a way, it continued my Father's career at the Vancouver Art Gallery. American art, British art. This painting behind me, Harold Cohen, was one of the big British abstract painters of the '60's. Bernard and Harold Cohen. There again, it cost so much to ship these painting over here that we bought them, rather than send them back. That's why I still have a collection of them. SS: That's great. JM: So there is absolutely no control over the cost until Dad finally said, look, we have to stop this. It's too bad because they were turning over a lot of money. I mean the figure which I've been told, which I don't if it's true, is that they were grossing about a million dollars a year, which was a lot of money then. But they weren't making any money then. SS: Yes, a newspaper article was saying, million dollar gallery closing. JM: It's a shame because I think it was the best gallery Toronto's ever seen. SS: This leads to my next question actually really nicely. I understand that your father was bothered by the fact that many Canadians weren't in the habit of purchasing advanced art in the 1960's and that the Canadian government wasn't supportive enough. This was in the early 60's. Do you remember this disappointment? Was your father disappointed? JM: No, well yes, I don't know what Dad expected from the government. There's this farcical brouhaha with the National Gallery over not allowing the Brillo boxes [by Andy Warhol] in. SS: Yes, I'm coming to that question. JM: Dad didn't expect support from the government but people just didn't buy. 312 SS: Did he have this sense of... a lot of people called it a particularly Canadian condition of.. .you probably understand this yourself as an art dealer, that it's not like in New York City where there's this energetic market purchasing art. JM: There's a pressure cooker in New York that's partially about hoping you buy the right thing and making money. Partly about social intercourse with the artist community and the prestige that brings and competition with other collectors. Plus, everybody goes to New York. I mean, if you go to a new area like the meatpacking district, which has sprung up out of nowhere. All the factories are now very expensive galleries with people sitting on their Macintoshes. If everything in the gallery isn't fifty grand, you never heard of it. You think, where does that money come from? Well, every German and Italian and Brazilian millionaire is going to go to the meat-packing district. Toronto's not a destination. Toronto was a fatal place to open a gallery like my Father's. And if he opened that same gallery today, showing exactly the same thing, it would fail again, even at the same prices like that. SS: That's a good point. JM: That gallery was doomed to fail. By the way, you can ask David about this. David Mirvish and my Dad opened at more or less the same time. David is a great success. He has a fabulous collection. Probably the best colour field painting collection in the world. Yet David's gallery was just as much a failure as my Father's was, as David will tell you. He didn't sell anything but David had the wherewithal to say, okay, to hell with it, if you don't want to buy it I'm going to put it in the warehouse, whereas in our case, the unsold work was all dissipated. It was sent back to New York, or England, or South America. SS: Is that because the works were taken on commission as opposed to... 313 JM: They were taken on commission. So, Toronto, I think, not digressing from your thesis... SS: No, no it's not. It's actually important. JM: I think Toronto is a tragic city for anyone creative or ambitious because there are enough people here to draw you in. It's a city that's got a lot of very interesting people in it. A lot of wonderful people. SS: And a lot of moneyed people, which is strange. JM: A lot of money. Well, the trouble is most of that money is dormant, it's not going into the arts. Toronto's one of the most, for now at any rate, one of the most sophisticated and culturally aware cities in the world but there isn't enough to really support a front rank commercial enterprise in the arts. Another great gallery that opened was the Dunkleman Gallery. They were very nice collectors, very wealthy. Opened a gallery just down the street from our second gallery. They had my Father's taste and knowledge and unlimited money to do anything they liked. They had things like a Gonzalez bronze mask show, a Twombly painting show. That kind of thing. After a few years, although they didn't need to make money with it, they just got tired of the brutal lack of response and they said, okay, we're closing. SS: It does actually does relate to my dissertation in the sense that I will be arguing that there's a sense of a sort of deferred modernism in Canada. It's always slightly removed. It's not just essentially behind the times, it's just that it seems it's always put off or, there's a respect for modern art but it's not collected in an aggressive manner. There's an understanding that there is other art out in the world but it's not yet accepted in the schools or by the teachers or by the majority of artists. 314 JM: I don't know if it's just a population problem, I mean we've obviously got a lot fewer people here than in most major cities. You can't compare Toronto with New York or London or Paris and it's not fair to do so but I think there are, as I say, I think it's a tragic trap to start something as ambitious as what my Father did in Toronto. That you're drawn in and you've got fifty people who are wonderful. They're loyal, they love you, they buy, but you need five hundred. And it's not just the art business. It's like any creative business here and I think it's the same for artists. You can reach a certain level here, as I heard Ron Bloore say once, you can reach a certain plateau and that's all you can do. Now, if you're in a great city like New York, there's a lot more competition but at least there's a possibility of going beyond the plateau, whereas here, no matter how good you are, you can't. Unless you're a photo realist, there is that, then you can break out into the outside world. So it's interesting to note that your other subject of an interview, David [Mirvish], will give you the other side. He'll give you the optimistic side of my pessimistic coin. David would never say what I'm saying except that he will admit that if he hadn't been able to do what he wanted and keep all the things he showed. On the face of it, he didn't do any better than Dad because the clientele was not here. It just struck me recently, somebody was asking me about the gallery, that if Dad opened that same gallery now it would fail for the same reasons because Toronto hasn't improved that much. It's a lot bigger but what's going on out in the 905 area really doesn't really matter. The Toronto that we're talking about is south of the 401. It's the old city, the city of Toronto rather than the Megacity, or whatever they call it. The amalgamated city. 315 SS: Well speaking of getting outside of Toronto, do you recall anything at all about your father's Andrew Morris Gallery in New York City?... JM: That was a partnership that I think was engineered by Emilio and the idea was to promote Canadian artists in New York and it was a failure. I think they had.. .1 know they had one, or maybe two major Harold Town shows there, which really didn't sell. I mean, why would people in New York be interested in buying Harold Town? They could go buy a Hans Hoffman. I've got on file a number of acerbic letters from Harold saying that the gallery wasn't supporting him enough, wasn't doing enough for him because he was never grateful. He was always ungrateful. SS: I've talked to a lot of people in the Toronto art scene. It's so funny. It's across the board. The attitude toward Harold Town is so uniform. It's the same from everybody. JM: Well he was a charismatic figure. Very witty, very entertaining, but a real bastard. But anyway, I've lost the thread. What was I saying? SS: You were saying, the shows in New York, of Town's, failed, right? JM: Yes, everything they did there failed and ultimately they just had to stop that. SS: Did you ever visit that gallery? JM: No, I didn't and to tell you the truth, the whole thing is still a little bit of a mystery to me. I don't know what happened. I wish I had asked Dad more about this when he was alive. I wished we'd done a book or something, except Dad said.. .Dad has written about his pre-war life and about his wartime life. He once joked with me that if he wrote frankly about his life in the art world, in Canada, not only would he have to leave the country, but I would have to leave the country because he had a pretty dim view of it when he looked back. 316 SS: That's maybe, if you don't have anything nice to say, why say anything at all. JM: That was his motto. He basically didn't look back but when I suggested why don't you write a bio of your life, as an art dealer in Toronto, he said no. There were too many bad things, too many bad people. It's a shame but I still would give somebody the same advice. If they want to have a life in the arts, go to one of the major cities. SS: Yeah, exactly. JM: As difficult as that is. What we have here, I think, is we've got more performing arts now. We've got a great opera, great symphony hall. Thanks to David Mirvish we've got a lot of really nice theatres. I just went to see Medea at the Canon. It's a beautiful theatre. [...] SS: Well it's interesting because the Morris Gallery in New York City had such a great location, 57th and 5th. It just seems like it would just make itself but it's unfortunate. [...] JM: Other people tried it though you know. Walter Moos and Mira Goddard and I think Waddington also. Well, Waddington, we used to joke about him being a chain operation. You know Waddington's were all over the place. Nobody succeeded. They all went through a... SS: It's funny, you'd think, well let's take the same gallery in Toronto and if that's the scene then let's put it in New York, it's got to do well. JM: It didn't, because you really couldn't promote Canadian art in Toronto and you can't parachute into New York I think at a certain point. It's better if you're there, you've got contacts, you've got a start. I think the overhead is crippling for one thing. 317 SS: At 57th and 5th, yeah. You mentioned it briefly.. .what do you recall of the Warhol soup carton scandal? The Brillo boxes I guess. And customs, with the National Gallery's Charles Comfort in '65? JM: Well, this is pretty well known, the bones of it is, at that time, the National Gallery had to certify a sculpture coming into the country as a work of art and they refused to. SS: Comfort, yes. JM: So therefore, duty would have had to been paid, although the duty would have been nothing. I think it would have cost two thousand dollars each or something at the time. But Dad, as a matter of principle, refused and never had them. He never had them in the gallery. SS: Oh, your father? JM: I don't think he ever got them through customs because then there was this big brouhaha. SS: As a matter of principle he didn't want to pay the duty or... JM: He didn't want to pay the duty. SS: Okay, it sounded like you were saying he didn't want to recognize them as sculpture either but no, not at all. JM: Oh no. Dad was trying to avoid this. He said I'm not paying the duty as a commercial... SS: Because that would validate saying that they're not art. JM: Yes, exactly, so he got in a public row with.. .1 think the curator was Hubbard at the National Gallery. SS: It was Charles Comfort. 318 JM: Oh yes, it was Charles Comfort. Charles Comfort, you're right, and ultimately the law was changed so that the National Gallery was no longer on the hot seat SS: The authority right? JM: Well they probably didn't want that anyway. Better taken away from them. But I don't .. .for years I didn't know whether Dad had actually got the Brillo boxes here. I think, piecing together some of the articles you've shown me, plus I have no photographic record of them ever being here. I've got photographs of the Pop Art show but there's no Brillo box in there. SS: There's an article about it. JM: I just think they went back to New York and that was the end of that. SS: [Looking through articles] I just want to see. I can't recall. The St. Thomas Times Journal of Ontario, March 6, 1965... "Soup cartons not sculptures Comfort says. Jerrold Morris, manager of a Toronto art gallery, said in an interview Thursday that the National Gallery refused to recognize Pop Art. He charged the gallery had refused to issue a certificate saying eighty facsimiles of soup and soap pad cartons are works of art and should be allowed into the country duty free. The cartons are part of an exhibition by New York Pop artist Andy Warhol, scheduled to open at Mr. Morris's gallery March 18. Mr. Comfort told a press conference Friday, that article 695C of the handbook of customs and excised tariffs exempts from duties only original sculptures or replicas made there from..." blah blah blah.. .He said he does not consider Andy Warhol's soup and soap cartons as sculptures but as aesthetic objects." JM: But then they should have qualified. SS: Yeah, it doesn't say. 319 JM: But look at the number of them there were. I didn't know that. Eighty? SS: Well, because I know that for every flavour of Campbell's Soup out there he, Warhol did a... JM: But Dad was trying to import eighty of these boxes? I wonder if that's correct? SS: It's saying that your father charged the gallery because it refused to issue a certificate saying eighty facsimiles of soup and soap pad cartons are works of art. Facsimiles, it's strange, I like the fact that they're calling them facsimiles too. JM: When you look back on it now it's all really so trivial and.. .but it mattered then. It stopped the exhibition from going on as it had been planned. SS: Well it's interesting, Charles Comfort was the director who was more conservative and he took over after a directorship that was less conservative and sort of controversial. Alan Jarvis. JM: Yes, I've met Alan Jarvis. SS: I wanted to ask you if you ever encountered Alan Jarvis. JM: It was only socially. He was a charming man. Tall, handsome man. I think he was gay- SS: Yes. JM: And very witty. Very erudite. SS: Almost everybody says handsome, too. JM: And bitter. He resigned on a matter of principle because of an argument with the Diefenbaker government but he didn't realize what a devastating blow that would be. He never got back into a major job. Do you know David Silcox? SS: Oh yes. JM: The guy who wrote the Milne catalogue, and he's now the head of Sotheby s. He told me a couple of anecdotes, a couple of funny things that Jarvis said if you want to hear it. I don't want to waste your time. SS: No, I do. Jarvis is interesting. JM: He said that when he died he hoped to go to hell because then he would just think he was still in Toronto. SS: That's funny. JM: And he called Yonge Street five miles of outhouses leaning up against Eaton's. I mean, you've got to remember how awful Toronto was, how awful Canada was in that era, for a sophisticated, intellectual, moral gay guy. SS: Yes. Well I was friends for quite some time with Alan Jarvis's wife of convenience, so to speak, and she knew that he was gay and she was left with three children after being widowed. So when he got the position at the National Gallery of Canada, Alan called up Betty and said, now I'll take the position but only if you'll marry me. JM: This is all interesting. I don't know any of this. SS: Yes, Jarvis is going to be one of the biographies I'll be looking into because he was one of the first Canadian-bred art historians that had some actual weighty authority [...] JM: I don't know the exact dispute. He resigned on a point of honour. SS: Yes, what happened is, there's a sticky acquisition from the Prince of Liechtenstein and apparently what had happened was Jarvis had been dealing with him and had apparently promised to purchase something but you know, the National Gallery can't purchase anything with out the parliament... JM: Yes, they didn't come through with a purchase, which he guaranteed personally. 321 SS: It was that, but according to.. .now I wish I had officially interviewed Betty Jarvis about this because she tells me her side of the story is, yes there was all that controversy but one of the main controversies was that there was some sort of quilt or carpet or something. I can't remember the exact story, that had something to do with the Queen [and her visit to Canada] and Jarvis had made some sort of snide comment about this becoming a distraction or something negative toward the Queen and that rubbed certain people on the Board of Trustees the wrong way. Anyway, he rubbed a few people the wrong way but in actuality, people such as Jean Sutherland Boggs look back on Jarvis as a very important time in the gallery's history because of what he did acquire successfully. He got the one and only very nice Henry Moore sculpture there. ... There's an Epstein there. Alan Jarvis was a sculptor himself. He was one of the first real sympathizers with modern artists you know. JM: You could do a whole thesis just on him. SS: I know. JM: I think he's a much bigger figure than anyone knows. SS: I agree. I totally agree and he's been written about by certain individuals in a very incorrect manner and not a lot has been brought up about him but to do a sort of monograph dissertation is suicide unfortunately. So I do plan to spend time on Alan Jarvis but devoting an entire dissertation to one person, unless it's Michelangelo, is really tricky. JM: See, I only know of him because of my parents and I know vaguely about the art historical part, and you know him because you're researching the period, but most people never heard of him. 322 SS: Most people don't, but what's nice is that just essentially looking at what he acquired for the National Gallery for the brief years 1955 to 1959 is great stuff. Really fantastic stuff. I own a sculpture by him actually. I have very few works of art but I have a sculpture by him. JM: Oh, good for you. SS: Yes. He was a sculptor and he was very close with Douglas Duncan. JM: Another giant figure about which everybody knows so you don't have to do anything more on Douglas Duncan. SS: Well, I think more should be done on Douglas Duncan [...] he had that Picture Loan Society which is a British approach to selling art [...] JM: His business methods, his absent-mindedness was also very British and his lack of interest in money, you know, of a certain type of British academic. SS: There's a lot of forgotten biographies out there and I think Alan Jarvis is one that needs more attention. There's a Canadian Art issue that featured him on the cover and it said "The most beautiful man in art history", or Canadian art history. But the article is very flawed. But anyway, I'm realizing I've skipped ahead on some of my questions. JM: What are you going to do when you try to listen to this discourse ramble? SS: Transcribe it. [...] .. .1 wanted to ask you to what extent do you think your father was trying to consciously promote Canadian art beyond Canada's own borders? JM: I wish I knew more about the New York gallery and I wish I had talked to Dad more about it. I just don't know. 323 SS: It wasn't too long though. It was just a year or two. JM: Yes, it was just two years. It's too bad Emilio isn't around to ask. I think Emilio had a much larger role than anybody knows. SS: I wonder if he kept a memoir? JM: That would be interesting to know. I've got a feeling that his family disapproved of the whole thing and that you might not get a favourable reception, but that would be interesting if he did. SS: That would be very interesting. JM: Because he's kind of an unknown figure. I don't think he'd ever have public presence if it wasn't through this connection with Dad. SS: Did he ever have a gallery in Cuba? JM: No, he was an architect. SS: Oh yes, right. JM: It may not be the same Emilio del Junco but I was just looking at this Cuban Modernist, before the revolution. All these buildings were built just before the revolution. Bauhaus type modern buildings and there's Emilio del Junco's house. And I think it must be the same guy. SS: Well John, we should really go to Cuba and investigate. I think that's exactly the type of research project... JM: As long as it's not 20 below. [...] SS: ... I just want to ask you in general, from your impression of having been in Toronto during the 60's. This is a very vague question but would you agree that there was a 324 distinct shift in Canada in the 1960's toward more interest in American art than ever before? JM: Well, inevitably I think, because really, that's when American art became the most powerful art in the world. Starting in the 40's but in the 60's it got recognition and expanded beyond its own borders. And I think there's no doubt that Canadians became more aware of it. But you're talking about a tiny group of people. I mean, most Canadians.. .if you go out on the corner of Bloor and Avenue Road today and ask a thousand people have they ever heard of Jackson Pollock, one might say yes. SS: You think so, really? JM: Yeah. I mean, you're dealing with, essentially, a profoundly uninterested population in anything. SS: I have here a list of works from the files of the Art Gallery of Ontario which is a record of all the works that came from the galleries associated with you and your father since 1961. JM: Yes, I've seen that. SS: I wanted to go through the list and, if anything interesting about these acquisitions come into mind, to share your thoughts. And I should say that I'm especially interested in the reserves of Englishness in Canada and the turn toward abstract American art in the 1960's. If there's anything that popped out at you. So you've seen this list then? JM: Yes, my researcher who was competing with you for the same. I thought that would be a very interesting list and reading it I found it really depressing. In fact, I think it's a disgrace. 325 SS: Yes? What do you think it says of the Art gallery of Ontario and their habits in purchasing? JM: It says the Art Gallery of Ontario did not support this revolutionary and invaluable gallery that my Father ran. Most of what is bought there is either prints or something else inexpensive or minor. SS: Or Canadian. You know, sort of part of their... JM: And the few major things that were bought, were bought by the.. .Women's Committee. The Women's Committee, if I look at my own records, they were the ones who bought and that was wealthy, artistically inclined women, led by... [Mrs.] Eaton and Mrs. Zacks. SS: And Mrs. Parkin too. JM: And Mrs. Parkin. But if you look through that, it's very, very skimpy. SS: Considering it goes back to '61. JM: Yes, if you consider that, from '61 to '84, when my Father died. SS: A Rauschenberg, but it's a print. JM: Yup. I mean, I basically... if you look through that [list] and you cross out everything that is a print, then you're left with very little. SS: Very true, yeah. JM: I mean, it's actually stunning how little was bought. Here, let me have a quick look. I'll just refresh my memory because I looked at it once a few days ago and I didn't look at it again. Okay, no look, let's discount.. .I'll tell you what I'm going to do. I'm going to go through it very quickly and I'll make a tiny mark beside anything that I think actually counts. SS: You're earmarking the stuff of importance, yes. JM: I'm marking the stuff. So discount the J. H. MacDonald, In the White Forest. It's a beautiful canvas. The Canadian.. .1 don't count Canadiana, you know, like The Group of Seven or other... SS: As an avant-garde purchase in terms of art? JM: No, absolutely not. These are not, and furthermore, the Canadiana department always did buy from us. That's Dennis Reid for a long part of this time. So never mind that. Never mind the Helen McNicholl, the Challener, another Challener. Henry Martin, out. Albert Moore, okay there is something that counts. That is a European drawing. By the way, I don't know what these mean. It looks like prints but it's not. 77 / 200? This is an original drawing that's not a print. SS: There may be an accession number. JM: Yes, it's an accession number. SS: The year '77 was their... JM: J.W.G. MacDonald, Morrice, Holgate, Brooker, Brooker, Pegi Nicol. These are all Canadian. I mean, that doesn't count in my opinion. SS: It doesn't reflect the international capacity of the gallery. JM: Larry Rivers, it's a lithograph. Claude Breeze head drawings. Minor, they were a hundred dollars. Frankenthaler print, Brooker, Brooker, Brooker, Brooker, Brooker.. .we represented the estate. Bloore, okay, good for them, they bought a Ronald Bloore. Joy Walker, that's a fifty dollar print. Okay, well this is good, they bought a Harold Town, Great Seal #1. If I showed you my records you'd see most of these major purchases are by the Women's Committee, but I still don't really count that. 327 SS: They're usually funds raised then gifted to the Art Gallery of Ontario, so they're not from the general acquisition funds. JM: My records show who really bought it. SS: Yes, yes. JM: There's a Lynn Chadwick sculpture. Okay that's good. SS: Mark that. JM: I'm going to mark that. That counts. I don't think I've come to anything so far that I can consider worthy of being marked. SS: You marked one. JM: A Nakamura, an Oscar Cahen, Cuevas sketchbook page. So minor, you're looking at things that are hundreds of dollars. Harold Town, Molinari, Oscar Cahen, Harold Town, Harold Town, David Partridge, Robert Rauschenberg print, Kathe Kollwitz etching. Andy Warhol, Elvis one and two, that was the Women's Committee, but that counts. It's now worth more than the whole building of course. Harold Town, Rauschenberg, print, Jasper Johns, print, a good one but Brian Fischer, James Rosenquist. These are all prints. Now there's something, Reg Butler, sculpture. They actually have it on display down there. It's beautiful. Probably the best thing Butler ever did. Most likely 1200 bucks or maybe it was 35 hundred. These are all Canadian. Horatio Walker, Marmaduke Matthews, pencil. Okay, I'll give them a credit for that. This is one of the nicest things they ever bought from us. It's a big Erich Heckel mountain landscape. Blue and white grid picture. Barnsley, Manly. That's an interesting thing. I never knew Dad had a Marcel Duchamp, you know, one of the suitcase things. Then more Canadian. George Richmond, a tiny little drawing, okay, but still. Varley, Rauschenberg, Gonzalez, little 328 drawing. Toronto Twenty print, Challener, a tiny little Max Pechstein, Female Nudes in Palua Landscape. That's when Kathy Lochnan was the curator of drawings. Every single person in the Art Gallery of Ontario had to come in and vet it before they bought it, including the janitor. So, you're looking at six things in thirty years. Doesn't mean anything. I look at that and it just depresses me. SS: I'm glad you went through it because I was... JM: It looks like a lot. SS: It looks substantial. JM: But when you actually look at it, it's meaningless. SS: Yes, it's sixty-five works in total. JM: Of which six you could actually count. You go ahead, I'm listening to you. SS: No, actually, to be totally honest with you, that was my last question unless something strikes you that I should ask you that I haven't. No, that was fantastic. Thank you, that's great. I'd like to see the photographs. If you don't mind I'll keep recording because it will remind me of what's what. JM: My wife told me, don't be bitter and try and keep on top of it. I'm driving the poor girl nuts. SS: Eleanor said that? That's too funny. JM: Well, I do tend to. SS: You're not bitter. You haven't driven me crazy. You'll have a problem getting rid of me. I might crawl into your cupboard there and take a nap. I wanted to ask you the last time we met, because you did show me some of the photographs, and I would be so pleased if I could reproduce one or two for my dissertation. 329 JM: Which photographs? Oh yes, sure, of course. SS: Some of the Morris International Gallery. JM: Oh sure, sure. They're interesting. I've got no hold over them. The more it's publicized the better. [...] SS: These are great, especially the record of The Art of Things. JM: I've actually got a little piece of film, a TV film, that a very nice guy at the CBC sent me of my Mother at the Andy Warhol exhibition that had the electric chairs. And my Mother, who was basically an English stage actress with fake upper class accent, is standing in front of these saying "Oh I want my husband to buy me the green one and I think Pop Art is here to stay of course." And some smartass, who was mocking my Mother, said "I don't know. Are you really so sure?" I'd love to get a hold of him and say go down and have a curator tell you that those paintings are worth more than the whole building. SS: That's true. JM: Pop Art is here to stay. SS: You're mom was beautiful. JM: Mom was right and everybody else was wrong. SS: Thank you for sharing this with me. And thank you for sharing all your thoughts. I'm going to release you from recording now. ~ END OF INTERVIEW Appendix D Sarah Stanners interviews Sir Anthony Caro, sculptor Date: 14 February 2008 Location: Georgiana Street Studio, London, UK Digital recording transcribed and excerpted. Sarah Stanners: So I just prepared some questions because I'm sure in my nervousness I'll forget. Sir Anthony Caro: Go ahead. Don't be nervous. SS: As you know, I'll just cut to the questions that are important to me. I'm interested in the impact that Henry Moore made in Toronto and part of that story is why he chose Toronto to make such a large bequest of his body of work. .. .I'm wondering, in your opinion, because I've been unable to find concrete evidence... do you think with the sort of misinformation that was swirling around about whether the Tate had money for a new wing or whether they were going to expand the gallery for him, and also the controversy of the letter to the editor of The Times in '67... do you think that Moore felt a little bit slighted by the fact that there was no concrete promise of space in the Tate? Or that he felt nervous that there was such a strange reaction to it? Do you think that that controversy with the Tate had anything to do with his decision to bequeath works to Toronto? AC: I honestly don't know. SS: Okay [laughter]. It was worth asking. 330 331 AC: I couldn't say. I know what his reaction to the letter.. .1 know, but I don't really. You know I'd left by then so I wasn't in close touch with Henry Moore after I was his assistant. Then, if I knew, then I could have answered this question but this was long after, so I don't know. SS: I love this story that you were interested in his work and just went out to Hoglands [Moore's home and studio]. I think that's a great spirit to have. AC: He was a great guy. SS: Yeah, and I think that's fantastic. AC: Lovely man, lovely man. Very good to me. SS: And I think he was actually so careful of what he put out there, that I can't seem to find any evidence that he said that he was dissatisfied with the Tate because he was too much of a gentleman to actually say so. So I'm finding most of it is speculation. SS: When did you first travel to America and what were the circumstances? AC: 1959. ... I applied for an English Speaking Union travel grant. I tried in '58, failed to get it, and I tried in '59 and got it. And on that occasion I didn't go to Canada. SS: Do you remember when you first went to Canada? AC: I'm trying to remember, but I think it was near '63 when I was working at Bennington, living in Bennington. Probably then, it's certainly when I first met David [Mirvish] because he first came down in a little red sports car and loved our work. Me and Noland and Olitski, we were all living in Bennington. We couldn't believe that anybody would love our work. That was great.... And then, I think you know, then I had a show in David's gallery on Markham Street when it wasn't a big gallery, it was just two rooms in a house and I don't know what year that was, but we could look it up. I can't tell you exactly when, but that was probably the first time I went. 332 SS: And when this young man in a red sports car turned up, what did you think of.. .1 mean, what I like about Mr. Mirvish is his passion for the artwork, it's genuine, it's absolutely genuine. He really, truly loves your work. AC: He was nineteen... SS: That's what I wanted to ask you about. How did you feel about this, practically a teenager, enjoying your work? AC: We were all amazed and delighted. I mean, you know, people out there in the world didn't know what we were doing and didn't like it when they saw it. They thought we were mad you know, but David got it. SS: He says that he had such a hard time selling artwork that this is why he has this fantastic collection right now. That it was good luck that he was a poor salesman in art, so he's quite happy to have the works. .. .at that time of exhibiting with Mirvish at his gallery.. .do you remember seeing Jack Bush's work? AC: Yes, I knew Jack and he came to us, to our house here in London, and his wife I knew, and I went to their place. I don't ever remember going to Jack's studio. He was a lot older than me but he was supportive and, I mean, but in those days.. .who did I see? You know, I think they were all younger. I think it was a little after that I tended to get to know Toronto artists so really, basically, I got to know Canada well after Emma Lake and... [...] .. .but I think that's when I really began to get to know more about Canada because when I went, Toronto was sort of business but somehow after I'd been to Emma Lake, I think then they said well why don't you come and work in Edmonton.. .and do some, you know, that was when I got to know the Edmonton artists and there were a few. 333 [...] SS: Well, I was wondering more, sort of in general, do you recall in your mind at the time, or even now, feeling that there is a difference between Canada and America? AC: The people yes, but are you talking about the art? SS: Either or really. AC: I think the America I know is an older America. It's changed a lot in the last ten years. A lot. The Canadians I felt are kinder. I always felt that the English sent their naughty sons to Australia and their good sons to Canada. SS: I've never heard that. That's great. AC: I think I'm amazed at the hospitality of Canadians. I actually am amazed ... in America there's an edge to it. There was more of an edge to it in America. When I started Triangle Workshop, that was called Triangle because it was specifically for English, American and Canadian, because of three corners of the triangle. SS: In some cases there were some rather patriotic Canadians that felt a little bit like we've got a lot of these outsider artists coming into our country and trying to tell us what to do. Did you ever experience any of that? AC: No. I was.. .1 didn't get that at all, but as I say, it was more of the West and I think Western and Eastern Canada are two very different places. I think.. .no I don't think I ever experienced it at all, not at all, but I do think there's an incredible tradition of good art in Canada and people are making very good art and continue to. [...] .. .Edmonton is full of good artists and then there's a whole different thing happening in Calgary, which is exciting. And then Toronto, I think, is kind of closer to New York but you know we 334 often said if we didn't live in London, where would we live? We might probably live in Toronto, I think. Perhaps, perhaps. SS: For what reasons? AC: Well I think it's a better place to bring up children, you know... When our children were young we talked about it. SS: I agree. AC: And I feel it's kind of.. .it's American without being so aggressively American you know. SS: Yes. I do know. Speaking of Toronto, you have work, a piece at York University. Do you... AC: Well I did the work you know. I did a whole series at York. SS: Could you speak about that a little bit? AC: Well yes, I mean, that was David [Mirvish] because I had.. .somebody said to me, an Italian dealer, would you like to have a show in my gallery and make the work in Italy, and I said yes, and so we went to Italy and looked for a long time, and in the end, we found a place to work and I made about ten pieces where he had a factory, which I had never done before, and David came along and he saw the work and then he said I might be able to arrange for you to [inaudible] in Toronto, would that interest you? And I said yes, so he went to see Tannenbaum, who owned York Steel, and arranged for me to go and work at York Steel and I made about thirty sculptures there, very quickly, but I kept going back, kept going back all the time. In fact, I started off in a large, side part of the factory ... I did a whole lot of work in Toronto and we'd go back there and we got the work out of York Steel onto the campus at York University and then we had a crane and I would say 'let's change it, put it on it's side' or 'cut bits off and so on. SS: Oh great. Fantastic. 335 AC: One time we were sitting out there [in the fields around York University, Toronto] and we came back to England by the next plane and [when we got home].. .there were all these mites, these are Canadian mites, that had gotten on the car and they were crawling under my clothes... I must have gone back four or six times, I suppose, to keep on looking at the works, with a break each time because they had to be remade, you know, redone and I was helped with that... [...] SS: And David Mirvish was the catalyst that... AC: And David organized it, yeah, absolutely. David has got several of those pieces. SS: Do you remember the way it was received? Do you remember meeting people while you were working on it? How people received it? AC: I didn't talk to any other artists at that time. I talked to the guys who made it at the factory, you know, and they were wonderful. I said, 'I'm stuck with this Red.' He was the crane driver. 'What shall I do with it?' 'Turn it on its side.' I would never have imagined turning three tons on its side, but he knew how, and he did. They were great. They were great. You know, it was just the workers. We were up there, the first day we got there, at eight o'clock and they said, 'Were you lying in this morning?' You know, they worked hard. They'd finished early too... but they worked really hard. ... I had a pad, they gave me a pad. They called it The Artist's Shoppe. They gave me this pad and I could only have three or four sculptures at a time on the pad, so I would make them and every day I'd try and get one off, even if it wasn't finished I'd get it into a good enough state that they could be wielded up and then I could come back next time and look at it and that taught me a lot about a way to make sculpture here. So when I came back here I found I would make things in my garage. Little things in my garage at home. Quite quickly and 336 spontaneously and pack them up and put them away and don't look at them for six weeks or whatever, just like I did with the Canadian work. SS: This was because you were forced to fly back home and then... AC: Yes, once here I said don't look at them until they become fresh to you again, because each time the freshness was a real help to me.. .gave it a spontaneity about it, so it was good. I learned a lot from the Canadians... SS: That's interesting that it's distance that made you do that. AC: Well, in fact, you couldn't see them, otherwise you'd be messing about with them when things were being made and you'd say 'oh dear, change that,' but you don't want to do that... SS: You're forced to stop. Well that's great. That's really great. AC: But it isn't much help about Henry Moore. SS: No, no. Well, see, Henry Moore isn't the focus of my study but it's one chapter that I'm in the thick of at the moment. AC: Do you think that Henry Moore has had a big influence on Canadian sculpture? SS: What's interesting is, I think he had a big influence on the shape of the Art Gallery of Ontario in the way it's administered. .. .I'm reading some fan letters at the moment in the archives, [from people who] were really struck by his work. My argument is more the fact that he really, truly shaped the Art Gallery of Ontario and its pursuit of an international reputation. They were able to use Henry Moore as a way of gaining some world recognition. Yes, and Bill Withrow was the director of the gallery at the time of its expansion, to create a Henry Moore Sculpture Centre, and then today the Art Gallery of Ontario is being expanded 337 again under the architect Frank Gehry, and for the most part he's preserving [the Moore Sculpture Centre]. AC: Frank Gehry is a Canadian? SS: He is. He spent time growing up in Toronto. So, my argument is more to do with the shape of.. .it marks a time when Toronto wanted to have an international reputation. When Toronto wanted to be more with it and wanted to shed its reputation of being provincial. Part of what I've thought about with Henry Moore, is that on the flip-side it might be true that he may have been attracted to having a large collection in North America so that he could have more of an international profile himself. AC: I think the international thing is interesting because in a way I think that's what has happened on the West, on the West side, [here it] is much less. Well they are interested in Olitski's work and that sort of thing, but I think they are less focused. They used to be less focused on the international thing and it was a strength, and it worked. They have their own voice and I think that was very good. SS: Do you think that, for a sculptor like yourself, that going to North America was a sort of new frontier? AC: Oh yes. Absolutely. Absolutely, because, I mean to say, anything is possible there and history was not breathing down your neck, as it tended to do here. And I remember years ago looking at a book of sculpture with Henry, with Henry Moore, and when he came to the David Smith he said that's not sculpture, because he thought sculpture was mass. SS: The European tradition of it? AC: Yeah, I would say it was a Renaissance tradition and Davis Smith is a Cubist really, sort of, you know, post Cubist, and I think that was just a different thing. But I do think that America 338 gave me a tremendous freedom.. .but I remember even Karen Wilkin, who is.. .she lived in Edmonton for a while and she also lived in Toronto, I think. SS: Yes. She writes quite a bit about Jack Bush, too. AC: Yes, and so I mean, she's a good friend and I think I got along through her... [...] SS: So does this correlate with the sort of move in your work towards largeness and openness, or did that occur to you before you came [to North America]? AC: It started here. I think it started in the very beginning over here, but yeah, it's a free way of thinking, which is terrific. Now they've got a bit freer than here. SS: Speaking of going overseas to do things, I don't know if you've heard about it and I'm interested in what you think about this, and it has to do with shedding a mantle of, or maybe a burden of having history as a sculptor looking over your shoulder. There's the art of Simon Starling. Are you aware of his work? He won the Turner Prize in 2005 for doing ShedBoatShed... AC: Yes. SS: So he is about to exhibit a work in Toronto that is very Toronto-specific and what he's done is he's taken a sculpture, well, he's been inspired by a work of Henry Moore's, Warrior With Shield, a 1953-54 work. AC: I know, because the year he did that I was there. SS: And what he's done is, he's made a replica, well, it's an artist's rendition, technically speaking, because it can't be a copy. It's made of steel, it's slightly larger. He did gain permission from the previous director of the Moore Foundation to do this, and what he's done is, he sunk it to the bottom of Lake Ontario in an effort to have zebra mussels, which are a non- 339 native species of mussels, infest the piece. This has been going on for almost two years and it's been hauled out, about a month or so ago, and it is absolutely invaded by these foreign zebra mussels... AC: You eat them. SS: I don't know that you'd want to eat them [laughter]. They're a nuisance in Ontario because they are attaching themselves to all sorts of ships. They've become the dominant species in the Great Lakes and they're not at all from there, they're from the Baltic Sea. Very strange. So this piece has been hauled out and there's been a process of trying to kill the meat and adhere the shells but it will be on display at The Power Plant Contemporary Art Gallery and it has been acquired by the AGO. According to the artist, it's speaking to this move, this sort of transatlantic exchange of non-native species or non-native artists. Okay, so that in a nutshell, that's what it is. So, the Warrior With Shield is standing.. .and it's interesting how these mussels have attached themselves to this work. So it's much to the horror of many people, and then also to the delight of many people. I'm finding that some people love it, they think it's fantastic. Some people absolutely hate it. I'm interested in what you think about this sort of process of current contemporary British artists throwing back or at least making comments on their fathers. I mean, it's hard for you to form an opinion, since you haven't seen the work. AC: I haven't seen the work, but basically, I don't want to hear stories. I want to look. In the end, all that matters is what you see. I don't want to hear the story and that is all a story. SS: Yes. That is, I have to say, a very perceptive reaction to it because most people... AC: It probably is good and there are sculptures and paintings which have stories and so on, but the primacy of storytelling I think is something that we, in this country, had ever since Blake, and I detest it. I don't think that art is illustration, I think it's art. 340 SS: Is this any way connected to what Michael Fried talks about in presentness? I'm curious about the chicken or egg... I'm wondering whether Fried, seeing work like yours, inspired him to think about thoughts of presentness in artworks and at-oneness or whether it was a development of a theory and that he searched it out later? AC: I have no idea. Michael always understood my work and he's wonderful in the studio and I always have a great time with him. I doubt if I've ever had any influence on his mind at all because he's got a great mind. SS: Your studio, or I think it's either yourself or himself in your studio, is the cover for a collection of his essays and criticisms, do you know that? AC: ... Well he spent a lot of time with me. I mean every time he comes... we spend more time in the studio when we can. [...] but there are others and Terry Fenton and Karen's good, you know. And they're all good in different ways, which is wonderful. It's great. I'm very much for them and very much for workshops and the people talking to one another. Kicking up against one another. Tripping over each other's work and saying, 'Look, I'm stuck, what do you think I should do?' Or, 'How do you like this piece?' Or, you're having a problem with the right hand side. You know, all that, I think that's the way a lot of art gets made and I think talking back and forth like ping-pong is great. SS: So a process of education. Mutual, really. AC: Well, sort of, yeah. Mutual stimulation and in so long as there's a friendly feeling, and not an aggressive... not a tribal way, but a feeling of yeah, I'd love to see what you 're doing and hopefully someone might say something useful. SS: Did you have a positive experience at Emma Lake? 341 AC: Yes. Yes, yes, yes. I worked at Emma Lake with Doug Bentham. He very kindly helped me and I worked in a clearing in the woods. I had to work with light materials because we were far from anywhere. I think Prince Albert was the closest place. That was some miles away, so we just had to fill up with a lot of light stuff and work with that. So that's what you learn from going to a new place. You don't get the same thing as you get in the studio. You get too used to the studio and also, sometimes I think, you go out to somewhere where, you know, the thing is, some other material or some other or they don't have the ability. I think that when I first went, did that soldering in Italy, I came across steel that was rejects. In Canada, or in England, or America, they would have cut it and thrown the bad bit away so I would never have seen the soft ends and then finally [ inaudible ] .... soft ends in Toronto, at York Steel, but they were much better, they were much better pieces, so that was a good thing. But these thin bits, you would never have gotten. In Italy they were cutting them out by hand, squares of them. A different attitude you know. It was helpful. SS: 1 think it's great that you love learning. AC: And then also, in that Italian place, where there was very strong sun, I was working almost in the dark. It was absolutely black inside the building and then white light outside so you would kind of.. .all that helps terribly. All of that is just so different. It's great. So one wants to go to places to do workshops I think. Do perhaps something different. SS: Well, I'm traveling to do research and I'm learning so much. It's so fast paced. AC: Are you? Are you really? SS: I absolutely am. AC: Well it's a different attitude for one thing. SS: It's mostly meeting people too. 342 AC: Well, you see, in the Triangle Workshops when we had a whole bunch of Canadians first time, and every time we had a lot of Canadians. Always. There'd be a Canadian working beside somebody from London say, and you'd see out of the comer of your eye somebody doing something you never imagined and that was great. "Oh you can throw it like this can you?" Or you can do it like this and so, you know, how do you do that? So in a little while the shyness breaks down and people ask each other things and people said to me, in those two weeks, my work changed more than six months in the studio, and it's true because something else is coming in. SS: That's very important. AC: Yes. SS: Thank you so much for sharing with me. AC: Not at all. ~ END OF INTERVIEW ~ Appendix E Sarah Stanners interviews Simon Starling, artist Date: 31 October 2007 Location: Queen's Quay, Toronto Digital recording transcribed and excerpted. Sarah Anai's Stanners: One of the things I actually wanted to know for a long time, and I don't think I've bothered to ask, how did you come about starting this project in Toronto? The Moore and mussel project. What was the seed? Simon Starling: Very often you sort of come to a new kind of context, or situation, or city, or exhibition space with a whole load of kind of baggage, stuff that you're interested in. It just came out of.. .1 mean, I visited here for the first time, two years ago I guess. More than two years ago, and met with Reid [Shier] at that time and started to sort of, I don't know, think about.. .1 mean, I knew a little bit about the Henry Moore connection before I came, but not so much. In a way, I wasn't so interested in that initially, but then when I.. .1 don't know, I think it's because I'd been working on this project in Basel where the exhibition very much evolved out of its relationship to the river in Basel, the Rhine, and the whole way that shaped the city, all these kinds of stories and the ferries... across the river and all these kind of things I talked about in that talk. So I had that in my 343 344 head when I came here [to Toronto] and the idea of this show was going to be a kind of [ inaudible] so I just started to talk to Reid about the [Toronto] islands and various things and this notion of the zebra mussels came up from that, and then, of course, in a very, very fast way, that led to Henry Moore and his habit of picking up stones on the beach and then mutating them into figures or whatever. There's so many of the pieces here in the collection which.. .they really feel like things that have been dug up from the bottom of the sea, dredged up or something.. .and then the mussels and the shielded warrior, and it just seemed like too good to be true somehow. So, it evolved in a kind of easy way somehow. SAS: I think it's thoughtful because of the fact that.. .1 don't know how much time you spent researching it, or whether it was a lovely coincidence, but the actual sculpture that you chose, the Warrior, it being the first piece of Moore sculpture that Toronto ever acquired. Just its sort of historical connections are really, really nice. SS: Apparently it's on display at the moment in the opera house. Have you seen it? SAS: I have seen it through the glass there, but I haven't been to many operas lately. ... What's nice is the fact that it's there at the opera house. It will actually be a primer for the public to recognize it as a Moore and then, perhaps, when they come to see your exhibition at The Power Plant, maybe it will be a nice trigger for them. They'll recognize it. So I thought it was great that it was making public appearances and not hiding in the renovations at the AGO, and it's great that the piece will ultimately end up at the AGO. SS: The nice thing about the project is, it's way beyond my dreams in a way. It's generated so much.. .1 don't know, it sort of ripples, waves that come off it. It seems to connect with so many different people in so many different ways and that's when you know you're on to something good, I guess. SAS: Random next question is, there's an idea that artists today, [that] contemporary artists are international artists.. .that their identities are more international but some people would argue, including my own advisor. .. .that in fact, place does matter and that we do still tend to have little tags connected to, you know, it could be Basel-based artists. It could be Montreal-born. Paris, say. How do you feel about yourself? Because you do exhibit very much widely, and more than most artists do. SS: In a funny way I'm known as a sort of Scottish artist and I'm not Scottish at all, which is a double complication. I suppose, in a way that's the kind of context in which my practice evolved. I think a sense of place was really important at that stage, but more as a kind of, a sort of sense of place but no place as well. It's like this idea.. .1 think I've always sort of been a bit of a...the work is sort of predicated on a little bit of a sense of being a little bit out of place as well. Always. For me, that was one of the reasons to move to Scotland. To just create a little bit of a rupture in your relationship to where you are. That's kind of coupled with this extreme sense of a very purposeful sense of place that evolved in Glasgow in the 90s, in the early 90s when I moved there.. .this whole generation of artists who decided to stay there and make something of that situation. In a way to sort of by-pass the notion of Glasgow being a provincial place and to just sort of get on with it. Use it as a base for something. SAS: That's so much the case here, too, actually, because Toronto long had a history of being considered to be provincial and some artists were... 346 SS: Yeah, why do we have to go to New York or London? I think that's really informed the way that I approach projects like this in Toronto. It's kind of a mapping process in some form. SAS: I've said this to you before. I'd say the main reason why I really am drawn to your work, I think a lot of it is so insightful, is because a lot of your approaches are conceptual but you are very much interested in and fascinated with material connections to the thing and the process of things changing. The process of things eroding and spaces changing. It's critical to your work even though people may [inaudible]... SS: In a way I don't see those two things being kind of mutually exclusive. I suppose in some sense, conceptual art was a process of de-materializing the art object. It's also equally about a kind of process of.. .what's the right way to say this? Just as an example, which as you talk about in this interview, this work by Robert Barry, .. .gas releases, which he made in L.A., around L.A. in 1969. It's about pushing the sort of de- materializing of the art object to really an extreme, but it's also, I think, in a very sort of poetic sense, absolutely about material in the end. It's this kind of sense that there's this sort of two sides of the same coin that I've tried to develop...the idea of sort of deconstructing the language of art making, which is part and parcel of the conceptual program, if you like. It's at the heart of that I suppose, that interest about trying to unpack the raw materials, to think about this idea of looking at photography, for example, as an almost sculptural material. Thinking about the silver particle or the platinum particle and where that comes from, or these kind of things. SAS: It bothered me at first, but I had this happy accident, in the end. My digital camera broke down the day before, on Monday, right before I came to the lift out [of Starling's 347 Infestation Piece: Musselled Moore from the Toronto Harbour waters], and I was thinking, I want to document this and see what's happening. Mind you, everybody had a camera, so I've got images to gather later, but what ended up happening is, that I think I was able to preserve things in a better way, because I wasn't so concerned about getting the shot and it was great to watch you getting the shot, actually. I was fascinated about how the sculpture was doing, but it was interesting to see your process of documenting it. SS: Yeah, I think that's something that I, in a way, I suppose it's something I've been sort of thinking about more and more in recent projects. This idea of the work, on the one hand, as being, in some sense, performance or time based but then also about the way that is then mediated. I trained as a photographer originally, so I have a sort of sensitivity to that I suppose, and it's always been very important to try and document the work myself whenever possible with these kind of things. This was one of the reasons I was so interested in Mollino because he was somebody who essentially.. .he said he understood himself to be this dynamic, futurist kind of character who drove fast cars and went skiing and flying and he didn't really produce so much in his life. I mean, he made furniture, but it was never mass-produced. He built some buildings, but a lot of them were knocked down, and he had an acute sense of that, and therefore, he was always very conscious of writing his own history in a way, and editing his own history and cropping his own history and retouching his own history. These kind of things. In a way, that was how I thought about piecing that show together. It's like these two parallel kinds of storytelling in a way. It's sort of his images of his car and then his kind of mediation of that project, and then my subsequent kind of remake, or whatever, and sort of mediation of my project. I think it's something that's coming back more and more. I suppose things like 348 the project I made in Berlin, which I guess you might have seen. I showed it, actually, in Vancouver, at the Presentation House. It's this film.. .it's a short four minute film, which is kind of about a company of fabricators in Berlin who worked.. .they've been going for over a hundred years. They're completely kind of connected to the fabric of Berlin in a way. They've worked on lots of architectural projects. They worked with various people connected to the Bauhaus. They made sort of prototypes for Lilly Reich, and then worked, of course, under National Socialism on various sort of things with Albert Speer... So they kind of matched. Looking at the company matched the history of the city. The work kind of came out of doing a.. .1 made a piece in Barcelona some years ago, which is in this book actually, which involved making a replica of a Lilly Reich screen. A glass screen. I took the plans for this to the company, Noack, in Berlin so that they could make the steelwork, and it turned out that his grandfather had actually made the original steelwork for Lilly Reich. So there was this incredible sort of serendipity, or something, and that planted the seed of the idea of kind of making a work with and about them. So I made a film, a 35 mm four minute loop, which is all made in their workshops and in the archives they have, and it was made, really, using tools in their workshop to move the camera, or trolleys, or put the camera upside down on the drill and it spun around. It has a little bit of a sense of a kind of constructivist, [inaudible] .. .kind of plunking, grinding, mechanical thing and then the project was sort of, in a way, given its form by the fact that I asked Noack to build a loop machine to show the film on. So they built this very beautiful, spiral structure. A stainless steel structure, with eighty six arms, which carried the film around and then down back through the projector again so as a kind of self- contained system and then it shows the film, in a way, about its own, you know, it's the 349 box with the sound of its own making. And that, again, that was sort of an attempt to try and bring a lot of these things together. These kind of modes of working together and, actually, they were resolved in some sense, which I've never actually managed before, I don't think. The work's always been a little bit exploded. There's catalogues and talks and objects and whatever you have, and text. This is the first time I ever managed to make a piece that really holds itself together, in a way. SAS: And which collection is it in now? SS: Well, we don't know yet. The Museum of Modern Art in New York have been.. .it's sort of on hold to them at the moment, so we'll see. We may have a meeting in December about it. SAS: It's interesting that they're interested in that one. That Starling piece that they can say is contained and of itself. SS: There's been lots of people interested in it. I don't know. It'll end up somewhere. Maybe in the museum at [ inaudible] .. .which will also be quite nice I think. Yeah, there's all that kind of going on. SAS: And then you've got to actually ship yourself all around the world and think about other things, right? SS: I was going to ask you actually, when we had a little email conversation a while ago about Marcel Broodthaers and the connection of the Moore piece to that and his use of mussels and this kind of notion of Broodthaers having a.. .sort of playing games with also notions of being provincial and Belgium and ... jokes on the national dish and these kinds of things. I was going to ask you because you talked about this last time I was here. You talked about this idea of Moore as a kind of.. .Moore making sense in Toronto. 350 SAS: He's sort of an injection of modernism, or something like that. SS: But it's a certain kind of modernism. SAS: For Toronto it was a sense of being international because in most cases Moore is considered the symbol of provincialism coming out of the UK. SS: Yes. But he also has, unlike any British artist, an international kind of reach. SAS: Yes, exactly. He was attacked very much by what's known as the Canadian Artists Representation. It's a sort of artists' union. He was attacked because all of a sudden the Art Gallery of Ontario was dedicating this massive space to him, and naming it after him and putting lots of money behind it, but then, it was a way to raise their sense of respect for the museum by having this large, big-name artist. Members of CAR protested it aggressively, saying... "Why don't you choose a Canadian artist? Why don't you name it The Tom Thompson Centre?" This that and the other. Moore responded by saying, "Art is international!" and it's been quoted so many times over, but, what I've argued, is that Moore was a way of, sort of purchasing in a sense, a sense of being 'up to the times' for Toronto. Meanwhile, at the precise time that they were purchasing Moore aggressively, it was when Moore's popularity was descending everywhere else but Canada, which is very interesting. For me it's just a way of.. .my dissertation takes into account the influence of British culture and actual aesthetic practice and even museum practice on Canada. This is what I'm looking at. SS: It's still very strong I guess. SAS: I would say so. A lot of people don't recognize it because people, at least in North America, will associate modernism with the rise of New York City being the center of it all, which it was very much so for a lot of Canadian artists. It was a quick and easy place 351 to go to. Relatively cheap. But if you really pull back the skin, you can see that our very first curators were British. The main advisors to our purchasing were British. A lot of approaches to abstract art, especially, were unusually British, so this sort of 'we're going to abstract but not so much. We're going to get the essential landscapes in there'. In any case, my study starts 1906 and ends 1976 and Moore's an interesting case where, at the time, when there was a great rise in American modernism, if you really do look back into the newspapers and accounts of modern art in Toronto, you're still very much salivating over British modern art and that standard. .. .and so your work, in considering Moore's, is interesting as a sort of.. .it's going to make a fantastic epilogue I think. Which is kind of strange because I think I might just start writing at the end because I really do believe that contemporary art does inform our way of writing history, or our way of considering history. You've shared a lot of interesting thoughts, which I appreciate. I think it's been very hard for Canada to be able to.. .or Toronto to be able to shine as some sort of center for the arts, especially being so close to the U.S. So far from their sorts of funding but in many cases I think that the way that the museums and galleries were run has a lot to do with strategically purchasing certain things, a lot of which were British, so that's the kind of the boring synopsis of my study. Truly. It's a different animal altogether than what I think about for writing articles. But I am constantly thinking about the relevance of national identity and artists. A lot of people will [ inaudible 26:31] through it and consider it a good waste of time because they associate modern and contemporary especially with artists freely moving around the world. To me it's almost become an assumption now and I do think there's a lot to be said for looking at.. .some of the most fantastic art that I think comes out of Canada has everything to do with concentrating on, 352 not regionalism, but looking to their region and what informs their region and actually it makes their work quite translatable everywhere else. I think some art that attempts to have an international profile is kind of hollow in a sense. I don't know. SS: No, absolutely. It's something that sort of... I've thought a lot about in relation to what we were talking about. This idea of the artist as a sort of, I don't know, almost like a migrant worker or something. Somebody who drops in some place and then responds and moves on constantly. One place after another, which I am very aware of being something that's related to what I do somehow and it's a bit scary I think. It's a bit sort of, I don't know.. .the idea that it's actually a very interesting approach to life. Although you're always bringing, as I said, your baggage with you, it's increasingly implicit in invitations that you get as an artist. There's a sort of subtext that they want you to do something extremely specific for them. It's strange sometimes I think. It's a strange world. It makes me uneasy sometimes. SAS: I could see that. SS: It's really odd. SAS: Especially since you're at this stage of your career, people would have.. .they've read the introduction to Simon Starling so now they want their chapter. Right? SS: Yeah. It's really weird. I guess I kind of.. .it's so important that the work keeps evolving and doesn't become sort of programmatic in a way. Strange thinking that it's really... it's one of the reasons why I like making these kind of mall expansive exhibitions. I don't know if I said this to you yesterday, but there's this idea of you're actually piecing together a group show but all the work is by you. That formally the work 353 is extremely diverse in a way, but it's a really nice process. Giving works new life because of the things you juxtapose them with. I mean, it's like the job of a curator. SAS: I was going to say. Curating yourself. SS: Yeah. It's a funny business. That's where it goes back to Mollino again. SAS: Well, I think you're thoughtful enough that.. .you're very self-aware at least. SS: It's a funny life sometimes. SAS: It would be, I think, quite the challenge to let's say twenty years from now do the Starling retrospective. That would be quite a challenge. I think you'd have to curate it and that would be much more interesting. Then you'd really have the challenge. SS: I went to see this big Stan Douglas show in Stuttgart recently. SAS: Oh yeah. Great. SS: It's a huge show. It's basically every work he's made. SAS: I've heard of it. SS: It's quite amazing, but it really made.. .it made you think about how.. .he's an artist I have a huge respect for but when you see the work on mass like that, it starts to undermine itself a little bit. SAS: Absolutely. SS: You suddenly realize the actual structure of the work is quite repetitive very often and you're always forcing new material into the same mold, as it were. I think it would have been a much better show if there'd been half as many works. SAS: I know a painter that is in his eighties and regularly destroys his work for fear of what might turn up in his retrospective. He's controlling his own archive and every once and a while will slash and burn because he's terrified of what that retrospective will look like. A strange self-editing. SS: It is. I'm sure there's a lot of people that do that. SAS: Well you're screwed. There's no way. It's just out there in different ways. There will be no culling of your work. SS: No, no. [...] ~ END OF INTERVIEW ~