The Crux of Delacroix

The National Gallery is currently showing an exhibition called Delacroix and the rise of Modern Art.  The conceit of this show is that Delacroix and those who were inspired by him gave birth to Impressionism and then Modernism. It is a nice idea.  I am often slightly suspicious of "inspired by" shows.  They often have two major issues.  The first is that the link between the main artist and those they inspire can often be a little tenuous or at least not as all encompassing as the show would like to make out (which makes the process of inspiration a little reductive).  The second is that, because those who are the inspirees are not the major focus of the show they are either minor figures or not  the major figures best work.

I also went into this show knowing nothing about Delacroix prior to this.  He was just another name the floated around vaguely in the artistic firmament filed in the "a bit like Rubens" box.  The show I am afraid to say had both of the problems that I feared it would.  No doubt Delacroix was revered as the show hammers home by a sketching painting by Cezanne showing him and other painters of the time worshiping the man.  Unlikely to be the only influence though.  This Cezanne painting, and indeed all the Cezanne's on display nicely illustrated the other problem.  They were less good examples and far from Cezanne at his best. An early Van Gogh makes an appearance, which is is interesting but not a particularly spectacular example.  Likewise in the last room was a Kandisky and a very rough Kandinsky it was.

This is not to say that I did not like the show.  I did.  For a start I was there with Hugh Mendes whose encyclopedic knowledge of all things art greatly enhanced the experience.  Also Delacroix himself I like.  The Lion Hunt and The Bathers were particular favourites.  The main thesis of the show was Delacroix's establishment of colour theory and the use of complementary and primary colours to create great visual impact was a significant turning point in art and a major inspiration.  One primary colour sitting in the field of the other.  This element and the move away from painting realistically to painting for effect.  The paintings then were selected to display this element and in that way the show worked.  In one way then this exhibition works better for those who are interested in art theory more than those who are just interested in art. 

Once you see these elements you see them again and again. Blocks of primary colours,  a bright main figure popping out for the rest of the painting.  And then you see quite how far this idea develops in for example Van Gogh's Olive Trees (which is a good example) and another favourite Gaugin's I Raro Te Oviri. For me the highlight of the show was the discovery of Redon. I had never heard of Redon before but I his work greatly appeals to me, I particularly like The Red Barque.  Another point of interest was the rediscovery of flowers as an artistic subject.  This is something the exhibition does do well.  The rooms are themed on subject and it makes for a great impact.  My favourite room probably was the flower room just for the great initial burst it makes upon the ideas.  I came away inspired to look at flowers again as a subject for painting.

I bought the postcards afterwards, as is tradition.  Oddly the collection contained a postcard of Music in the Tuileries Gardens by Manet, which didn't even feature in the show (although other obscure Manet's did).  Very strange.

I am glad I went as it taught me a lot, but I could easily see people coming away left cold and slightly baffled by it.