Impressionism: a historical reconstruction

The 3rd ‘impressionist’ exposition

1877

General info

 

Introduction:
On this page you will find information on the organisation, the partakers, the used techniques, the lenders, the reviews and the results of the 3rd ‘impressionist’ exposition held in 1877 in Paris. This was the only of the 8 ‘impressionist’ expositions, that was called explicitly “impressionist”, namely there was above the entrance door displayed ‘Exposition des Impressionnistes’ (R2,p58), but this was not repeated in the catalogue↓. The journal ‘L’Impressionniste’↓ appeared 4 times. There were 18 partakers showing 246 art-works, which is a bit more than the 241 catalogue numbers. (See slideshow.) About 85% of these art-works were oil paintings, Degas showed several pastels on monotype. Caillebotte was the main organiser, the financer and an important lender. Hoschedé was the most important lender. Monet showed probably 8 paintings depicting the Saint-Lazare station, but there is confusion about the many interiors in the catalogue and the many exteriors Monet depicted. The most prominent work exhibited was Bal du moulin de la Galette↑ of Renoir, a masterpiece in an impressionist painting style. Piette, a friend of Pissarro, was a sort of guest of honour showing 31 art-works.

1877, the organisation:
This was the only of the 8 ‘impressionist’ expositions, that was called explicitly “impressionist”, namely there was above the entrance door displayed ‘Exposition des Impressionnistes’ (R2,p58), but this was not repeated in the catalogue. Caillebotte was the main organiser (and financer), supported by Monet, Pissarro and Renoir and did lend 8 art-works. Manet was involved in a diner discussion preliminary to the exposition in January (R2,p189). The hanging was done by Caillebotte, Pissarro and Renoir (R5,p105).  Art-dealer Legrand was the manager (R2,p262).

1877, special features:
The third impressionist exposition had  18 partakers showing more than 246 works, see slideshow. This makes the catalogue with 241 numbers quite accurate. Piette (who first joined) and Monet showed the most works (both 31). Monet showed probably 8 paintings depicting the Saint-Lazare station, but there is confusion about the many interiors in the catalogue and the many exteriors Monet depicted. Piette, a friend of Pissarro, was a sort of guest of honour showing 31 art-works. The most prominent work exhibited was Bal du moulin de la Galette↑ of Renoir.

1877, the partakers:
The third impressionist exposition had  18+1hc-1=18 partakers. Again apparently Mme de Rambure exhibited without being in the catalogue (=hc; R102,p275), but probably she is the same as ‘Jacques François‘, a pseudonym for an unknown woman.
There were several new-comers that only joined this exhibition: Cordey, Franc Lamy, and Maureau. Another new-comers was Piette, of whom posthumously works would be shown in 1879. It was the last time Cézanne joined, he as one of the most well known ‘impressionists’, but only joined 2 of the 8 expositions. Renoir and Sisley would retreat till 1882 and would submit to the Salon again. ‘Jacques François‘ exhibited one more time in 1886 as Mme de Rambure. The other partakers would exhibited more often after 1877: Caillebotte, Cals, Degas, Guillaumin, Levert, Monet, Morisot, Pissarro, Rouart and Tillot.

1877, the used techniques:
Most art-works exhibited were oil paintings. Probably 208, about 85% of the total amount of 246 art-works.
The following partakers exhibited aquarelles: Cézanne 3x (no.30-32); Morisot 2x (no.127-129); Piette 17x (no.146-162), probably most of them were gouaches. So in total there were 22 aquarelles exhibited, about 9% of the total amount of art-works.
The following partakers exhibited pastels: Morisot 2x (no.125+126). Degas showed several pastels on monotype, see mixed techniques↓. So in total there were just 2 pastels exhibited, about 1% of the total amount of art-works.
The following partakers exhibited drawings: Morisot 2x (no.130+131). So in total there were probably 2 drawings exhibited, about 1% of the total amount of art-works.
Curious is that not one etch was exhibited, while in 1874 and 1876 many were exhibited. Degas exhibited several monotypes. Two were (hardly) reworked, which I count as engraving (no.59+60). The others were reworked with pastel, therefore I count them at the mixed techniques. So in total there were 2 engravings exhibited, about 1% of the total amount of art-works.
The following partakers exhibited art-works using mixed techniques: Degas exhibited according to the catalogue 3 monotypes (no.58-60), but in reality the nos. 37+39+43+44+45+46+47+56 also were monotypes reworked with pastel. I count as mixed techniques, except no.59+60 which were not or hardly reworked. No.40 of Degas was a pastel reworked with thinned oil. No. 41 + 50 were made of thinned oil, I count them as normal oil paintings. The work I render to compare for no.52 is made of monotype and pastel; the very uncertain suggestion I render for no. 57 is made of pastel and gouache; because of the uncertainty I don’t count them with mixed techniques. So in total there were probably 10 art-works exhibited made with mixed techniques, about 4% of the total amount of art-works.

Was this an impressionist exposition?
In general we see more paintings having bright colours, see for example Piette. Several artists used a lively and sometimes juxtaposed brushstroke, this includes Pissarro. The Ball du Moulin de la Galette↑ (no.186) of Renoir is a beautiful example of depicting every day life in the city, masterly rendering the leaves filtered light. Still, Monet in his serie of the Saint-Lazare station used many greyish and brownish colours. The colours of Morisot are still more  sub-dued. Guilaumin is alternating in applying the impressionist painting style. So, the 3rd ‘impressionist’ exposition was more impressionistic than the previous expositions, but still in a limited way.

1877, the lenders:
Several works were loans: of Degas (7 out of 26), of Monet (21 out of 31), of Pissarro (8 out of 22), of Renoir (4 out of 21), of Sisley (11 out of 18). So, in total there had been 51 loans, which is about 21% of all the 246 works exhibited.
The most important lenders were de Belio (6x), Caillebotte (8x), Charpentier (7x) and Hoschedé (18x). De Belio did lend 3 paintings of Monet (nos.95+96+98) and 3 of Sisley (no.214-216). Caillebotte did lend 3 paintings of Degas (no.37+45+47), 1 of Monet (no.115), 3 of Pissarro (no.163+180+181) and 1 of Renoir (no. 185). Charpentier did lend 1 work of Monet (no.106), 1 of Pissarro (no.172), 2 of Renoir (no.187+188) and 3 of Sisley (no.217+218+221). Hoschedé lending 11 works of Monet (see nos.90-112), 4 of Pissarro (no.170+171+175+176) and 3 of Sisley (no.211-213).
Other lenders were Daudet lending 1 work of Renoir (no.189); Duret lending 2 works of Monet (no.94+110) and 1 of Sisley (no.219); Fromenthal lending 1 work of Monet (no.111); Édouard Manet lending 1 work of Monet (no.103) and 1 of Sisley (no.220); Gustave Manet lending 1 work of Monet (no.104); Rouart lending 1 work of Degas (no.50). There were also anonymous  lenders: for Degas Ch. H. (maybe Charles Hayem; no.43), H. H. (maybe Henry Hill; no.38) and V. (no.44).

1877, reviews:
Georges Rivière published in April 4 times a journal calling ‘L’Impressionniste’ (R2,p192). Most critics were positive. Most of the criticism was confined to the work of Caillebotte, Cézanne, Degas, Monet, Morisot, Pissarro, Renoir and Sisley (R2,p190). Degas, Renoir and Morisot were admired; the landscapists were discussed as a group; on Cézanne the critics were negative (R2, p198+195). There were about 50 reviews, which is half less than 1876 (R5,p104). Most art-critics used the term ‘impressionnistes’, see. That is not strange, because above the entrance door there was displayed ‘Exposition des Impressionnistes’ (R2,p58).

 

1877, the results:
 There were about 8.000 visitors, more than 2x the first two expositions. Zola mentioned an attendance of 500 visitors a day (R2,p427). Still the total visitors were just 8.000 (R2,p192). Caillebotte rented the exposition room (R2,p191; R3,p198); he also paid the many posters (R5,p104). There are no data about the height of the costs nor of the results.

 

General sources:
My main sources are Moffett (1986=R2=aR1), Berson (1996=R90), Dayez (1974=R87=aR2), Rewald (1973=R1), Walther (2013=R3), Roe (2006=R4), Denvir (1993=R5), Monneret (1978-81=R88), Adler (1998=R89). See the link for other general References (=Rx) and to the internet references (=iRx). See here below for additional references (=aRx). See links for practical hints and abbreviations and for the subscription of the paintings.

 

Additional references (=aRx):

1. archive.org//t7cr6bg0d (Online version of Moffett: The New Painting, 1986 =R2=iR19)
2. impressionistarts.com/third (webpage on the 3rd ‘impressionist’ exposition; =iR374)
3. x

 

 

Recommanded citation: “Impressionism, a historical reconstruction: The 3rd ‘impressionist’ exposition in 1877; general info. Last modified 2023/09/18. https://www.impressionism.nl/1877-expo-info/.”

 

Note: More info will be added.