7th ‘impressionist’ exposition 1882

 

 

Impressionism: a historical reconstruction

The 7th ‘impressionist’ exposition

1882

General info

1882: the most impressionist exposition:
When we see Impressionism as a painting style, the exposition in 1882 was the most impressionist exposition. (See slideshow.) Still, it was called ‘indépendants‘. There were only 9 partakers, who exhibited 212 art-works (85% were oil paintings), which is a bit more than the 203 numbers in the catalogue. They showed an average of 23,6 art-works each, which is the highest average of all expositions. Many disagreements preceeded this exposition, eventually it was the art-dealer Durand-Ruel who persevered the exposition. On this page you will find information on the organisation, the partakers, the used techniques, the lenders, the reviews and the results of the 7th ‘impressionist’ exposition held in 1882 in Paris.

1882, the exposition of independant artists:
The catalogue for the first time was named ‘exposition des artistes indépendants’. This is strange. When we see Impressionism as a painting style, you could say this was the most impressionist exposition↓ of the 8 held from 1874-1886. Strange also, because Durand-Ruel, who had a great influence in this exposition, called an exposition in London held that Summer “Exposition impressionniste”. Renoir objected to the term ‘indépendants’, because of it’s revolutionary associations (R2,p421). Still, several art-critics called them ‘impressionnistes’, see. It is interesting to know who suggested the term ‘indépendants’.

1882: what preceded?
Already in November 1881 Gauguin suggested to Pissarro that Rouart had offered to pay a rental. But Gauguin and Guillaumin didn’t want to exhibit again with Raffaëlli and others that were introduced by Degas. On those terms Degas didn’t want to exhibit himself, where after his old schoolfriend Rouart and also Cassatt, Forain, Tillot and Zandomeneghi resigned. In early February 1882 Pissarro and Caillebotte started to ask Monet, Morisot and others. During this month the art-dealer Durand-Ruel became increasingly active as co-organizer and decided to show works of Monet and Renoir he owned. Monet pleaded that a new exhibition should be limited to a core group and extremely well organised. Renoir, being ill in L’Estaque, pleaded for an exhibition based on talent, including Degas, Monet, Morisot, Pissarro and Sisley. He disapproved the anarchist tendencies of Pissarro, Gauguin and Guillaumin.
On Renoir’s insistence the rule not to submit to the Salon had been suspended (R2,p423).

1882, the organisation / special features:
In the end the hanging was done by Caillebotte and Pissarro. In the first week of the exposition Eugène Manet did the hanging of the paintings of his wife Berthe Morisot, who was in Nice. The exposition was held in March from the 1st till the 31th at the ‘Salons du Panorama de Reischoffen’ (or: Reichshoffen) 251, Rue Saint-Honoré (Paris). It was held in the upper floors in a large, airy, well-lighted hall.
The 7th ‘impressionist’ exposition had only 9 partakers showing about 212 works, of which 11 outside the catalogue (=hc), that counted 203 numbers. This is an average of 23,6 per partaker, Pissarro showing 36 art-works and Monet 35 oil paintings. Notable for this most impressionist exposition is the presence of Vignon, who is quite forgotten nowadays and the absence of Cézanne, who is seen by Duret as 1 of the just 7 Impressionists.
Sources: R2,p373-378+394; R3,p232; R5,p131 +133; R90I,p377.

1882, the partakers:
The 7th ‘impressionist’ exposition had only 9 partakers. Caillebotte, Monet, Renoir and Sisley joined again after some years of absence. They didn’t return after this year. Gauguin, Guillaumin, Morisot, Pissarro and Vignon also were present like the years before and they also would be in 1886.

1882, the used themes:
3/4 of the art-works were landscapes (R2,p379). There were also many figure paintings exhibited, namely by Caillebotte, Morisot, Pissarro, and Renoir, but not by Monet, Sisley and Vignon. Notable is that there were 16 still-lifes exhibited, about 8% of the total. 1 of Caillebotte (no.4), 4 of Gauguin (no.18+23+24+26), 6 of Monet (no.57+69+78+80+81+82, 5 of Renoir (no.144+145+156+158+159) and 2 of Vignon (no.194+198). See slide-show.

1882, the used techniques:
See link for an overview of the used techniques. See slideshow.

Of the total of 212 exhibited art-works 181 were oil paintings, about 85,4% of the total amount of art-works, which is the highest percentage of oil paintings exhibited at the 8 ‘impressionist’ expositions.

The following 4 partakers exhibited pastels: Caillebotte 1x (no.14); Gauguin 1x (no.28); Guillaumin 13x (nos.44-56); Morisot 3x (nos.98-100). So in total there were probably 18 pastels exhibited, about 8% of the total.

Pissarro exhibited 10 gouaches (nos.126-135), about 4,7% of the total; I will count them as aquarelles.

Vignon exhibited 1 study made with 4 pencils (no.203); I will count it as a drawing; this is less than 1% of the total.

Gauguin exhibited 1 sculpture (no.30); this is less than 1% of the total.

The following partaker exhibited art-works using mixed techniques: No.136 of Pissarro is indicated as détrempe (=tempera), I assume he used mixed techniques; this 1 work is less than 1% of the total.

1882, the lenders:
Most of the exhibited art-works were probably owned by the art-dealer Durand-Ruel, who had a large share in the organisation. There were just 7 loans of others which is about 3% of all the works exhibited. The loans were works of Guillaumin 1x (no.45); Monet 4x (no.57+58+69+91); Vignon (no.189+190). The lenders were Caillebotte did lent 1 work of Monet (no.69), Cahuzac 2 of Monet (no.57+91), Charpentier 1 of Monet (no.58), Rouart 1 of Vignon (no.189). There were also anonymous  lenders: for Guillaumin P. (no.45) and for Vignon D. (no.190).

Was this an impressionist exposition?
When we see Impressionism as a painting style, this exposition in 1882 tcan be seen as the most impressionist exposition. 3/4 of the paintings were landscapes (R2,p379), the favourite theme of the Impressionists. Duret called this exposition the best (R2,p373), in line to his 1878 article in which he restricted Impressionism to those artists who were devoted to landscape, colour and open air painting (R2,p378;R142;R7). Duret restricted the Impressionists to Monet, Morisot, Pissarro, Renoir and Sisley and later (1906) added Guillaumin (and Cézanne). These 6 were augmented by Caillebotte, Gauguin and Vignon who in these years mainly painted in an Impressionist painting style. In this sense it can be called the most impressionist exposition (R5,p132). Even the many still-lifes↑ were painted with bright colours and juxta-posed brushstrokes. When you look at the slide-show you will see that most of the paintings were made in an impressionist style. Curious is that 14 works were called studies, about 7% of the total. 2 of Gauguin (no.22+25), 6 of Guillaumin, including 4 pastels (no.42+43+44+45+48+49), 4 of Pissarro (no.101+103+104+107) and 2 of Vignon (no.201+203). This is not in line with the impressionist conviction that a fleeting moment is best captured in a sketchy painting. Some of the paintings of Caillebotte (see no.1↓) and Pissarro still have sub-dued colours with many brownish hues.

1882, reviews:
Most critics were positive (R5,p132). Caillebotte and Renoir were praised for their figure paintings, especially for their correct drawing (R2,p379). Pissarro was praised most for his outdoor painted large peasant women, painted ‘without false grandeur’ (R2,p381). Pissarro and Sisley were praised; Gauguin, Guillaumin and Vignon were ignored or despised; Renoir’s landscapes were overlooked; the landscapes / works of Caillebotte, Monet and Morisot were variously appreciated (R2,p382).
Note: more info will follow.

1882, the results:
At first there were many visitors and good profits, but probably in the end the exposition ended with pretty large debts. Henri and his brother Ernest Rouart rented the rooms (R2,p390); the rent was 6.000 franc (R5,p131). The entrance fee was 0,50 franc (R5,p131). During the first week there were 340 à 350 visitors a day. The paintings of Morisot were priced between 500 à 1200 franc. Those of Monet between 2.000 and 2.500 franc. Those of Sisley for 2.000 franc. The opening day was successful, the earnings were 950 franc. (R2,p378) Mid-March Caillebotte predicted a debt of 2.000 franc (a person), although the first earnings were successful (R2,p378).

 

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. youtube.com/channel_the_philips_collection (a lecture 2016/03/17 by Richard Brettell reconstructing the 7th ‘impressionist’ exposition: all together in one room; 57:17min.)
  3. culture.gouv.fr//1882 (extended article on the 7th ‘impressionist’ exposition; =iR424)
  4. magrasku.de/siebte_impressionisten-ausstellung (page in German on the 7th ‘impressionist’ exposition; =iR59)
  5. impressionistarts.com/seventh (webpage on the 7th ‘impressionist’ exposition; =iR374)
  6. x

 

Recommanded citation: “Impressionism, a historical reconstruction: The 7th ‘impressionist’ exposition in 1882; general info. Last modified 2024/02/14. https://www.impressionism.nl/7th-impressionist-exposition-1882/.”

 

Note: More info will be added.