Caillebotte reviews

 

 

Impressionism, a historical reconstruction:

Gustave Caillebotte

(1848-1894)

Reviews

on the impressionist expositions

 

Introduction:
On this page you will find summaries of the reviews on Gustave Caillebotte. Namely on the ‘impressionist’ expositions he joined in 1876, 1877, 1879, 1880 and 1882. See the account for a more detailed representation of these reviews.
Note: You will just find the reviews of 1874 +1876. The other reviews will be added later.

1876:
Here you will find a summary of the reviews on the 2nd ‘impressionist’ exposition related to Gustave Caillebotte.
See the link for the art-works he showed in 1876.
Caillebotte is extendedly reviewed, he is mentioned in at least 27 reviews. L’Audience (Rv34) calls him the ‘primus interpares’. A. de L. calls him ‘The success of the exhibition’ (Rv10) and Burty (Rv43) mentioned ‘(he) has attracted a great deal of attention’, but Baignières (Rv41) writes that Caillebotte ‘remains far behind Degas‘. Namely his numbers 17+18↑ and less frequent no.19+20+21↓ are mentioned. Some call him original (Rv33+43). He renders a ‘faithful representation of life’ (Rv43+35). He is praised for his skill, his craft and is called a draftsman (Rv29+36+10). But Zola is more critical ‘because of their precision, the paintings are entirely anti-artistic’ (Rv54). The high perspective in these works is noted and labelled as ‘bizarre’ (Rv10), ‘scorning’ (Rv42), ‘astonishingly’ (Rv54). Porcheron (Rv28) calls his works the worst of the show because it martyrs perspective. Enault (Rv36) complains ‘The arms of the scrapers are too thin, and their chests are too narrow. (…) let your nude be beautiful, or leave the subject alone.’ But, Blémont (Rv35) reviews ‘They are full of truth, life, and of a simple and frank intimacy.’ Laurent-Pichet (Rv60) criticised ’the plates etc. stand upright on a vertical surface.’ Pothey (Rv6) praised the ‘very beautiful light’. Chaumelin (Rv33) calls him a ‘Realist as crude as but far more witty than Courbet, as violent as but far more precise than Manet.’ Also Baron Schop (Rv31) relates him to Courbet. Some see him as worthy to be accepted at the Salon (Rv10+26+35).

1877:
Here you will find a summary of the reviews on the 3rd ‘impressionist’ exposition related to Gustave Caillebotte.
See the link for the art-works he showed in 1877.

 

1879:
Here you will find a summary of the reviews on the 4th ‘impressionist’ exposition related to Gustave Caillebotte.
See the link for the art-works he showed in 1879.

 

1880:
Here you will find a summary of the reviews on the 5th ‘impressionist’ exposition related to Gustave Caillebotte.
See the link for the art-works he showed in 1880.

 

1882:
Here you will find a summary of the reviews on the 7th ‘impressionist’ exposition related to Gustave Caillebotte.
See the link for the art-works he showed in 1882.

 

 

Sources:
See the pages on the reviews per year (note only 1874 +1876 is available).
Most of these reviews are gathered by Ruth Berson (1996=R90I).
See at the bottom of the main page on Gustave Caillebotte.

 

 

Recommanded citation: “Impressionism: Gustave Caillebotte, an overview of the given reviews. Last modified 2026/03/31. https://www.impressionism.nl/caillebotte-reviews/

 

Note: more info will be added.