{"id":182,"date":"2020-07-28T16:17:27","date_gmt":"2020-07-28T21:17:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/exhibitions.lib.udel.edu\/whistler\/?page_id=182"},"modified":"2021-03-04T16:06:04","modified_gmt":"2021-03-04T21:06:04","slug":"the-butterfly-goes-to-court","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/exhibitions.lib.udel.edu\/whistler\/home\/the-butterfly-goes-to-court\/","title":{"rendered":"The Butterfly Goes to Court"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Of all the conflicts in Whistler\u2019s career, his lawsuit against renowned art historian and critic John Ruskin was most significant. Ruskin wrote a particularly harsh review of Whistler\u2019s paintings in an 1877 exhibition at London\u2019s Grosvenor Gallery. He was incensed by the painting Nocturne in Black and Gold: The Falling Rocket<\/a><\/em>, which was radical in its nearly-abstract appearance. Ruskin criticized Whistler\u2019s \u201cill-educated conceit,\u201d famously writing, \u201cI have seen, and heard, much of cockney impudence before now; but never expected to hear a coxcomb ask two hundred guineas for flinging a pot of paint in the public\u2019s face.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In response, Whistler sued Ruskin for libel. The trial in 1878 provided Whistler with the opportunity to present his artistic ideals before a wide audience. Significantly, Whistler defined his paintings as \u201can arrangement of line, form, and color first\u201d and explained that in his art, he \u201cwished to indicate an artistic interest alone.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although Whistler won the trial, the jury awarded him a mere farthing\u2014a quarter of a penny\u2014in damages. Forced to declare bankruptcy, Whistler accepted a commission to travel to Venice, where he would produce some of his most famous etchings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n


[UD_EXHIBITION_ITEM]<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Adriano Cecioni (Italian, 1836\u20131886)
Men of the Day No. 40: \u201cThe Realisation of the Ideal<\/em>,\u201d<\/em> 1872
color lithograph on paper
Mark Samuels Lasner Collection<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

John Ruskin was a prominent social theorist and the foremost art historian and critic of Victorian Britain. He attacked Whistler from a position of considerable authority, having been appointed the first Slade Professor of Fine Art at Oxford University, a position that he held from 1869 until 1878. Captioned \u201cThe Realisation of the Ideal,\u201d this caricature from Vanity Fair<\/em> simultaneously mocks Ruskin\u2019s less-than-ideal rigid and awkward appearance and references his philosophies regarding society and art. Ruskin believed that art had a moral purpose and should be used to uplift society, a philosophy that was in conflict with Whistler\u2019s view that art was, foremost, an arrangement of visual elements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n


[UD_EXHIBITION_ITEM]<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Leslie Matthew Ward (known as Spy), (British, 1851\u20131922)
A Symphony<\/em>, 1878
color lithograph on paper
Mark Samuels Lasner Collection<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This caricature of Whistler was published in Vanity Fair<\/em> in January of 1878, a month after John Ruskin\u2019s counsel filed the first official response to Whistler\u2019s libel lawsuit. It contains many of the characteristic elements in portraits of Whistler, including his monocle, walking stick, cigarette, and the prominent lock of white hair that protrudes from his hat. The caricature was accompanied by a brief biography that addressed Whistler\u2019s artistic theories. In it, the anonymous author defended Whistler\u2019s art in language that would be repeated during the trial. \u201cHe has been accused of not finishing his pictures,\u201d the author wrote, \u201cbut \u2018finish\u2019 is a word that has been abused to convey the more apparent absence of a conventional amount of labour which he rejects\u2026and replaces by his assurance that he has done the work when he has done with it.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[UD_EXHIBITION_ITEM]<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Richard Josey (British, 1840 or 1841\u20131906), after James McNeill Whistler (American, 1834\u20131903)
Arrangement in Grey and Black, No. 2, Thomas Carlyle<\/em>, 1878
mezzotint on paper, London: Graves
Mark Samuels Lasner Collection<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Oscar Wilde called the portrait of the Scottish writer Thomas Carlyle the \u201cone really good picture\u201d among the paintings that Whistler exhibited at the controversial Grosvenor Gallery exhibition in 1877, which led to the legal dispute with John Ruskin. In pose and mood, the composition reflects Whistler\u2019s well-known portrait of his mother.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This mezzotint reproduction was made \u201cunder the immediate supervision of the painter.\u201d It was produced in September 1878, shortly before the Whistler v. Ruskin trial began.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[UD_EXHIBITION_ITEM]<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

John Ruskin (British, 1819\u20131900)
Notes for The Stones of Venice<\/em>, c. 1850
autograph manuscript with sketches
Mark Samuels Lasner Collection<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This sheet contains notes and sketches that John Ruskin used when preparing his multivolume architectural treatise, The Stones of Venice<\/em>. In it, Ruskin questions the relationship between art and society, arguing that the decline in Venice\u2019s morality\u2014manifested in its art and architecture\u2014presents a warning for England. Ruskin\u2019s opposition to Whistler\u2019s art was an extension of these views. He believed in the moral value of art and railed against what he saw as amorality and consumerism in Whistler\u2019s work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[UD_EXHIBITION_ITEM]<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

John Ruskin (British, 1819\u20131900)
Fors Clavigera: Letters to the Workmen and Labourers of Great Britain.<\/em> London: Printed for the author by Smith, Elder & Co. … and sold only by Mr. G. Allen …, 1871\u20131884
Special Collections<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

John Ruskin launched his attack on Whistler in July 1877 in letter 79 of Fors Clavigera<\/em>, <\/em>his series of polemical pamphlets. Appended to a lengthy discussion of the value of labor and money, Ruskin\u2019s discussion of the Grosvenor Gallery exhibition began with favorable comments on artworks by Edward Burne-Jones in the exhibition. Turning his attention to Whistler, whom he negatively contrasted with Burne-Jones, Ruskin wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cFor Mr. Whistler\u2019s own sake, no less than the protection of the purchaser, Sir Coutts Lindsay ought not to have admitted work into the gallery in which the ill-educated conceit of the artist so nearly approached the aspect of willful imposture. I have seen, and heard, much of cockney impudence before now; but never expected to hear a coxcomb ask two hundred guineas for flinging a pot of paint in the public\u2019s face.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Several London newspapers reported Ruskin\u2019s statement, bringing it to Whistler\u2019s attention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[UD_EXHIBITION_ITEM]<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Barbara Leighton (British, 1870\u20131952)
Edward Burne-Jones,<\/em> c. 1890
platinum print cabinet card
Mark Samuels Lasner Collection<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Edward Burne-Jones was the star witness on Ruskin\u2019s behalf in the Whistler v. Ruskin trial. This photograph shows him at work on the large watercolor painting The Star of Bethlehem<\/em>. Relatively little is known about the photographer, Barbara Leighton. The daughter of a Conservative politician, she was especially known for her portraits of other artists.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[UD_EXHIBITION_ITEM]<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Edward Burne-Jones (British, 1833\u20131898)
Autograph letter signed to John Ruskin, 5 November [1878]
Mark Samuels Lasner Collection
NEW ACQUISITION<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In\nearly November 1878 John Ruskin asked Edward Burne-Jones to testify on his\nbehalf at the upcoming Whistler v. Ruskin trial. Burne-Jones answered him in\nthis letter, emotionally proclaiming his support for Ruskin in a stream-of-consciousness\nstyle of communication. Part of the letter reads, \u201cif that advertising Yankee\nquack teases you I\u2019ll kill him. I\nthought perhaps it was over. I\u2019ll help in\nany way that I am told \u2013 turn up at a court like Mr. Winkle if you like \u2013 so\nwill [William] Morris \u2013 it won\u2019t bother\nyou will it? I want peace for you and rest and friends all about spoiling\nyou….,\u201d adding in a postscript, \u201cI have re-read the bit about your commission\nto lawyers. But I am to be teased & want it. It\u2019s\nno teasing \u2013 I\u2019ll do anything more\nthan gladly.\u201d Despite Burne-Jones\u2019s uneven testimony at the trial, his\ncorrespondence indicates the depth of his support for Ruskin.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[UD_EXHIBITION_ITEM]<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

James McNeill Whistler (American, 1834\u20131903)
Whistler v. Ruskin: Art & Art Critics<\/em>. London: Chatto & Windus, [1878]
Inscribed by Rosa Corder to Frank Newburn
Mark Samuels Lasner Collection<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Less than a month after the trial ended, Whistler published the first of his infamous brown-paper pamphlets. The seventeen-page volume Whistler v. Ruskin: Art & Art Critics<\/em> presents the artist\u2019s view of the trial and its significance. Casting the legal battle in moral terms, the text argues against the role of critics in the art world\u2014a claim that Whistler would continue to make throughout his career. The pamphlet was an immediate success. In the two months after the trial, five editions of the volume appeared, bringing widespread attention to Whistler\u2019s account of what he called \u201ca battle fought for the painters.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rosa Corder, an artist and one of Whistler\u2019s models, owned this copy of the pamphlet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[UD_EXHIBITION_ITEM]<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Edward Linley Sambourne (British, 1845\u20131910)
\u201cAn Appeal to Law,\u201d in Punch, <\/em>7 December 1878
University of Delaware Library<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Showcasing the widespread interest in Whistler and his lawsuit against John Ruskin, this illustration from the popular periodical Punch<\/em> lampoons both men. The judge, wearing a legal barrister\u2019s wig, presents an oversized farthing to Whistler, highlighting the meager award he received for victory in the legal dispute. Ruskin, identified as the \u201cold pelican in the art wilderness,\u201d looks downward in a way that suggests decapitation. The two-headed snake at the bottom of the illustration indicates the ultimate result of the trial. Labeled \u201ccosts,\u201d it extends its tongue in the direction of both Whistler and Ruskin, referencing the legal fees that each side was obligated to pay. Despite his success in the trial, Whistler\u2019s obligation to pay his legal costs led to his financial ruin.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[UD_EXHIBITION_ITEM]<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Frederick Sandys (British, 1829\u20131904)
James Anderson Rose, <\/em>1861
black, white, and red chalks on paper
Mark Samuels Lasner Collection<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As Whistler\u2019s solicitor, James Rose directed the legal strategy used in the Ruskin trial. He retained the barrister John Humffreys Parry to argue the case before the court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rose was a close friend and associate of many artists, including Whistler. He assembled a collection of artworks by his friends and clients, which included several paintings by Dante Gabriel Rossetti and a prized collection of Whistler\u2019s prints. This portrait drawing by the Pre-Raphaelite artist (and Whistler associate) Frederick Sandys appears to depict the sitter deep in thought, emphasizing his keen and penetrating mind.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[UD_EXHIBITION_ITEM]<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Edward Burne-Jones (British, 1833\u20131898)
Virgil and the Muse of Poetry, <\/em>c. 1880\u20131890
watercolor heightened with gold on paper
Mark Samuels Lasner Collection<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Edward Burne-Jones was a close friend of John Ruskin and one of the three witnesses who appeared on his behalf at the trial. Of Whistler\u2019s Nocturne in Black and Gold<\/em>\u2014the painting that Ruskin specifically criticized in his review\u2014Burne-Jones testified, \u201cIt would be impossible to call it a serious work of art.\u201d One of Burne-Jones\u2019s main complaints about Whistler\u2019s art was its apparent incompleteness. Although he praised Whistler\u2019s use of color, Burne-Jones criticized what he saw as a lack of form and \u201cfinish.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As this watercolor indicates, Burne-Jones frequently depicted medieval and mythological subjects. This is one of a number of artworks that relate to Virgil or his epic poem, The Aeneid<\/em>. The frame is original and was designed by the artist.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[UD_EXHIBITION_ITEM]<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Albert Joseph Moore (British, 1841\u20131893)
Study of a Draped figure for the right-hand figure in The Shulamite<\/em>, 1864
black and white chalks on paper
Mark Samuels Lasner Collection
Recent Acquisition<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whistler and Albert Moore first met in 1865, the year after this drawing was made, and the two men developed a lifelong friendship. As one of Whistler\u2019s three witnesses at the Whistler v. Ruskin trial, Moore was the strongest proponent of Whistler\u2019s art during the proceedings. Despite differences in their preferred subject matter, Whistler and Moore shared an aesthetic affinity that celebrated \u201cart for art\u2019s sake.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Like Whistler, Moore employed meticulous working methods. For each painting, Moore prepared numerous studies of figures and drapery. This characteristic study depicts an early pose, which Moore later modified, for one of the figures in his large 1866 painting, The Shulamite<\/em>.
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Of all the conflicts in Whistler\u2019s career, his lawsuit against renowned art historian and critic John Ruskin was most significant. Ruskin wrote a particularly harsh review of Whistler\u2019s paintings in an 1877 exhibition at London\u2019s Grosvenor Gallery. He was incensed by the painting Nocturne in Black and Gold: The Falling Rocket, which was radical in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"parent":58,"menu_order":3,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"page-exhibition.php","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-182","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/exhibitions.lib.udel.edu\/whistler\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/182"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/exhibitions.lib.udel.edu\/whistler\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/exhibitions.lib.udel.edu\/whistler\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exhibitions.lib.udel.edu\/whistler\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exhibitions.lib.udel.edu\/whistler\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=182"}],"version-history":[{"count":12,"href":"https:\/\/exhibitions.lib.udel.edu\/whistler\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/182\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":670,"href":"https:\/\/exhibitions.lib.udel.edu\/whistler\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/182\/revisions\/670"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exhibitions.lib.udel.edu\/whistler\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/58"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/exhibitions.lib.udel.edu\/whistler\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=182"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}