Salute to Canada's impressionist, Helen McNicoll

Helen McNicoll, The Brown Hat, c. 1906. Art Gallery of Ontario. This is one of McNicoll’s earliest known paintings and displayed in 1906 at one of her first exhibitions. The austere background and mood suggest McNicoll may have painted it prior to 1906 when she was a student in London and Montreal, the label said.  Although it is not believed to be a self-portrait, it shows her style before she found “light.”

Helen McNicoll, Midsummer, c. 1909, Art Gallery of Nova Scotia

Who was Helen McNicoll and why should we care?

Helen McNicoll, Study of a Child, c. 1913, Montreal Museum of Fine Arts.  Although McNicoll never used the word "mother" in any of her titles, she often painted women as caregivers, working in and around the home. The label noted that McNicoll joined Mary Cassatt and Berthe Morisot describing the value of women's work, juxtaposed beside subjects chosen by male artists.

Not only was she Canadian (drawing more attention than usual because of the White House occupant's obsession with Canada), but she was a fine impressionist and featured artist in a show ending earlier this year at the National Museum of Fine Arts of Québec, Helen McNicoll An Impressionist Journey.

Helen McNicoll, Beneath the Trees, c. 1910, McNicoll Canadian Art Collection

Helen McNicoll, The Apple Gatherer, c. 1911, Art Gallery of Hamilton. When exhibited in 1911, the Montreal press praised this "delightfully sunshiny pictures of which Miss McNicoll is now an almost perfect master," blending impressionism and plein air naturalism.

Helen McNicoll, The Apple Gatherer (detail)

Helen McNicoll, Garden, 1913, Pierre Lassonde Collection

Helen McNicoll, Garden (detail), 1913, Pierre Lassonde Collection

Upon first glance her style immediately brings to mind that of Mary Cassatt with whom she shared many commonalities. 

The two artists often lived about the same time, McNicoll (1879-1915) and Cassatt (1844-1926). They spent part of their adult lives studying and painting abroad, in London (McNicoll) and France (Cassatt).

Helen McNicoll, Picking Flowers, c. 1912, Art Gallery of Ontario.  The label said this was likely made when McNicoll was traveling and based on a plein-air study.

Helen McNicoll, Fishing, c. 1907, private collection. McNicoll's companion, Dorothea Sharp, carried "pretty frocks" which fishermen's children loved to wear when modeling for the artist.  See below.

Helen McNicoll, The Children's Playground, 1912, private collection.

Helen McNicoll, Landscape, c. 1910, Samuel and Esther Sarick Collection

McNicoll and Cassatt both painted domestic scenes in soft colors with children and women the frequent subjects amidst pleasant almost idyllic backdrops.  

Neither married nor had children. They shared a close bond with female companions. Both came from wealthy families.  

At the outbreak of World War I in 1914, McNicoll was in France, soon forced home by her father. She died the next year in England. 

Helen McNicoll, Venice, 1910, Pierre Lassonde Collection

Helen McNicoll, The Open Door, c. 1913, Samuel and Esther Sarick Collection.

Helen McNicoll, The Gleaner, 1910, Pierre Lassonde Collection. Her face seems a bit rough for a woman as she almost sneers.  Unhappy in her work?

Helen McNicoll, Stubble Fields, c. 1912, National Gallery of Canada. Shortly after this was exhibited, it was purchased by the National Gallery which, the label noted, boosted the artist's confidence.

 

Helen McNicoll, This Gleaner was painted in 1908, again with a red, rough face, almost identical to the Gleaner above, painted two years later and in similar apparel. Samuel and Esther Sarick Collection

Helen McNicoll, The Chintz Sofa, 1913, Pierre Lassonde Collection. The woman may be Dorothea Sharp who shared this studio with McNicoll in London.  The label said the woman pictured may be sewing mementos for the women's suffrage campaign in England. This work in 2023 produced the highest price, $653,775, that I found for a McNicoll.

.

Helen McNicoll, The Victorian Dress, c. 1914, Art Canada Institute

Helen McNicoll, Evening Street Scene, c. 1910, Women's Art Association of Canada

Helen McNicoll,, The Avenue, 1912, Pierre Lassonde Collection. This reminds me of several of van Gogh's.

Helen McNicoll, Montreal Snowstorm, c. 1911, Pierre Lassonde Collection

Helen McNicoll, Fruit Vendor, 1910, Pierre Lassonde Collection. The label noted that most of the artist's markets were French scenes but this one was in Venice.  The girl wears a black shawl, then (and now) in vogue and shows three women in various roles.

Helen McNicoll, In the Market, Montreuil, 1912, private collection.

Helen McNicoll, The Market Cart, Brittany, 1910, Robert McLaughlin Gallery 

Helen McNicoll, The Market Cart, Brittany, 1910, Robert McLaughlin Gallery 

Unknown photographer, Helen McNicoll in her studio, c. 1906, Robert McLaughlin Gallery Archives

Helen McNicoll, Dorothea Sharp working with a child model, n.d., Robert McLaughlin Gallery Archives

 

McNicoll and Cassatt each suffered ill health, complications from diabetes leading to McNicoll's early death at age 35.  At age 2, she had scarlet fever which left her practically deaf and unable to communicate normally. 

And although she lived to age 82, Cassatt gave up painting at age 60 or 70 (sources vary) due to blindness.

In 2023 their art did meet in Cassatt — McNicoll: Impressionists Between Worlds at the Art Gallery of Ontario which has featured solo McNicoll exhibitions in the past.

I am sure there are other similarities which must be the subject of a dissertation or two. Here is a link is to a good article about the two artists in Art Herstory.

Searching Washington museums (the Phillips, the National Museum of Women in the Arts, the National Gallery of Art), I found none with a McNicoll but they all have at least one Cassatt.  Yes:  Cassatt was American, but still... 

The highest price I found for a McNicoll was one she made likely of her companion, Dorothea Sharp, The Chintz Sofa (c.1912) which sold for $653,775 in 2023. Cassatt's high price was almost $7.4 million in 2022 for Young Lady in a Loge Gazing to Right.

patricialesli@gmail.com

'Degas/Cassett,' the tape, and more at the National Gallery of Art

Mary Cassatt, Little Girl in a Blue Armchair, 1878, National Gallery of Art, Collection of Mr. and Mrs. Paul Mellon

Two impressionists, Mary Cassatt (1844-1926) and Edgar Degas (1834-1917) are linked artistically but not romantically no matter how much a romanticist might wish it otherwise, no matter what the wall label copy and catalog at the National Gallery of Art's show, Degas/Cassatt,
say to remind readers that their relationship was only professional; they were not "a couple" and, indeed, "drifted apart" in later years. Neither ever married, but they owned more of each other's works than they owned of any other contemporary artist's. 

Sadly, it all comes to an end this weekend (I want them all to remain forevermore, at least through my life, selfish beast that I am; can they go to the new Corcoran?) when Degas/Cassatt, the story of their professional relationship exits the world's stage.

Washington is the only venue for this magnificent display.(However and in a nearby gallery comes Degas's sculpture, Little Dancer Aged Fourteen who springs to life with some of her dancing buddies, the ones painted by Degas, which opens on the day of departure for Degas/Cassatt, October 5.  Cassatt thought Degas's future might be more fruitful in sculpture than in painting.)

A classy and free color brochure at Degas/Cassatt describes the painters' styles:  They painted the human body, clothed and unclothed, avoiding landscape portraiture. Degas rejected the label, "impressionist," preferring to be called a "realist" which also defines Cassatt's work. They both were highly educated and from well-to-do families.

For only $5, one may rent a tape to hear while you stroll (or elbow, depending upon the crowd's numbers which I believe will be pretty hefty this weekend) through the 70 or so works, guided by professionals who provide background for about 13 of the pieces in the show.

Edgar Degas, Mary Cassatt, c. 1879-1884, National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, Gift of the Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation and the Regents' Major Acquisition Fund

 The tape's talk time is about 35 minutes, but I listened for much longer than that, hearing some portions more than once, like the description of Degas's Mary Cassatt, c. 1879-1884. Can you blame her for wanting to get rid of this? What woman (or man) wants to look worse that she looks?

There she sits leaning in a chair, a woman in her mid to late 30s but looking much older, like she's going to fall out of the seat upon the floor. She is hunched with a grim expression, wearing black as if in mourning for...? What might have been?

The tape describes her as manly and gaunt, but I beg to differ. She seems pensive, a trifle irritated, bent in an unusual pose and sitting for what may have been long periods of time to satisfy the artist. She could have been doing something else: "What am I doing here? And why am I doing it?" No wonder she tried to unload the painting later without his knowledge. She called it "painful." Mary, you were right!

Edgar Degas, Mary Cassatt at the Louvre, c. 1879, Philadelphia Museum of Art, The Henry P. McIlhenny Collection in memory of Frances P. McIlhenny, 1986

The most fascinating part of the show to me is the gallery where it hangs, the one devoted to Degas's images of Cassatt as she toured the Musee de Louvre. The many and varied sexy silhouettes he drew of her give a viewer pause. The works are each distinctly different, most, drawn of her back side while she strolled through the galleries. For a single woman of her age, there were not many public places acceptable for her to venture out unaccompanied, like culture finds women sheltered today in certain Middle Eastern countries.

Perhaps Degas wanted more from Mary Cassatt than collegial exchange.

Mary Cassatt, The Loge, c. 1878-1880, National Gallery of Art, Washington, Chester Dale Collection

 

For The Loge, the tape says the young women at the theater seized an opportunity to mix with gentlemen and show off their beauty. They are dressed for the occasion and sit like dolls, almost expressionless but glum, displayed on a shelf for the men to ogle.   Since it was a husband's duty to provide the goods, no jewelry is worn except the artist, Cassatt, has placed on the neck of one,  a black choker.  What do you make of it? A symbol of a prison confinement that marriage can become? Like the black bars of prison which lock in an inmate and can strangle.  Contrast it with the pastels in the work.   About 150 years ago it is doubtful criticism of marriage as an institution was often heard, but now more Americans are unmarried than married. Mary Cassatt believed marriage would restrict her career.

On the other hand, could the choker symbolize the confinement the women have experienced growing up? Marriage will set them free?  Based upon their expressions, the future does not look so bright for these women. Maybe, the pickings are not to their liking.  Is this all there is? 

It seems likely that an academician has written about Cassatt's gender renderings.  Doesn't The Black Choker sound like the enticing name of a novel?  It reminds me of Girl with a Pearl Earring, Vermeer's painting which evolved into a book which became a movie which became a play.  I wish someone would query the experts and ask their explanations of the Black Choker. 

In the meantime, calling for a script.  I can't wait to read it. 

Edgar Degas, Scene from the Steeplechase: The Fallen Jockey, 1866, reworked 1880-1881 and c. 1897, National Gallery of Art, Collection of Mr. and Mrs. Paul Mellon

When you enter the exhibition, at the far end on the wall facing you is a large painting, Degas's Scene from the Steeplechase: The Fallen Jockey, which seems oddly out of place, juxtaposed between two Cassatt paintings of females reaching. (Reaching for what?) 

Cassatt wanted to buy The Fallen Jockey for her brother, a horse lover, but Degas refused to sell it, saying he needed to rework it, and over the next 30 years, on and off, he did. After his death, it was found in his studio.

 

Without the tape would I have paid much attention to the brown and muddy flooring of Cassatt's Little Girl in a Blue Armchair (which a thorough analysis revealed later Degas extensively reworked)? The weirdly spaced furniture stands on opposite side of the "shore" where a sleepy little girl sprawls in an illuminated chair lost in thought, perhaps contemplating her future, dogged (!) by what the painter knew lay ahead.  She appears about eight years old, but her image suggests someone older, experienced and wondering, what if?     
 
You see what art can do!  There is much more than what you see.

Little Girl in a Blue Armchair is on the cover of the "must have" 160-paged catalogue available in the shops.

What: Degas/Cassatt

When: Now through Sunday, October 5, 2014 from 10 a.m. - 5 p.m. Friday and Saturday, 11 a.m. - 6 p.m. Sunday

Where: Main Floor, West Building, National Gallery of Art, between Third and Ninth streets at Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. On the Mall.

Admission: No charge

Metro stations: Smithsonian, Federal Triangle, Navy Memorial-Archives, or L'Enfant Plaza

For more information: 202-737-4215

patricialesli@gmail.com

Mild and Bland: Mary Cassatt at NMWA

By the Queen of Free

Not to be confused with the exhibit, "Role Models: Feminine Identity in Contemporary American Photography" at the same place which is not mild and bland.

At least, that was the impression two women whom I presumed to be volunteers gave a 9-year-old friend’s daughter and me upon entrance at the National Museum of Women in the Arts on a free Sunday recently.
They hesitated and directed us first to the Cassatt exhibit.

Upon climbing the marble stairs we met a chicly dressed visitor from a foreign land (France? Belgium?) who looked at me sternly and said “This (‘Role Models’) is not for her” nodding first to the child and then, to the contemporary photography exhibit. (And you thought Americans were conservative.) I thanked her.

Golly gee, if an exhibit is that graphic, should signs be posted? (“This exhibit is rated XXX.” Think of the crowds who would flock!)

I welcomed the warnings which spared us from possible embarrassment and, likely, my certain death at the hands of the girl’s mother had we seen the show. Better to be safe than sorry. Besides, there was harmless Mary Cassatt adjacent. (Has anyone ever called her works ‘dull’?)

Nothing controversial about her paintings and etchings in the small show which is all about friends and relations. (The title is: "Mary Cassatt: Friends and Family.") Did Ms. Cassatt ever paint any men? The paintings are the pastel colors with the idyllic expressions and poses you visualize when her name is mentioned. Rather robotic with little evidence of consternation other than one of a relative who grimaces slightly. It's like all the subjects are getting ready for naps. They are painted in the style of what was idealized and expected of women at about the same time the Women’s Suffrage Movement was gearing up and women were being arrested for demanding the vote! Imagine.

What's the saying? "Well behaved women never make history? (Who said it? Laurel Thatcher Ulrich and she was?) Well, Mary Cassatt proves her wrong.

Anyway, I enthusiastically anticipate returning to see Strong Women who always inspire and instill me with energy, vigor, and happiness. I have seen enough of Quiet Women in places besides museums.