“Badassery”: Examining the Identity and Influence of Female Patrons of the Arts in the Gilded Age and Progressive Era of the United States
While art is greatly admired and appreciated worldwide every single day by countless thousands, where we admire the technique, style, and subject matter of the art and life of the artist, we very rarely pay attention to the patronage that lies behind every painting and every artist’s career. Without patronage, great art and artists may have been lost or never existed at all. It’s dramatic, yes, to assume that the patronage of art is the sole reason for the continuation of art, but we cannot deny the influence and power patrons have on the art world.
In this essay, my aim is to illuminate certain female patrons who, during their lifetime collected, commissioned, and catered artists and their work, influencing the art that was consumed at that time and, by extension, the culture around them by examining their identities as individuals and as patrons, primarily through the lens of their strong personalities. My focus has been on women from the late 19th century and early 20th century in the United States, which coincides with the time periods of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era. Other defining characteristics that help shape their identities were the collective thread of being white, wealthy, and highly cultured, as well as traveling extensively in their lifetimes to European epicenters such as Venice, Rome, and Paris. This is by no means a comprehensive list of female patrons during this time (we may never know how many there were and may never know the true extent of female prowess), but these women I am highlighting have underlying characteristics, situations, and life events that show what it took to break the mold and become women unto themselves, second to no man. It is because of my research on these women and their strong characteristics that I have found the need to employ the use of an unconventional word, but one used by people my age to describe the incredible and seemingly impossible success of people: badassery. It’s a noun, if you’re wondering. These women were total badasses, plain and simple.
I begin with the examination of Isabella Stewart Gardner (1840-1924), a Boston socialite whose lifelong collecting resulted in an extensive collection of work housed in The Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum. A reporter from the city once dubbed her “one of the seven wonders of Boston, [who] often leads where none dare follow... she imitates nobody; everything she does is novel and original,” (“Isabella” gardnermuseum.org). Her collection of books, manuscripts, furniture, jewelry, couture fashion, and art was, according to Rosemary Matthews, influenced by the many losses she encountered in her life including her grandmother, sister, brother, son, close friends, and eventually her husband (183). While these losses may have spurred her to replace her emotional turmoil with the permanence and stability of books and art, it was Gardner’s tenacity and strength of character, aided by her wealth, travels, and place in society that allowed her to collect fine works of art. Gardner collected the haute couture gowns of Charles Fredrick Worth and the old and well-preserved manuscripts of Dante and his contemporaries, but some of her greatest works collected came from Old Masters, such as Vermeer and Rembrandt, as well as from her friend John Singer Sargent, as seen in Figures 1 and 2. It would be easy to dismiss Gardner’s patronage as being a result of her position as socialite to a wealthy man, but Matthews notes that her personal life and goals for herself coincided with her conviction to the arts, a single-minded ambitiousness that was seen as overtly masculine. Her time as a collector “[defied] the classification of a male/female divide,” and left Bostonian society to catch up to her lofty legacy (Matthews 187).
In my analysis of Gardner’s life, I found her patronage to be influential in how art was presented most especially. Her museum, one I have toured myself, is homey and exactly as she intended. Not a single piece has been changed, as per her wishes (“Isabella” gardnermuseum.org). It feels like stepping into Gardner’s world and seeing the art as intimately as she did. Art suddenly feels like an homage to humanity and connection, rather than a praise of the often cold and sterile museums popular today. Each painting, presented in its setting, as seen in Figure 3, is a study in vulnerability. These works cannot hide behind and lean on the imperious nature of a normal museum. Rather, they must be viewed simply as they are in a setting that invites a different, more nuanced worldview. It feels to me like the "Female Gaze"(the womanly form of the “Male Gaze”, which is the act of viewing women with a heterosexual masculine perspective that sexualizes the female form for male pleasure.) version of a museum and that is true badassery. Without the catalyst of loss in her life, without the financial support from her husband, but most especially without the tenacity Gardner possessed, the intimacy of her collection and the vast array of art would not be present today. Her personality became the backbone from which she built her legacy and it was that specific part of her identity, the one that was passionate and rebellious and strong, we have to thank for the incredible collection she left behind.
I next examined the influence and identity of Mary Cassatt on the art world broadly, but also her influence with the work of two exceptional patrons: Louisine Havemeyer and Bertha Honoré Palmer. Mary Cassatt introduced Louisine Havemeyer to art when Havemeyer was just sixteen. This was the beginning of a lifelong friendship and collaboration, “which eventually included 44 Courbets, 28 Monets, 23 Manets, 63 oils, drawings and pastels and 71 sculptures by Degas, and 20 works by Cassatt, as well as major paintings by Rembrandt, Veronese, Goya and El Greco,” (Faxon 15). Louisine’s marriage to Henry Osborne Havemeyer in 1883 gave her the means to begin her art collecting in earnest and, with Cassatt’s guidance, began collecting the art of popular and up-and-coming European artists, particularly within the French Impressionists style. Cassatt’s vast knowledge, wisdom, and sharp mind allowed her, in company with French dealer-collector Théodore Duret, to snatch up paintings for Havemeyer and her husband. Havemeyer’s love of Courbet was especially evident in her collecting. Her acquisition of several sensual nudes by Courbet indicate a rebellious and fully realized woman in Havemeyer (Faxon 19). Her husband’s initial disapproval at the acquisition of these nudes was soon accepted when Havemeyer was noted to have said it was “one of the loveliest pictures I have ever seen,” (“Gustave” metmuseum.org). Figures 4 and 5 demonstrate the bold sensuality of the nudes, something that women of Havemeyer’s time were discouraged from seeing as it lacked propriety. Cassatt’s mentorship of Havemeyer’s artistic eye led to one of the richest collections of impressionism to ever come to America. These two women paved the way for French impressionism into the United States and were also influential in the fight for women’s equality. It is my observation that the worldlier a person’s education, the more they strive to find equality and harmony in their lives. For me, Cassatt and Havemeyer’s extensive time in Paris and their influential roles as powerful patrons of the arts would indicate a rich cultural knowledge, so it is only natural that they would want to see the power they exercised abroad realized in their home country of the United States. Havemeyer in particular was influential in the first-wave feminist movement, specifically with her aid in the foundation of the Congressional Union for Women’s Suffrage in 1913, later the National Women’s Party (Faxon 19).
Havemeyer’s role as patron brought out a sense of responsibility for the upkeep of culture and feminine power, I believe. It is, as I have observed in my own life, difficult to go back to a role in second string when you know the taste of control and leadership in your mouth. I can imagine that Havemeyer would have felt this same dissonance upon her return to America after each acquisition trip abroad. Her perseverance in fighting for women’s equality, that part of her identity so integral to her collecting and activism, grew out of the power Cassatt bestowed upon Havemeyer at a young age with the spark of influence that comes with the purchase of art. Her legacy is one of growth and the desire to share the wealth of knowledge Louisine Havemeyer acquired in her lifetime. It doesn’t hurt that Havemeyer’s extensive donation to the Metropolitan Museum of Art has led to one of the richest and fully realized collections of impressionism in America. Again, we have ourselves a badass woman taking charge of her life and making it something bigger.
Cassatt’s other patron she worked closely with is one of my favorite women I have found in my research. Bertha Honoré Palmer (1849-1918) was a woman of grand and opulent tastes whose sharp mind and fierce ambition not only led to a massive collection of French impressionism, aided by Cassatt, but also led to an impressive business empire and progressive sociopolitical activism. Her depiction in Figure 6 shows her beauty and affluence very clearly. This is badassery at its finest. Being brought up to be relegated to the perimeter of life is stifling to say the least. Not being able to engage fully in the arts, education, science, or politics is unfair and unnatural for the innate curiosity of humans, but that was the way of life in American women during the Gilded Age. For Mrs. Potter Palmer, however, she refused the cards life had dealt her and decided to collect what mattered to her. I believe this is due, in part, to her bull- headed character, but also due to her extreme level of wealth. It’s easy to do what you want rather than what you must when you have the money for it. As a result, Palmer had the largest collection of French impressionist art at the time in America. She and her advisors, Mary Cassatt and Sara Hallowell, collected the art that popular opinion called “queer and deformed,” (Erwin 287). The collection is comprised of the impressionist giants, Monet, Degas, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, Whistler, and Cassatt. Figures 7 and 8 show just a few of the many notable paintings Palmer owned.
With her wealth and character, Palmer pushed past the boundaries women were relegated to not only through her collection of art but also through her continued education at the Art Institute of Chicago where she often lectured on the papers she wrote and where much of her collection now stands. This cultural education influenced Palmer, much like it influenced Havemeyer, to support first-wave feminism. In particular, Palmer helped Jane Addams’ Hull House grow, opened the Palmer Mansion to meetings for the Women’s Trade Union League, and expanded and fought for the enrichment of education for women, as she herself was educated at a few universities with top marks (Erwin 288). But the part about Palmer that really shows her badassery was her business empire. Even before she overtook her husband’s businesses after his death, Palmer was adept at fundraising; but it was Palmer’s investments into railroad spurs, cattle herding, timber, agriculture, and real estate that doubled her fortune in only half the time her husband had taken to acquire the original sum (Erwin 292). It takes a woman of high confidence and intelligence, with an ambitious and fierce personality to make that happen. Bertha Honoré Palmer was the fiercest of them all. Her developments in the world of business impacts America still today and her collection of art, the thing that started it all for Palmer, leaves a rich history behind in Chicago.
The last woman I will discuss in this paper is Gertrude Stein (1874-1946), whose influence on the development of Post-Impressionism and Cubism in Paris had just as much influence on her own work in writing. While the Steins were born and raised in the United States, they made the permanent move to Paris early on and, despite their new permanent home, the influence Gertrude and her brothers Leo and Michael, as well as Michael’s wife Sarah had on the art world in America cannot be understated (Rabinow). Stein and her brother Leo’s intimate patronage and friendship to Pablo Picasso, Henri Matisse, and Paul Cézanne are the main reason why these names are known worldwide. Cubism was essentially born in the walls of the Stein household. How many people can say they helped create an art movement?
Gertrude Stein’s relationship with Pablo Picasso was especially instrumental in creating the Cubist movement. Intellectual, educated, and curious about the fringes of modern thought, Stein and Picasso exchanged thoughts and ideas, coming to determine that art should not mimic nature, but be reduced and reassembled to geometric pieces (Lubow & Rewald). Their friendship is evident in Picasso’s portrait of her, Figure 9, and evident in her work The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas, a biography on her lover and an introspective look at the Stein’s lives in Paris. A quote that embodies their relationship and the formation of Cubism comes from The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas, where Stein says, “After a little while I murmured to Picasso that I liked his portrait of Gertrude Stein. Yes, he said, everybody says that she does not look like it but that does not make any difference, she will, he said,” (Siraganian 591). Her and Leo’s patronage of Cézanne, notably with Figure 11, also informed Stein's work in writing. The intellectual vigor and vision necessary to nurture the growth of artists, done primarily through the salons the Steins hosted in their home, was the product of strong character (Lubow). If Gertrude Stein was meek and mild-mannered, the development of Cubism with Picasso and the collection of some of the greatest works of avant-garde art in Paris at the turn of the 20th century would not have been facilitated. The symbiotic nature of Gertrude Stein and Picasso, as well as Stein’s and her brother’s bold appraisal of Matisse, Cézanne, and others like Toulouse-Lautrec and Renoir helped bring art into the modern era. That truly takes a badass personality to achieve and we have the Steins to thank for that.
Bernard Berenson said of Isabella Stewart Gardner’s philosophy, “Viewing great art can take us away from ourselves and give us, where we are under its spell, the feeling of being identified with the universe, perhaps even of being the soul of the universe,” (Matthews 187). Any time I write about people who change the world through their sheer force of nature, I’m happy, but particularly in this instance I see how the collection of art brought a sense of power to these women. It provides strength and confidence to these women that they may not have had before. Women were second class citizens to men, their needs and rights subservient to the will of white men. One of the first real places to express power over their own lives was in collecting art. Many of the women I discussed today went on to become influential in the realms of education and women’s suffrage, and, of course, in the foundation of modern art collection in America. This expansion of influence that went well beyond the expectations of American society are the picture-perfect example of badassery and, if you will allow me this simplistic summary, all has to do with their sheer strength of character.
If I had the time and the page count I would write on other influential patrons of the time such as Etta and Claribel Cone, the women of the Harlem Renaissance: Mabel Dodge Luhan, Charlotte Osgood Mason, Mary White Ovington, and Amy Spingarn, as well as the founders of the Museum of Modern Art: Lillie Bliss, Abby Aldrich Rockefeller, and Mary Quinn Sullivan. All of these women and the women I wrote on in this brief paper had to have strong personalities in order to make it in a man’s world. They were given the means to collect through wealth, station in life, and race, but it was their badassery that led them down the path of art collection. Without their strength, America may have never seen the French impressionist movement and come to appreciate it. We can never quantify the number of artists who were influenced by the collections of Isabella Stewart Gardner, Louisine Havemeyer, Bertha Honoré Palmer, and Gertrude Stein, as well as the women listed above. In this sense, their contribution to the world of art collection in America is invaluable and I’ll say it for the last time, the mark of true badassery.
Megan Singleton, December 6th, 2018.
References:
Art Rooms Blue Room. The Isabella Stewart Gardner MuseumPrint.
Courbet, Gustave. Nude with a Flowering Branch. 1863. The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Courbet, Gustave. The Woman in the Waves. 1869. The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Cézanne, Paul. Madame Cézanne with a Fan. 1888. E. G. Bürhle Collection Foundation.
Degas, Edgar. On the Stage. 1877.
Erwin, Robert. "Having it All." The Massachusetts Review 51.2 (2010): 286-93. Web.
Faxon, Alicia. "Painter and Patron: Collaboration of Mary Cassatt and Louisine Havemeyer." Woman's Art Journal 3.2 (1983): 15-20. Web.
"Gustave Courbet | Nude with a Flowering Branch | The Met." The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 2018. Web. 25 November 2018 <https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/436018>.
"Isabella Stewart Gardner Bio." The Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum. 2018. Web. 20 November 2018 <https://www.gardnermuseum.org/about/isabella-stewart-gardner- bio#chapter1>.
Lubow, Arthur. "An Eye for Genius: The Collections of Gertrude and Leo Stein." Smithsonian Magazine 2012Print.
Matisse, Henri. Woman with a Hat. 2905. San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.
Matthews, Rosemary. "Collectors and Why they Collect: Isabella Stewart Gardner and Her Museum of Art. " Journal of History of Collections 21.2 (2009): 183-9. Web.