A few months ago, I saw a couple of blow-me-away paintings posted on Facebook by one of my arty friends. They were by John Twachtman, an artist I’d vaguely heard of, knew he was classed as one of the American Impressionists but that was it and even that I wasn’t sure about. So, curious, I went on a hunt.

 

There was no book on John Henry Twachtman (1853-1902) in our local library but I did find one via interlibrary loan (we are soooo lucky to have this ability to access books from other libraries!). Most of the images and the information are taken from that book: John Twachtman by Richard J. Boyle, Watson-Guptill, 1988. (Just the fact that it was difficult to find even one book on this artist reveals how little he is known.) Unfortunately, I don’t think the reproductions are very good but I decided to use them anyway.

 

First, the images I saw on Facebook:

It was the second picture that I was most entranced by. There is such a simplicity to it, a moving from realism to abstraction. Although the values are close in range, there is still a real dark in the front grasses which contrasts with the lightest light in the water beside the grasses (the light is also seen in the sky). And even though he has put this focal point (the highest contrast) in the lower part of the picture, somehow it doesn’t stop our eye from ranging over the whole image. By the way, have you noticed how large this painting is?? I yearn to see it in person!

 

The same applies to “Springtime” – again with a close range of values punctuated by a very small amount of dark. Here are the images in black and white which I hope helps to augment my words.

 

 

 

John Twachtman was born in Cincinnati in 1853 of German heritage. By 1871 he was studying at a local art school and in 1874, at age 21, he met Frank Duveneck who was to change the course of his art life. It was Duveneck who invited Twachtman to join him at the Royal Academy of Fine Arts in Munich in 1875. Many other artists studied there including William Merritt Chase (1849-1916) and Thomas Dewing (1851-1938). While in Munich, Twachtman quickly adopted the style of Munich artists such as Wilhelm Leibl (1844-1900) and began painting alla prima (all at one time) and with rather dark colours. A good example of this style is “Head of a Man.”

 

 

Twachtman studied in Munich until 1877 when he went to Venice with Duveneck and Chase. The paintings he did there were somber, showing the influence of the dark style from Munich. The following year, Twachtman returned to Cincinnati on hearing of his father’s death but stayed there only briefly, choosing instead to paint on the east coast.

 

On an offer from Duveneck to teach in his private school, Twachtman ended up in Florence in 1880. Before setting off, he wrote to J. Alden Weir (1852-1919) who he’d met the year before, “In my mind I have finer pictures than ever before. Ten thousand pictures come and go everyday and those are the only complete pictures painted, pictures that shall never be polluted by paint and canvas.”

A second visit to Venice brought him into contact with James McNeill Whistler who was in the city to complete a commission as well as escape the publicity of the Ruskin trial of 1877. His work in  etchings and pastels greatly influenced the “Duveneck boys”. (In an earlier blog I wrote about a few of Whistler’s Venice pastels. Click here to read it.)

Twachtman returned to Cincinnati in 1881 after Duveneck’s school closed. There he married Martha Scudder, daughter of a prominent physician. The Twatchmans left soon after and headed for England, Holland and Belgium but returned to Cincinnati in 1882 for the birth of their son. (It’s amazing how much backing and forthing Twachtman did between the US and Europe!).

They then headed for Paris (apparently with the financial help of his father-in-law) where Twachtman studied from 1883-1885 at the Academie Julien and spent much of his time learning to draw. He also came under the influence (as did many other American artists) of the work of Jules Bastien-Lepage (1848-1884) which combined accurate draftsmanship with the atmosphere of outdoor painting. Twachtman began to replace the bravura brushstroke and darker tones of his Munich style with a more even application of paint and diffuse overall light. You can see the difference between the painting below and the two paintings above that I showed you first – they were done within about a year or so of each other.

 

 

Twachtman returned to the Unites States  in 1885 and by the next year was living in Connecticut. In 1888, one of his paintings, Windmills, won the coveted Webb Prize at the 10th annual exhibition of the Society of American Painters. He began to show regularly with the Society of Painters in Pastel and exhibited with them in 1888 receiving favourable reviews.

The book I am using as a reference does not contain any pastels so I pulled a couple from the internet so you could see their delicate beauty and the obvious influence of Whistler’s work with the background paper colour being such an important element in the picture. I think they are exquisite. They have the feel of work done on location.

 

 

 

By now, Twachtman was enjoying a certain amount of financial and critical success. It was also around this time, 1889, that Twachtman’s style began to change again.

 

Hmmmmm……this blog is already rather long and I have so much more to share. So you’ll just have to wait for Part 2 I’m afraid. Hang tight, the best is yet to come!!

 

One more before I leave. I found it on the Butler Institute of American Art website. It’s done in oil but seems to relate closely to the pastels above. It’s a beauty!

 

 

In the meantime, I’d love to hear if you’d ever heard of John Twachtman and if you had, could you call a painting to mind? And if so, which one?

 

Have a really super weekend,

 

~ Gail

 

 

PS. And because I came across this painting as I was ending my blog research and writing, I had to include it. It’s from the Met. The Twachtman family rented a chateau near the port of Dieppe and while there Twachtman painted views around the Arques River Valley, this being an example. Once back in his Paris studio, he then painted the monumental canvas of the same subject.

 

And because the Met has the larger version, I use their reproduction for you to compare and contrast with the smaller painting. Remember that one is the size of a small table, the other would cover a large section of wall!

 

 

Oh and here’s the book I used.

For Canadian purchasers:

 
For US and International purchasers: