A review of the exhibition at the National Gallery of Art, by Marc Vincent
Impressionism is one of the most famous and beloved styles in Western art, and the National Gallery of Art (NGA) in Washington is marking the 150th anniversary of the first Impressionist exhibition with Paris 1874: The Impressionist Moment, on view until January 19, 2025. The show packs a punch, highlighting the social and political context of the times and the radical nature of the Impressionists compared with the more traditional academic painters favored by the Salon.
As an alternative to the conservative Salon exhibitions, and to have more say over how their art was selected and exhibited, Claude Monet, Auguste Renoir, Edgar Degas, Berthe Morisot, and others formed an incorporated business called Société Anonyme des Artistes Peintres, Sculpteurs, Graveurs etc. Their first exhibition opened on April 15, 1874, at the studio of the renowned photographer Felix Nadar, 35 Boulevard des Capucines. The entrance to the NGA exhibition is a gigantic photomontage of the façade of the building in the 1860s, giving one the impression (pardon the pun!) of visiting the exhibition back in 1874.
And while you are waiting in line to enter the exhibition, you can feast your eyes on large-scale film clips on the walls featuring Paris at the turn of the century.
The first Impressionist exhibition contained some 200 works by 31 artists, and during its month-long run, about 3,500 people came to see it. At the NGA, it’s a thrill to see the very painting that gave birth to the movement’s name: Monet’s Impression, Sunrise from 1872, on loan from the Musée Marmottan in Paris.
The label Impressionism was coined by Louis Le Roy, an art critic who, like most people, found the paintings so sketchy that they seemed mere “impressions” rather than finished works of art, and he cited Monet’s Impression, Sunrise as a case in point. The name stuck, and the artists who had joined the Société Anonyme came to be called “Impressionists.” They would exhibit their works a total of eight times between 1874 and 1886.
Just two weeks after the opening of the Impressionist exhibition, the official Salon opened on May 1 at the Palais de l’Industrie, an imposing Beaux-Arts building on the Champs-Élysées that had been built for the Paris World’s Fair of 1855.
The Salon had been founded in 1667 during the reign of Louis XIV and featured works by graduates of the Académie des Beaux-Arts. From the mid-18th century until around 1900, it was one of Europe’s largest and most prestigious annual exhibitions of contemporary art. The Salon of 1874 lasted 2 months and attracted some half a million visitors, who viewed 3,701 works by over 2,000 artists! Like previous Salons, the jury who selected the works tended to be conservative and favored paintings that addressed moralizing and didactic themes from history, mythology, or religion. Artists whose works were selected for the Salon gained immeasurable prestige, and their successful career was guaranteed.
The painting by Camille Cabaillot-Lassalle of the Salon of 1874 gives one a glimpse of what the Salon experience was like: paintings are stacked tightly from floor to ceiling as elegantly dressed visitors mill around. What’s fascinating about this particular painting is that the works of art depicted on the wall of the Salon were actually executed by the artists themselves—so it was not strictly the oeuvre of Cabaillot-Lassalle but a collaborative effort by many hands.
The first room at the NGA unambiguously sets up the contrast between works in the official Salon and those at the Société Anonyme exhibition. One of the most instructive aspects of the exhibition in Washington is that the wall labels for each work indicate where it was exhibited—either at the Salon or at the Impressionist exhibition. Paired side by side are works by the immensely talented and successful academic painter Jean-Léon Gérôme and the younger upstart, Claude Monet.
Right: Claude Monet, Impression, Sunrise, 1873 (Musée Marmottan, Paris)
Gérôme’s painting is representative of the official academic style against which the Impressionists rebelled. His paintings, such as this one, with their historical subject matter, flawlessly blended brushwork, meticulous detail, and skillful manipulation of light and color, were extremely popular and sought-after. L’Éminence Grise recreates a scene from the palace of Cardinal Richelieu, the virtual ruler of France during the childhood of Louis XIII. You see the cardinal’s chief adviser, a Capuchin friar known as L’Éminence Grise (the Gray Cardinal), descending a staircase as courtiers bow in respect and reverence. In modern parlance, éminence grise has come to mean “the power behind the throne.”
Monet’s painting, on the other hand, is not rooted in history but is simply the painter’s impression of the harbor of Le Havre, where he grew up, and in great contrast to Gérôme, his brushwork is loose and highly visible. If Monet’s technique is clear, his subject matter is not: the hazy sky obscures the rising sun, and you can barely make out the boats, steamships, and masts in the distance.
And unlike previous artists, Monet and his fellow Impressionists usually painted not in the controlled environment of the studio but outdoors or en plein air. A painting, quickly painted on the spot, was more “truthful” than one labored over for hours and hours in the studio. And one could paint outside because oil paint was now available in small portable tubes made of tin, and easels were now collapsible and could be easily transported.
The rest of the NGA exhibit is organized thematically, placing the Impressionist movement in its political and social context. One often forgets that the Impressionist movement followed on the heels of two catastrophic events in French history. Through paintings, engravings, and photographs, the gallery entitled “Paris in Crisis” reminds us that France had recently suffered a crushing and humiliating defeat in the Franco-Prussian War (1870-71) and that this was quickly followed by the Commune, a social progressive movement of working-class groups and former soldiers who succeeded in taking control of Paris in March 1871. The two-month-long civil war that ensued between the Communards and French government troops caused tens of thousands of casualties, as well as the destruction of major Parisian monuments such as the Tuileries Palace and the Hôtel de Ville, both dating back to the Renaissance. Scars from these events were still visible in the city, as you can see looking up the Champs-Élysées.
Other themes addressed at the NGA include the Impressionists’ depictions of contemporary life in the city’s public spaces, be they theaters, the opera house, cafés, or parks. Like a phoenix rising from the ashes, the Impressionists championed modern Paris as the capital of entertainment, leisure, nightlife, and fashion. They also depicted the allure of the countryside, like the coastal resorts on the English Channel, or the villages near Paris which were fast becoming suburbs. Industrialization facilitated all these pursuits, with the advent of train travel and set working hours that made people’s schedules more regimented and predictable.
If the NGA exhibition entrance featured the façade on the Boulevard des Capucines, Monet’s Boulevard des Capucines shows you a view from the Impressionist exhibition itself looking out onto Paris.
(Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, Kansas City)
On the right edge of the painting, in the middle, you can just make out two black blobs that seem to indicate top hats—people in the apartment next door who, just like Monet and by extension like us, are looking down at the lively scene below.
The painting reveals all the hallmarks of Impressionism in its contemporary subject matter and hazy, unfinished appearance. Monet did not use the traditional techniques of atmospheric perspective to suggest depth, or chiaroscuro (modeling through contrasts of light and shade) to suggest form. Instead, he painted rapidly on the spot, using only color variations to capture the effects of light and atmosphere. His broken, vibrating brushstrokes give the picture a shimmering quality that suggests that we are witnessing a fleeting moment in time, echoing the faster pace of modern life. Monet and the Impressionists stressed the primacy of seeing the world through their eyes, unhampered by intellectual theories or past traditions and formulas. This is very modern indeed: capturing the incidental, the momentary, and the passing aspects of everyday life. There is nothing universal, timeless, or moralizing about this painting!
You can see why most Parisians had a difficult time figuring out what these new paintings were all about: they were used to darker palettes and smooth brushstrokes, and they were accustomed to academic subjects that told heroic or moralizing stories from history, myth, or religion. Monet’s bright, luminous, color-filled scenes of nothing in particular were a dramatic change from the Salon, as was their sketchy quality and highly visible brushwork.
But the NGA exhibition also points out that attention-seeking journalists and critics often exaggerated reports of scandalized visitors to the Impressionist exhibition—that it was dangerous to one’s health or that pregnant women should avoid it. In truth, most visitors were simply underwhelmed by the exhibition, and it was a commercial failure. But by the mid-1880s, the Impressionist artists were well-known and some had actually become wealthy, like Monet who in 1890 was able to buy a house at Giverny. And in a supreme act of irony, the building where the first Impressionist exhibition was held still stands on the Boulevard des Capucines, whereas the Palais de l’Industrie was torn down in the late 1890s to make way for the Petit and Grand Palais of the Universal Exposition of 1900.
Marc Vincent, an ALFCR member, grew up in France and is a former art history teacher. All photos, except where indicated, were taken by Marc during his visit to the NGA exhibition on November 8.