L'Ecole de Paris & Belgium - selling exhibition Winter 2014. by Galerie St-John, Gent

Lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Ecole de Paris and Belgium

Influences and Friendships 1916-1946

Galerie St-John

Lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Ecole de Paris and Belgium Influences and Friendships 1916-1946

A selling exhibition

28 November to 28 December 2014

Galerie St-John Bij St-Jacobs, 15A 9000 Gent

Selection & Texts

Emmy Steel

Raf Steel

Dedicated to our families

Foreword.

For a long time our gallery has wanted to make an exhibition on the modern figurative painting that existed in Belgium and France in the first half of the 20th century. The artists involved were averse to the dogmas and constraints of much of the avant-garde theory. Art historians invented the names Ecole de Paris, Jeune Peinture Française, Constructeurs and Coloristes, Expressionists, Animists or Retour à l’Ordre to try to catalogue these artists, both in Belgium and in France. However, they seemed to deliberately cross the lines drawn by art historians. Their originality, their sumptuous painting technique and their will to modernise figurative art in relation to the history of art, using old masters as guides towards new art, appealed to us. All artists in this exhibition and their works were carefully chosen. Their relation with Belgium can be direct, for instance in the case of Friesz and Favory who worked in Belgium and both got influenced by Rubens and Jordaens. It can also be indirect as is the case with Maillol, who exhibited frequently in Belgium and had a large influence on artists like Rik Wouters and the generation of sculptors from the 1920s and 1930s. Some painters, like Foujita, were more appreciated in Belgium in the beginning of their careers, than in France, and counted many friends and collectors among the Belgians. For Belgian painters and sculptors at that time, France and Paris in particular remained a favoured travel and exhibition destination. Emile Claus went to Paris often to connect with the Parisian art world and to visit his many artist friends, who in turn came to visit him in Astene when they had a show in Belgium. Hippolyte Daeye had an important influence on the Belgian view on modern French art through his selection for the international Kunst van Heden exhibitions in Antwerp. De Smet, Saverys and Servaes were closely following the artistic developments in France, either first hand or via magazines or their dealers’ shows. The art dealers in Brussels regularly showed French artists (solo, or together with Belgian artists) and helped Belgian collectors build extensive collections of French art. The period between the wars saw an unprecedented interaction between French and Belgian art, also with numerous official exhibitions in both capitals. Reading about the artists in our show, it is amazing how much similarity and comradery there seems to have been between them. After all these years, this is still visible in their artwork.

CATALOGUE

Provenance Henry Van de Velde 1. Artistide Maillol (Banyuls-sur-Mer 1861 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Banyuls-sur-Mer 1944) Letter to Henry Van de Velde, 1905.

ink on paper (double sided, two separate pages) 17,5 x 22,5 cm Signed on the last page.

Provenance:

Henry Van de Velde Thyl Van de Velde Private collection (gift from Thyl Van de Velde)

Robert Kurt or Curt von Mutzenbecher (1866-1938) was a nobleman with a background in law. The man studied in Bonn and Berlin and worked between 1891 and 1893 at the German embassy in Washington. He was a member of the publishing company that edited the modern art magazine PAN. Being a close friend of Eberhard von Bodenhausen and Harry Graf Kessler, cosmopolitan, highly cultivated and an avid modern art collector, it was only a matter of time before Von Mutzenbecher met Henry Van de Velde. He commissioned Van de Velde an interior in his house in Berlin and when he moved to Wiesbaden in 1903, asked Van de Velde again to conceive a new interior for at least two rooms in his house. Von Mutzenbecher was appointed to head the Royal Theater of the city, where he worked closely with a.o. Hugo Von Hofmannsthal and Edward Gordon Craig. The music room in the Wiesbaden house of von Mutzenbecher had to be something striking and modern. As head of the theatre, he constantly tended to invite personalities from the theatre and art world. The music room would be the centre of his social and working life. Commissioned in 1903, the designing of the room proved difficult. It is not clear if the client wished to incorporate art in the general design or if this was originally the idea of Van de Velde. Van de Velde introduced von Mutzenbecher to Theo Van Rysselberghe, who in turn introduced the German collector to Maurice Denis. How Aristide Maillol got involved in the design is not clear. As Maillol addresses Van de Velde in his letter with a very formal â&#x20AC;&#x153;Monsieurâ&#x20AC;?, he was probably asked by von Mutzenbecher himself. Henry Van de Velde was clearly in charge of the overall design, and asked both artists to comply to his decorative scheme. He asked the painter Maurice Denis, who was working on the commissioned murals for the music room since 1904, to reduce the different subjects of each of the panels to one subject for all 5 panels, thus creating a harmonious decoration for the room.

Arisitide Maillol, letter to Henry Van de Velde, verso (above) and recto (below).

The unpublished letter and drawing now for sale shows that Maillol had doubts about the idea of Van de Velde to put a kneeling figure on top of the mantelpiece, in front of a large mirror. Perhaps Maillol thought that his small statue would not be able to compete with the overwhelming visual presence of both the design of the room furnishings by Van de Velde and the large colourful murals by Denis. Writing from Marly-le-Roi, where the artist had his studio since 1903, to Van de Velde on the 5th of April 1905, Maillol answers Van de Velde on questions of materials, probably for the choice of stone for the mantelpiece. Van de Velde’s preference seems to go to a grey coloured stone. Then the tone of the letter changes. Maillol challenges the view of Van de Velde to conceive a kneeling nude sculpture for the mantelpiece and asks for a change of design: “[…] ne pourrait-on faire au lieu de statue accroupie un grand bas-relief qui pourrait être très plat ou tout à fait en ronde bosse? Cela nous permettra de faire plus grand et j’ai un beau sujet mais alors il faudrait pour le prix indiqué de la pierre tendre – car se serait grandeur nature – vous mettrez une glace dessus […]”

The music room, as shown in the Dresden exhibition in 1906 (probably destroyed in WO II).

Maillol also includes a sketch of the relief. As we know through contemporary photographs of the finished music room at the Dresden exhibition for Decorative Arts in 1906, Van de Velde got his way. Maillol finished the kneeling figure as planned.

The idea as first formulated in this letter to Van de Velde was not abandoned by the sculptor. When Maillol was approached in 1905 by Karl Ernst Osthaus for the design of a large figure for the Hohenhof garden, the composition of the sitting nude was transformed from a bas-relief to a three dimensional large sculpture, eventually entitled Sérénité.

Sérénité, sandstone sculpture in the Hohenhof garden, 1905-1910 (now lost)

The scale of the sculpture is the same as the relief, according to Maillol in his letter the relief was to be executed life-size and in “[…] de la pierre tendre […]”. Sérénité measured 155 cm and was executed in sandstone. One can clearly see the same pose, right leg under the left, the same hair due of the model, the only important difference being the position of arms, not restricted by the constraints of a relief. In the end, Maillol was able to execute his idea. The fact that the statue was conceived for Osthaus’ Hohenhof garden, might not be a coincidence. Could it be that Van de Velde suggested Maillol to rework the sketch for the relief into a sculpture? Probably Maillol wanted to execute his idea, and this letter shows the extent to which the sculptor became almost obsessed with a particular pose. Further research into the Hohenhof commission will perhaps shed some more light on its genesis.

2. Hippolyte Daeye (Gent 1873 – Antwerpen 1952) Baby – Portrait of Marita Van Doorne, 1918.

Oil on canvas 66 x 41 cm Signed bottom right and in large capital letters on the back of the canvas.

Exhibited:

Rétrospective Hippolyte Daeye, Ixelles, Musée d’Ixelles, 27/04-04/06/1989, cat. nr. 50. Overzichtstentoonstelling Hippolyte Daeye, Oostende, P.M.M.K., 01/0725/09/1989.

Provenance:

collection Beaujean. collection Mr. & Mme Thierry Guislain. Private collection.

Bibliography: De Visscher-D’Haeye B., Hippolyte Daeye 1873-1952: Genese van een Oeuvre, Brussel, Gemeentekrediet, 1989, catalogue raisonné number 50, ill. p. 237.

Additional information: An old handwritten label on the back of the stretcher indicates the title of the painting and the date“1917”. We however prefer to follow the catalogue raisonné entry which dates the painting 1918.

Although Hippolyte Daeye received artistic training in Gent (Academy) and Antwerpen (Hoger Instituut), one can argue that his exile to London, during the first war, was of greater influence on his art. In London, Daeye was confronted with the work of Modigliani, Matisse and Cézanne, which he studied. His friendship with Gustave Van de Woestijne, Constant Permeke and Edgard Tytgat were equally important in his development towards a personal style. In England Daeye laid the foundations of his art. After executing a series of land- and cityscapes in a post-impressionist style, the artist embarked on his first series of works depicting babies. Painted around 1918 in a very sketchy style and with an almost fauvist palette, this subject completely liberated the artist from his academic teachings. By nature very difficult to capture through the means of a lengthy process of portrait painting, the artist soon found himself concentrating on the faces of the infants, leaving the rest of the surface either blank or using it as an abstract colour backdrop, sometimes suggesting movement. For Daeye, depicting the human form was primordial. Painting babies, the artist was forced to simplify his pictorial language, and had to try to get to the essence of what he saw. During his whole career, Daeye continued to paint babies and young children, and tried to simplify his technique (both drawing and use of paint) thus concentrating on what he considered important. Daeye’s paintings of babies and children don’t want to be “cute” or “charming. His babies, children and adults look at us almost with indifference, they seem to live in a world that has no connection with ours. The poet and art critic Maurice Gilliams, a close friend of the artist, found that Daeye’s paintings have no beginning or no end. They are evolving continuously. Maybe that is why the artist chose to depict infants, growing and evolving constantly, without a definite outcome as to what their personality will become. By depicting this evolution, artist and critic Michel Seuphor found that Daeye depicted what he called “le vrai”, the pure feeling. It would be a mistake to think that Daeye’s paintings were executed in a fast and direct manner. His paintings were all the result of long and thorough research into their composition and technique. Daeye took weeks and even months to start to paint the image that he had in mind. Daeye’s last paintings from the 1940’s are masterpieces in masking the painstaking process that was needed in order to make them seem mere sketches, unfinished works even. Also the way Daeye applied paint onto the canvas is very particular the oil paint becomes almost transparent. In his later works Daeye even tried to eliminate his personality from his works. Luc and Paul Haesaerts concluded their article on the painter with a curious thought that perfectly illustrates the duality and the mystery that surrounds the work of this enigmatic artist : “ […] Ainsi Daeye révéla à lui-même et à nous son dieu; et ni lui ni nous, bien que nous trouvant face à face avec ce que nous désirons connaître, ne savons au juste ce qu’il est et comment il naquit.”

Provenance Chéron & Cie., Paris 3. Tsuguharu-Léonard Foujita (Tokyo 1886 – Zürich 1968) Esmeralda, 1917.

Watercolour on paper 30,7 x 26 cm Signed and dated bottom left (also in Japanese).

Exhibited:

Probably Deuxième Exposition personnelle du peintre japonais Tsugouharu Foujita, Paris, Galerie Chéron & Cie., 05/11-30/11/1917.

Provenance:

Purchased at Galerie Chéron & Cie. on the first of December 1917 for the amount of 250 francs. Private collection.

Additional information: This painting will be included in volume 4 of the “Catalogue de l’Oeuvre” of T-L. Foujita currently prepared by the Archives Artistiques, under the number “D17.167.A”. The original certificate of the painting by Mme Sylvie Buisson dated 02/04/2014 will be provided to the buyer. The original invoice by the Galerie des Indépendants (Chéron & Cie.), 56, rue la Boétie (Paris), dated 01/12/1917 will be provided to the buyer.

Through the mediation of his first wife, the painter Fernande Barrey, the Japanese-French painter Foujita was given his first exhibition in the Parisian gallery of Chéron in the rue la Boétie in June 1917. The preface of the catalogue was written by his friend André Salmon, who convinced Picasso to visit the exhibition which showed no less than 110 watercolours. Picasso has stayed for hours to study the work and his endorsement meant a great deal for the young artist. The show was a success, both critically and commercially, and Chéron organised a second show in November of the same year. A star was born. Belgium was another key to success for Foujita as an artist. In the 1920s, both Brussels and Antwerp became primary markets for the artist. Galleries like Le Centaure and Sélection presented his work from 1920 onwards, even before Foujita had become an established artist in Paris. François Franck in Antwerp became one of his earliest patrons, buying works, introducing him to his friends and making sure that Foujita was included in the international Kunst van Heden exhibitions. It is possible that the Belgian art world (artists and collectors alike) was drawn to the work of Foujita because of the fact that it showed an alternative to expressionism, a way to reconcile modernism with craftsmanship. In this perspective Foujita’s work can be compared with that of Gustave Van de Woestijne and of course Valerius De Saedeleer. The quality of execution remained one of the important criteria for Belgian collectors to judge works of art. Foujita was a master in drawing and the small, almost miniature works he exhibited in Le Centaure in 1922, contributed to his fame. Jean Milo wrote about this exhibition: “ […] des premières oeuvres que j’ai pu voir deux ou trois ans auparavant rue du Musée [the 1922 Foujita exhibition in Le Centaure], petits tableaux représentant presque tous des coins de Paris ou des jardins d’enfants dont la finesse pourrait rivaliser avec certains Douanier Rousseau […]” Before Word War II Foujita became one of the most appreciated leading French artists in Belgium. Apart from a few exceptions, most of the works collected by Belgian collectors were of small dimensions. Subjects varied, but portraits and paintings and drawings of animals were preferred. The animal plays an important role in the work of Foujita. Through depictions of cats and dogs the artist represented his desires and/or hopes in a secretive manner. These were closely aligned with the artists’ feelings at the time of painting, so very personal and intimate works. Paradoxically, the paintings, drawings and etchings of cats and dogs (the latter are much more rare) became an overnight successes with the public. In 1928, André Salmon wrote: “Foujita triomphe dans la peinture des animaux; les animaux lui ont gagné le coeur des hommes: à mesure que notre siècle devient plus méchant, son amour des bêtes s’accroît (Est-ce un signe de décadence ou un espoir à l’horizon?) Nous vivons sous le signe du chat et du chien en art comme en politique.” So even if these paintings were applauded foremost on their technical prouesse and for their aesthetic appeal, people also acknowledged they had a deeper meaning.

Provenance Le Centaure, Brussels 4. Tsuguharu-Léonard Foujita (Tokyo 1886 – Zürich 1968) Paris or Le réverbère, cour intérieure à Paris, 1921.

Oil on canvas 12 x 12 cm Signed and dated bottom left and signed (Tsuguharu in Japanese), also signed and dated by the artist on the back of the stretcher.

Exhibited:

Exposition T. Foujita, Bruxelles, Galerie du Centaure, 13/01-29/01/1922, cat. nr. 4.

Provenance:

Acquired by the family of the previous owners at the Le Centaure exhibition in 1922 for 300,- frcs. Private collection.

Provenance Le Centaure, Brussels 5. Tsuguharu-Léonard Foujita (Tokyo 1886 – Zürich 1968) Le (petit) Pékinois, 1924.

Oil on canvas 33,2 x 24 cm Signed and dated bottom centre-right and signed (Tsuguharu in Japanese), also signed and dated by the artist on the back of the stretcher.

Exhibited:

Exposition T. Foujita, Bruxelles, Galerie du Centaure, 25/10-05/11/1924, cat. nr. 7.

Provenance:

Acquired by the family of the previous owners at the Le Centaure exhibition in 1924 for 1750,- frcs.

Additional information: The painting still bears the original label by the Le Centaure Gallery at the back of the stretcher. This painting will be included in volume 4 of the “Catalogue de l’Oeuvre” of T-L. Foujita currently prepared by the Archives Artistiques, under the number “D24.192.H”. The original certificate of the painting by Mme Sylvie Buisson dated 02/04/2014 will be provided to the buyer.

6. Henri de Waroquier (Paris 1881 – Paris 1970) Tour à Pointé la Reina (Espagne), 1921.

Oil on canvas 46 x 33 cm

Signed and numbered “561” bottom left, on the back of the canvas the typical, large inventory label of the artist, with title, date, medium, measures and number. The name of the first owner effaced. On the back of the canvas, the artist painted the number, date and his monogram. At the back of the stretcher part of an old auction label of the Palais des Beaux-Arts, Brussels is visible.

Provenance:

Private collection.

Additional information: Henri de Waroquier depicts in this painting a view of the tower of the Santa Maria de las Huertas, in Puente la Reina, which today goes by the name of the Church of the Cross, due to the important roman crucifix which is displayed in the building.

Henri de Waroquier was born in the rue Le Pelletier (Paris), his home was on the opposite side of the Vollard and Durand-Ruel galleries. One might say he was predestined to become a painter. However, his aristocratic family was not enthusiastic to send young Henri to the academy, hence his decision to live independently from his family at the age of 20. de Waroquier was largely selftaught and in his early years relied on designing decorative art for his income. Starting out as a post-impressionist, de Waroquier became interested in renaissance art, but his friendship with Charles Dufresne and Dunoyer de Segonzac gave his painting a decisive direction. Through his friends, Henri discovers Cézanne, and in the 1920s the artist makes a highly personal synthesis of renaissance and post-impressionism. His work from Italy and especially from Spain in the 1920s shows the artist at his best. de Waroquier himself wrote: “C’est à Tolède que je me suis trouvé. Devant un tel paysage, je me minéralise. C’est à travers ses révoltes géologiques que je ressens le besoin de peindre.” His views of Spain combine a very particular, almost earth bound palette, with a treatment of light reminiscent of El Greco and with a treatment of volume and space reminiscent of Cézanne. One also senses the love of the artist for the history of the country and the overall presence of religion. The works of Spain and later of Italy and Venice in particular become immensely successful and are exhibited throughout the world. de Waroquier’s work is coveted by a whole generation of artists, collectors and critics. In the 1930s de Waroquier turns away from his ‘minimalist’ work of the previous decade and starts to make highly baroque paintings, sometimes on a monumental scale. Between 1931 and 1937 de Waroquier starts to question his art. He stops painting and sculpting, does not exhibit and tries to revitalise his art through drawing. Around 1934 de Waroquier starts creating ephemeral sculptures. He is considered to be one of the first conceptual sculptors, making sculptures, photographing them and then destroying the works with only the pictures surviving. Although active almost until his death in 1970, de Waroquier loses his relevance to other artists at the end of the 1930s. Becoming very reclusive, his work gradually disappears from (inter)national exhibitions. In his heydays, de Waroquier frequently exhibited in Belgium and his work belongs to the collections of the museums in Brussels (a landscape from 1921) and Gent (a still-life of 1920).

7. Henri de Waroquier (Paris 1881 – Paris 1970) Baigneuse.

Broderie au passé. 10 x 11,5 cm Signed in full bottom left, on the back of the frame, the typical large inventory label of the artist, with title, medium, measures and number “635”. The name of the first owner indicated. The number dates the embroidery to the 1920s. The works has its original frame.

Provenance:

Probably bought in Paris around 1922 by the great grandmother of the previous owners. Private collection.

As mentioned above, de Waroquier started out making a living as a designer of decorative art. He had a keen interest in designing ‘cartons’ for tapestries. A few designs for wall hangings have survived. He also designed fashionable evening bags, which he exhibited and sold among others at the Salon d’Automne in the 1920s. One of these bags, from 1923, is now in the collection of the Musée des Arts Décoratifs in Paris. This embroidery is special to the extent that the artist considered it to be equal to his paintings. It bears the same inventory number and is fully signed. de Waroquier clearly wanted to make the difference between this work, which he saw as a work of art, and designs in the field of the decorative arts, which were not included in his catalogue raisonné and were monogrammed instead of signed.

Provenance Le Centaure, Brussels 8. Othon Friesz (Le Havre 1879 – Paris 1949) Le Coudon, 1924.

Oil on canvas 22,5 x 33 cm Signed and dated bottom right, title on a label on the back of the stretcher. There is also an original Le Centaure label on the back of the stretcher, mentioning author, date and title.

Exhibited:

Exposition E. Othon Friesz, Bruxelles, Galerie du Centaure, 14/02-25/02/1925, cat. nr. 2.

Provenance:

Acquired by the family of the previous owners at the Le Centaure exhibition in 1925 Private collection.

Additional information: There is a label affixed to the back of the canvas, of the French Customs, division “Service des Expositions”.

Friesz has always had a close relationship with Belgium. His stay in Antwerp in 1906, where Friesz painted alongside Georges Braque, and where the painter laid the foundations of his fauvist works of 1907, was of great importance. It goes without doubt that Friesz saw works by Rubens and one wonders if these baroque masterpieces had an influence on the budding fauvist. After the First World War, Friesz’ change of style was greatly supported by Belgian critics and collectors. His solo and group exhibitions in the galleries of the capital of the nation were avidly reviewed and visited. The important and trendsetting gallery Le Centaure showed Friesz’ work four times between the Wars, and the 1925 show was the first solo exhibition of Friesz outside of France. Friesz also had a solo exhibition at the Georges Giroux Gallery in 1929. To the traditional press, the artist remained the Fauve painter of before the war, but Karel Van de Woestijne, reviewing the 1925 Friesz show at Le Centaure, aptly put it as follows: “En laat Othon Friesz nu voor elk ander een ‘fauve’ blijven heten: voor mij is hij voortaan nog alleen een schilder, een groot schilder.” In 1922, Othon Friesz started the construction of a villa, called “Les Jarres” at Cap Brun near Toulon. Friesz frequented the region from 1918 onwards and in the 1920s his view on the mountain Le Coudon, would become central in his work. At the 1925 Friesz exhibition in Le Centaure, the artist divided the exhibition in three parts: an untitled part, “Le Bois” and “Les Collines de Toulon, 1924” showing views from around his villa. Number 1 and 2 of this exhibition were views of Le Coudon. The artist himself attached great importance to the views of the Coudon mountain. He sold one work of large dimensions to the Grenoble Museum of Modern Art, another Coudon view belongs to the collection of the Museum of Fine Arts of Antwerp and a work similar to ours, but smaller, once belonged to British painters Clive and Vanessa Bell and is now hanging in the Charleston Museum in Sussex.

9. André Favory (Paris 1889 – Paris 1937) Esquisse pour L’Eté.

Oil on canvas 38 x 46,5 cm Signed bottom right, title written by the artist on the back of the canvas. He also wrote his name and address, 4 Villa des Camélias [Paris] 14. A number “N° 41” is also visible, but it is not clear if this is in the hand of the artist.

Provenance:

Acquired by the previous owners at a sale in Galerie Fiévez, on the 23rd of March 1933, for the sum of 253 francs. Private collection.

André Favory was one of the most important painters of his generation. Favory started painting in a post-impressionist manner. In 1913 he decided to attend the classes of the Académie Julian in Paris where he met Metzinger, Lhote, Gleizes, de la Fresnaye and Marie Laurencin. These and the cubist work of Picasso pushed Favory towards a cubist style. His close contacts with André Lhote and Le Fauconnier were very important in this early development. The advent of the First World War was a breaking point. No longer satisfied with cubism, the artist asked André Derain which direction to take. Derain told him to follow his instincts, and Favory turned away from cubism in 1919. His work ‘Les Baigneuses’, now in the Musée du Petit Palais in Genève, was one of the most talked about works at the Salon, and convinced the art critic Louis Vauxcelles to become a fore fighter of his work. To him, Favory was one of the only artists to depart form cubism and develop a true new and modern way of painting. The international breakthrough occurred when Favory came under the influence of the work of Rubens and Jordaens, both of whom he studied in Brussels and Antwerp from 1921 onwards. The reds in the work of Rubens and the way the oil paint is treated in the work of these baroque masters is clearly reflected in the work of Favory from 1921 onwards. The artist combined a great feeling for composition with a superb use of colour. By 1925, Favory was one of the most talked about artists in Paris. His works were snapped up by collectors and dealers in France and all over Europe. Soon Favory held exhibitions in Antwerp, Zürich, Rome, London and New York. As is often the case, this success had an adverse impact on the quality of the work of the artist. In the second half of the twenties, Favory tended to paint nudes and portraits, his complex compositions with multiple figures were too time consuming to make. A crippling illness, alongside the consequences of a car accident, made it very hard for the artist to paint from 1927 onwards. As fast as Favory’s star had risen in the art world, so fast was his demise. After his death in 1937, Favory was gradually forgotten. It is only since a couple of years that the good works of the first half of the 1920s have been reinstated by museum curators and collectors. Favory remains one of the most important modern figurative painters of the 1920s. His short career was so intense that his influence is visible both in his own country and in Belgium. The artist frequently exhibited in Brussels and counted a lot of Belgian collectors among the buyers of his work.

From the collection of Maurice Gilliams, writer 10. Hippolyte Daeye (Gent 1873 – Antwerpen 1952) Young Girl, 1946.

Oil on canvas 67 x 50 cm Signed bottom centre/right.

Exhibited:

Hippolyte Daeye 1873-1952, Gent, Museum voor Schone Kunsten, 27/06-23/07/1953, cat. nr. 31. Hippolyte Daeye 1873-1952 retrospectieve tentoonstelling, Antwerpen, Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten, 30/05-09/08/1964, cat. nr. 131, afb. 133 p. 152.

Provenance:

Maurice Gilliams, Antwerpen. Private collection.

Bibliography: Corbet A., Hippolyte Daeye – monografieën over Belgische Kunst, Antwerpen, De Sikkel, 1949, p. 10 & 13, ill. 22. Exhibition catalogue Antwerpen, cat.131, ill. p. 152. De Visscher-D’Haeye B., Hippolyte Daeye 1873-1952: Genese van een Oeuvre, Brussel, Gemeentekrediet, 1989, catalogue raisonné number 203, ill. p. 272.

For additional information on the artist see this catalogue number 1.

Friendships and Influences Belgian and French Artists 1916-1946

From the collection of Jules De Coster, painter 11. Albert Servaes (Gent 1883 – Luzern 1966) The garden of the painter Jules De Coster at Kalken (Belgium), 1916.

Oil on canvas laid down on panel 52 x 35 cm Signed and dated bottom right.

Provenance:

Jules De Coster, Kalken (probably a gift from the artist) Mme De Coster,Gent Private collection.

The artist Jules De Coster (1883-1972) was a close friend of Servaes between 1916 and 1925. In 1916, De Coster had moved from Gent to Kalken. Servaes was invited to stay with him and it was during this stay that Servaes painted the garden at Kalken. De Costers’ stay at Kalken was short lived as the artist moved to Deinze in 1919, where he became good friends with Albert Saverys and Emile Claus. This view of a garden is a most unusual work for Servaes, in both subject and colour. 1916 was a very important year for Servaes. He finished his Peasant Cycle of drawings and started to find his definite style of painting, after a period of searching and experimenting with different techniques and colour schemes. This work, probably painted ‘en plein air’, must be seen as an experimental work, in which Servaes almost transformed the Kalken garden into the Garden of Eden. The way the work was executed, in one go, shows that Servaes clearly enjoyed himself, putting theoretical constraints aside.

12. Emile Claus (St-Elois-Vijve 1849 – Astene 1924) Stormy weather on the river Leie.

Oil on canvas 59,5 x 42,5 cm Signed with the monogram “E.C.”, bottom right The chassis bears the round “Atelier Emile Claus” stamp at the back.

Provenance:

Mme Emile Claus, Astene Probably André Vyncke, Gent Private collection.

This work is probably a large study by Claus meant to be used to make a large format work. We can date the work between 1920 and 1924. The brushwork is typical of the later Claus, using his brush to model the paint. In this case the broad and vigorous strokes imitate the movement of the trees, grass and water by the hard blowing wind. The white rowing boat features on other works by the artist from the 1920s. Claus’ later work is sometimes dismissed as of minor quality. In works as these however, we see an Emile Claus who turned away from his pre-war luminism style and incorporating a more expressionist or even expressive style of painting as advocated by the likes of Friesz or Saverys.

13. Anders Osterlind (Lipaud 1887 – Paris 1960) The exit of the Honfleur Harbour

Oil on canvas 65 x 80,5 cm Signed bottom left

Provenance:

Private collection.

Father Allan Osterlind came from Sweden to live and work in France, where his son was born. Anders studied with his father, and was self-taught. He exhibited for the first time at the Salon of the Société Nationale des Beaux-Arts in 1907. Osterlind befriended E.O. Friesz and Modigliani and also the composer Hector Villa-Lobos. After 1922 he exhibited his work at the Salon d’Automne. Osterlind was a very powerful painter, preferring landscapes to show his incredible technique. His work was praised in his adoptive country, but Osterlind exhibited frequently abroad. His work was often sollicited to feature in the exhibitions by the Carnegie Institute in Pittsburgh, and the artist frequently showed works in Brussels. This view of the Honfleur harbour probably dates from around 1922. A similar, dated work is known to us. In any case the work has to be dated before 1938, the year his father died, after which Anders signed his works only with his family name Osterlind.

14. Willem Paerels (Delft 1883 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Paudure 1962) Still life with pears and carnations.

Oil on canvas 60,5 x 50 cm Signed bottom left.

Willem Paerels had two painting careers. Starting out when he was only seventeen, the artist soon rose to be one of the most important modern painters of his generation. Associated with the fauvists Schirren, Oleffe and Jefferys he soon became an artist of international renown, with exhibitions in Belgium, France, Holland, and on the Venice Biennale. The war made the artist shift from a fauvist style to a more expressive way of painting, maybe under the influence of Le Fauconnier. The second phase of his career started with an important series of exhibitions in the Galerie Le Centaure in 1921, 1923 and 1925. Our still life is to be dated in that period, between 1923 and 1928. Paerels frequently visited the south of France to make preliminary drawings in Collioure, Marseilles and Port-Vendres. He later used these drawings in the process to make oil paintings in his Brussels atelier. Paerels continued to exhibit both in Belgium and abroad and travelled extensively in France, Spain and Italy. Meanwhile his expressionism softened and the use of more vibrant colours, consistent with his travels to the south, conquered his work. Paerelsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; works feature in the collections of many museums in Belgium and Holland. The museum of Grenoble (France) has a still life in its collection, dating from the same period as our work.

From the collection of Leon Sarteel, sculptor 15. Albert Claeys (Eke 1889 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Deinze 1967) The village of Mullem near Oudenaarde

Oil on canvas 52 x 35 cm Signed bottom right.

Provenance:

Leon Sarteel (1882-1942), Gent Private collection.

Albert Claeys debuted at the Taets gallery in Gent in 1920. The young artist frequented the budding expressionist milieu in Gent, and befriended Albert Saverys, Jules Boulez, Constant Permeke, Albert Servaes and the young sculptor Leon Sarteel. In 1925, Claeys and his wife moved to Mullem. In this idyllic village near Oudenaarde, Albert Claeys made his most authentic and modern works. Influenced by both modern Belgian and French painting, works from the 1925-1932 period, like our work here, are noticeable for their subtle use of colour and their delicate brushwork. Technically they are very close to the work Boulez and Frits Van den Berghe made in the same period. Claeys however remains a pure landscape painter, taking reality as his subject.

16. Marcel Leprin (Cannes 1891 – Paris 1933) La rue St-Jean et la Place St-Pierre à Caen, 1930.

Oil on canvas 55 x 46 cm Signed bottom right.

Exhibited:

Possibly Galerie Druet, Paris, exhibition Marcel Leprin, December 1930 (without catalogue).

Provenance:

Acquired at the Galerie Druet, Paris in 1931 for 1000,- frcs by the family of the previous owner. Private collection.

Additional information: Like the rest of the centre of Caen, the rue St-Jean was completely destroyed during the Second World War. Only the St-Pierre church was rebuilt as it was, along with some old historic houses. The street we see today has been rebuilt after the war, but the shoe shop André still has a shop in almost exactly the same spot as on the painting.

Marcel Leprin was a remarkable figure. First sailor, then bullfighter apprentice (!) and active as a painter of mural decorations in bars and cafés in Marseille, the young Leprin arrived in Paris in 1921 with nothing but his talent. He started painting views of the city, especially Montmartre. By 1924, his friend the frame maker Henri Bureau introduced the artist to possible collectors and dealers and placed Leprin under contract. Leprin’s first solo exhibition took place at Galerie Berthe Weil in 1925. His subjects and his way of life have often led to comparisons with Maurice Utrillo, although stylistically the two artist are difficult to compare. As soon as his financial situation had become better, the painter started to travel across France to paint. In 1928 the best works he painted in 1926 and 1927 were exhibited in the Galerie Druet, to much critical acclaim. The works were considered well drawn and the palette of the painter had become brighter. In December 1930, Leprin had a second exhibition at Galerie Druet, through mediation of Bureau. Again the show encountered great success and his views of the city of Caen gained much praise. In 1931 Leprin travelled through Normandy in search of subjects for his paintings. But a series of setbacks pushed the painter into despair and he started drinking and doing drugs. When he finally arrived in Paris in 1932, Leprin had to be hospitalised. Marcel Leprin died the next year, aged only 42.

From the collection of Jules De Coster, painter 17. Albert Saverys (Eke 1889 – Deinze 1967) Vue of the North sea at Knokke-Heist (Zoute)

Gouache on paper 50 x 58 cm (day measure) Signed bottom right.

Provenance:

Jules De Coster, Deinze Mme De Coster,Gent Private collection.

Saverys has always been fascinated by the sea. In the 1920s he spent several holidays. in Blankenberge. In 1926 Saverys and his friend Seeuws commissioned architect Valentin Vaerewijck to build them a villa in Knokke, where each family would occupy half of the large villa. In Saverys’ part there of course had to be an artist’s studio. Two years later, Saverys had another double house constructed, this time by the architect August Desmet, for him and for the family of industrial and collector Adolf De Coene. The artist started the 1920s with a series of large fish still lives, and a series of fisherman. Painted in bold colours, reminiscent of Ensor and related to the colour schemes we see in the work of Dufresne, Friesz and Favory, they belong to the most interesting works Saverys produced in the 1920s. In 1930 Henry Van de Velde was commissioned a house by Albert Saverys and his friend, the coffee merchant Colman, to be constructed in the dunes at Knokke, with a fantastic view to the sea. From the terrace of his house, Saverys had a magnificent view, and in the 1930-1939 period, the artist painted some of his best seascapes. Unfortunately, during the war the house was used by German soldiers, marking an abrupt end to the series of seascapes from Knokke.

18. Gust De Smet (Gent 1877 – St-Martens-Latem 1943) Farm next to a road, 1939.

Oil on canvas 50,5 x 60,5 cm Signed bottom right.

Additional information: As the painting is unrecorded and has never been published, a certificate authenticating the painting by Mr. Piet Boyens will be given to the buyer.

The 1930s were exceptionally hard on Gustave De Smet. Although the artist frequently showed his works and critics remained supportive, he did not sell any works. In 1932 Walter Schwarzenberg had to sell off his stock at bargain prices at public auction house Georges Giroux. When the Galerie Le Centaure eventually went bankrupt, later that year, no less than 105 works of De Smet came onto the market. The market got flooded with cheap Gust De Smet paintings. In a letter to collector Prof. J. Flachet from 1934 De Smet wrote: “[…] Heden sluit mijne tentoonstelling, [Artes te Antwerpen] en ik kan bijna zeker zijn dat er buiten aan U voor geen centiem zal verkocht zijn, het is toch wat al te erg niet? […]” The lack of sales pressed De Smet to sell his villa in the Pontstraat and to buy a smaller house in Deurle. It is as if the move to a new house and the financial problems made the artist think about the direction that his art had to take. In 1940 Gust De Smet wrote: “Ik zocht alleen los te geraken uit een soort formule, waarin ik alles gezegd had dat op die wijze te zeggen viel. Thans heb ik daaraan willen toevoegen de accenten van het leven, het zinderen van de lichtende kleur, het nerveuze van een omtrek, de dynamiek van een vorm. Dit spontane kost me meer inspanning dan het vroegere beredeneerde. Ik heb niets aan constructieve vormgeving verloren, maar oneindig aan vrijheid en rijkdom gewonnen. Mijn gevoeligheid is door geen redenering meer geremd. Ik verloochen iets van mijn vroeger werk. Thans echter sta ik nog onafhankelijker van het motief en kan ik mij vollediger overgeven aan mijn passie voor de kleur: het schilderen om het schilderen zelf.” Our work is a perfect illustration of what the artist put in words. This evolution De Smet embarked upon, came to a sudden stop with the death of the artist in 1943.

19. Jules Boulez (St-Eloois-Vijve 1889 – Oudenaarde 1960) The mountain at Tieghem (De Berg van Tieghem)

Oil on canvas 66 x 75,5 cm Signed bottom right.

Additional information:

The painting, conceived in the 1930s still has its original art deco frame, probably designed by Jules Boulez himself. On the back of the stretcher, the artist wrote the title of the work.

Jules Boulez was one of the most original and innovative artists of his generation. As a youngster he took drawing lessons from Emile Claus. Later he studied in Paris (1910-1912) and between 1912 and 1914 the artist took lessons at the Ghent Academy, where he befriended Albert Saverys, Albert Claeys and Hippolyte Daeye. Soon his art evolved to a very personal expressionist style, sometimes influenced by the Jeune Peinture Française. After his debut at the Salon d’Automne in Paris in 1920, Boulez exhibited his work frequently in avant-garde circles. He showed his expressionist work at the galleries Le Centaure, Galerie Manteau (Brussels), Galerie Apollo and in group exhibitions with fellow expressionist artists in Belgium and abroad. Boulez was relatively well off and was able to order the construction of a modernist villa by architect August Desmet in Oudenaarde (1928). The financial crisis of the beginning of the 1930s changed his situation and in order to survive, he expanded his activity as an interior designer. Boulez already made designs for rugs around 1925, and did designs for magazine covers, but now also designed furniture, lighting and interiors. All objects were handmade, unique or conceived in very limited editions. The designs were very modernist, his furniture is definitely sculptural in character. Boulez continued to paint, but mainly for himself. Apart from 1931, he did not have major exhibitions of his work. His work of the 1930s is perhaps the closest he gets to his French contemporaries. After the war, Boulez reinvented himself as a semi-abstract painter, under the influence of young talents like Jan Burssens and the Jeune Peinture Belge group.

20. Marie Laurencin (Paris 1883 – Paris 1956) Pantomine, 1922

Etching 22 x 26,5 cm (day measure) Signed bottom right. Numbered 17/75 bottom left

Provenance:

private collection.

21. Léon Zack (Nijni-Novgorod 1892 – Paris 1980) Standing Figure, sitting figure, 1936.

Ink (lavis) on paper 39 x 29 cm (day measure) Signed and dated bottom left.

Provenance:

private collection.

22. Ossip Zadkine (Smolensk 1890 – Paris 1967) C’est toi qui l’a voulu

Pencil on paper 24,5 x 24 cm Monogrammed and titled bottom right.

Provenance:

private collection.

23. Jules De Bruycker (Gent 1870 – Gent 1945) Le Fumeur, 1934

Etching 35 x 25 cm (day measure) Signed bottom right. Numbered 36/59, bottom left

Provenance:

private collection

The exhibition is open at the gallery from 28/11/2014 to 28/12/2014 Monday, Wednesday and Thursday from 2 pm to 6 pm Friday and Saturday from 10 am to 12 am and from 2 pm to 6 pm Sunday from 10 am to 12 am Welcome!

All images ÂŠ The artists and Galerie St-John, 2014 All texts ÂŠ The authors & Galerie St-John, 2014