Author: Real Goya Page 12 of 17

En cuanto al dibujo, el fondo artístico de la RSEAAP cuenta con un muy nutrido conjunto, dado que la Escuela de Dibujo fundada por la Sociedad será el antecedente inmediato de la Real Academia de BBAA de san Luis.

Pablo Jiménez dice que en el Renacimiento italiano el dibujo era algo previo al arte, aunque en su proceso: antes de la pintura, antes de la escultura, antes de la arquitectura, estaba el dibujo. Y pertenecía al taller, al lugar en el que los sueños toman cuerpo. Desde el punto de vista técnico y de la conservación adecuada, su fragilidad y extrema sensibilidad (a la humedad, tanto o más que) a la luz, precisa continuos y severos cuidados. Razón por la que es sabido que deben guardarse sin marco, en horizontal y a oscuras.

Pero no resulta fácil definir o describir qué es un dibujo. Como decíamos antes cuando es de creación, proviene de la primera idea, inicial. José Manuel Matilla, jefe de departamento de Dibujos y estampas del Museo del Prado dice que Goya “constituye una excepción en España. No hubo nada igual antes y, durante mucho tiempo, después”. Y en lo concerniente a su técnica, añade que “Goya corregía poco. Desde el principio lo tenía claro. Sólo incluía matices, unos pocos cambios.”

Será un año más tarde cuando  se finalice el trabajo de primera aproximación y catalogación y exhibición pública de los fondos de la Sociedad Económica. De forma que el 17 de Octubre de 1983 y hasta el 10 de Diciembre del mismo año presentamos la exposición Dibujos de Academia en el Centro de Congresos de la Caja (hoy espacio “Patio de la Infanta”). Se ofrecen al público en general un conjunto de 101 piezas, editándose un tercer catálogo, éste con 108 páginas y 121 reproducciones, de las que solamente una, el posible autorretrato desnudo de Goya, es en color. Nuevamente con texto de Gonzalo de Diego y catalogación, fichas y biografías a cargo del mismo Gonzalo de Diego y de José I. Pascual de Quinto.

Será llevada posteriormente a la ciudad de Valencia, constituyendo la muestra inaugural de la nueva Sala de Exposiciones de la Caja en aquella ciudad. Se inaugura el 22 de Diciembre y se clausura el 21 de enero de 1984. Excepcional acogida en aquella ciudad – no en vano Goya fue también Académico de la de san Carlos- y miles de visitantes celebrando tan singular manera de inaugurar un nuevo centro cultural.

Así pues aquellas exposiciones se compilan en un catálogo global que, suma de los tres editados, dentro de sus modestos límites suponen  254 páginas (66, 80 y 108), con 323 ilustraciones (85, 117 y 121) de ellas 7 en color, con lo que se confirma la idea inicial de un coste muy medido y hasta riguroso  en algunos casos. 309 fueron las piezas expuestas. El objetivo había quedado cumplido de manera que la propia Caja consideró adecuada y que la Sociedad Económica corroboró cumplidamente. Hasta el punto de que personalmente me supusieron, además de la enorme satisfacción moral de hacerlas y el gran honor del mucho trabajo puesto a su servicio, mi nombramiento como Socio Residente de la Real Sociedad Aragonesa de Amigos del País en la Junta celebrada el día 3 de Marzo de 1982.

Pero volviendo a Dibujos de Academia conviene recordar aquí que esa exposición catalogó y presentó públicamente dos dibujos de Goya de excepcional calidad e importancia:

(Probable) Autorretrato de Francisco de Goya y Lucientes. Dibujo a sanguina y tiza blanca sobre un boceto previo en lápiz grafito, sobre papel verjurado blanco. 518 x 352 mm, circa 1785-90. En el reverso hay otro dibujo, a la sanguina. Las inscripciones “Abril 30 de 1792” y de una rúbrica, ambas características de Goya y auténticas, fueron certificadas por el Dr. Canellas, catedrático de Paleografía y Diplomática y autor del Diplomatario de Francisco de Goya.El dibujo fue catalogado con el número 59.

(Probable) Autorretrato de Francisco de Goya y Lucientes.
Dibujo a sanguina y tiza blanca sobre un boceto previo en lápiz grafito, sobre papel verjurado blanco. 518 x 352 mm, Francisco de Goya.

Desnudo viril de pie y de espaldas. Es copia de un dibujo original de Pompeyo Batoni que también figuró en la misma exposición con el número 31 de catálogo.

Este dibujo, copiado por Goya, está realizado en punta de plomo sobre papel verjurado, preparado y teñido a gris. A diferencia del modelo de Batoni cuyo papel está teñido en azul. 522 x 332 mm. (el modelo de Batoni mide 531 x 400 mm). Realizado por Goya circa  de 1776 a 1790. Abajo a la derecha, dos rúbricas; la de la izquierda es la de don Diego de Torres, secretario de la RSEAAP entre 1776 y 1809?; la segunda, de Francisco de Goya. Catalogado con el número 60.

Desnudo viril de pie y de espaldas. Copia del original de Pompeyo Batoni.
Punta de plomo sobre papel verjurado, preparado y teñido a gris 522 x 332 mm. Francisco de Goya.

Laocoonte (copia del yeso) Dibujo en punta de plomo sobre papel verjurado blanco con filigrana “J.Honig/&/Zoonen”. 482 x 344 mm. En la catalogación y exhibición pública de 1983/84, fue catalogado como un posible anónimo español de la segunda mitad del XVIII (¿Francisco de Goya?). Tiene una posible inscripción ilegible al ángulo superior derecho. Y en el ángulo inferior izquierdo la inscripción “Abril 26 de 82” y rúbrica. Todas las inscripciones y rúbricas corresponden a Francisco de Goya, según dictamen del doctor Canellas. Doña Manuela Mena opinó en su examen previo a la exposición, que muy probablemente se tratase de un original de Goya. (véase mi artículo en este mismo blog, dedicado a Eleanor Axon Sayre en Zaragoza, publicado el 2 de julio de 2013).

Laocoonte (copia del yeso)
Dibujo en punta de plomo sobre papel verjurado blanco. 482 x 344 mm. ¿Francisco de Goya?

El blog de Realgoya, publicando estos artículos y testimonios sobre la actividad artística de los últimos años, pretende contribuir a la mejor difusión de la figura y la obra de Francisco de Goya y, en esta ocasión, abrir las puertas de la Sociedad Económica y su patrimonio al mundo digital, permitiendo que muchas personas que no tienen acceso a esas colecciones disfruten de los valiosos beneficios que éste le ofrece, y no solamente para residentes en Zaragoza y España, sino en el ancho mundo de internet. Y en todo caso, que su memoria permanezca accesible y viva para todos.
Volvamos ahora al otro motivo que  nos ocupa: la anunciada exposición sobre  la Real Sociedad Económica Aragonesa que se inaugurará “en torno al 23 de abril”, dado que, como informa María Teresa Fernández, “….su patrimonio e historia son, además, poco conocidos” y, como afirma el comisario de la muestra, Domingo Buesa, “Los fondos que atesora la institución son muy desconocidos por el público en general”. No en balde han transcurrido más de treinta años desde aquellas exposiciones primeras, que venimos glosando, y está claro que ha podido llegar el momento de cerrar este capítulo de la mejor manera posible.

“Nunca se ha hablado tanto de arte y nunca se ha sentido menos que ahora” se condolía Anselm Feuerbach en 1.882. Expresaba así  un malestar que había comenzado a sentirse en la segunda mitad del siglo XVIII, con el considerable impulso de las exposiciones académicas. El arte comenzaba a convertirse en un asunto público y con él aparecía la figura del crítico. Pero la concurrencia nubla la vista, como constatará Emilio Zola en su crítica  a los salones parisienses de 1866. Si únicamente los ganadores de medallas, es decir aquellos que ya están consagrados, componen los jurados, demanda Zola, ¿de qué protección se beneficiarán entonces aquellos que todavía no tienen medalla para defenderse? Serán precisamente los aficionados quienes se ocupen de hacerlo y desde entonces los artistas buscarán al gran público con la esperanza de encontrar en él un juicio positivo.

En 1763, Diderot loaba la exposición pública como siendo, por encima de todo, una institución que “procura a todos los estadios de la sociedad, y en particular a los hombres de gusto, un impulso útil y una recreación agradable”.  Desde siempre la pulsión de representación del Estado, de la monarquía, del individuo, ha constituido una importante incitación a rodearse de obras de arte. La difusión de las Academias, en el siglo XVIII, debe mucho al orgullo de las cortes buscando deslumbrar por medio del esplendor del arte. Napoleón recibía a los embajadores y diplomáticos extranjeros entre las colecciones artísticas del Louvre, con objeto de demostrarles, prácticamente en contacto con las obras adquiridas en sus conquistas, la unidad de Europa bajo el dominio de Francia. El poder se sirve de la exposición del arte como de un medio de dar al extranjero una representación de sus aspiraciones y de sus modelos, de su política y de su identidad.

De forma que las exposiciones han adquirido un estatuto político, forman parte de los medios privilegiados mediante los cuales se documentan e ilustran el acuerdo, la alianza y la cooperación internacionales, la identidad nacional y regional, la continuidad histórica, la conciencia de sí y el amor a la cultura de un Estado. Por ello y aún a pesar de la tremenda crisis económica actual, siguen siendo todavía justificables este tipo de manifestaciones.  Así pues, desde sus orígenes, las exposiciones han padecido la discordancia entre lo que esperaban de ellas sus visitantes y lo que ellas proponían, o pretendían proponer. Perfectamente consciente de sus prerrogativas y de su nueva responsabilidad, la creciente burguesía de algunos países europeos en el siglo XIX asumirá, ciertamente con natural y sorprendente eficacia, el mecenazgo de los artistas, sustituyendo el papel que hasta entonces había desempeñado primero la Iglesia y luego el Palacio.

(Continuará)

Gonzalo de DiegoIn regard with the drawing, the artistic background of the RAESFC has a very large set since the Drawing School founded by the Society will be the immediate forerunner of the Royal Academy of Fine Arts of San Luis.

Pablo Jiménez says that in the Italian Renaissance drawing was something prior to art, although in its process: before the painting, before the sculpture, before the architecture, it was drawing. And it belonged to the workshop, to the place where dreams take a shape. From the technical point of view and the adequate conservation, its fragility and extreme sensitivity (to moisture, as much or even more than) to the light, requires severe and continuous care. Reason why is well known that they should be stored without frame, horizontally and in the dark.

But it is not easy to define or describe what a drawing is. As we said before when it is created, it comes from the first and initial idea. José Manuel Matilla, head of Department of Drawings and Prints of the Prado Museum says that Goya “constitutes an exception in Spain. There was nothing like him before, and for a long time, since then”. And in regard to his technique, adds that “Goya corrected rarely. Since the beginning had it clear. Only included nuances, a few changes.”

It will be a year later when finishes the job of first approach, and cataloguing and public display of the funds of the Economic Society. Indeed on October 17^th 1983 and to December 10^th of that same year we present the exhibition Drawings of Academy in the Congress Centre of the Bank (Patio de la Infanta named today). They are offered to the public in general a set of 101 pieces, editing a third catalogue, this one with 108 pages, 121 reproductions, among which only one, the possible nude self-portrait of Goya, is in colour. Once again with text and cataloguing by Gonzalo de Diego, dossiers and biographies in charge of the same by Gonzalo de Diego and José I. Pascual de Quinto.

It will be led later to the city of Valencia, constituting the opening exhibition for the new Exhibition Hall of the Bank in that city. It was inaugurated on December 22^nd and ends on January 21^st 1984. An exceptional reception took place in that city – not in vain Goya was also academic of San Carlos- and thousands of visitors celebrating such a singular way of inaugurating a new cultural centre.

So those exhibitions are compiled into a global catalogue that, sum of the three released, within its modest limits represent 254 pages (66, 80 and 108), with 323 illustrations (85, 117 and 121) of which 7 in colour, confirming the initial idea of a very measured cost and even rigorous in some cases. 309 were the exposed pieces. The objective had been reached so that the own Bank considered adequate and the Economic Society was duly confirmed. To the point that I personally assumed, in addition to the enormous moral satisfaction to them and the great honour of such a work put at its service, my appointment as a resident member in the Royal Society Aragonese of Friends of the Country at the meeting held on March 3^rd 1982.

But returning to Drawings of the Academy it should be recalled here that the exhibition catalogued and publicly presented two drawings by Goya of outstanding quality and importance:

(Likely) Self-portrait of Francisco de Goya y Lucientes. Drawing in sanguine and white chalk on a previous sketch in pencil graphite on white laid paper. 518 x 352 mm, circa 1785-90. On the reverse there is another drawing, to the sanguine. The inscriptions “April 30^th 1792″ and a flourish, both characteristics of Goya and authentic, were certified by Dr. Canellas, Professor of Palaeography and Diplomatic and author of Francisco de Goya, El Diplomatario. Drawing was listed with the number #59.

(Probable) Autorretrato de Francisco de Goya y Lucientes.
Dibujo a sanguina y tiza blanca sobre un boceto previo en lápiz grafito, sobre papel verjurado blanco. 518 x 352 mm, Francisco de Goya.

Manly bare foot and back. It is a copy of an original drawing by Pompeyo Batoni which also appeared in the same exhibition with catalogue number #31.

This drawing, copied by Goya, is made in point lead on laid paper, prepared and dyed in gray. Unlike the model of Batoni whose paper is dyed in blue. 522 x 332 mm. (Batoni model measures 531 x 400 mm). Performed by Goya circa 1776 to 1790. Bottom right, two signs; the left belongs to Don Diego de Torres, Secretary of the RAESFC from 1776 to 1809(?). The second, by Francisco de Goya, listed with the number #60.

Desnudo viril de pie y de espaldas. Copia del original de Pompeyo Batoni.
Punta de plomo sobre papel verjurado, preparado y teñido a gris 522 x 332 mm. Francisco de Goya.

Laocoön (copy of the plaster). Drawing on tip of lead on white laid paper with watermark “J. Honig & Zoonen”. 482 x 344 mm. In the cataloguing and public exhibition of 1983-1984, it was listed as a possible Spanish anonymous from the second half of the 18^th century (Francisco de Goya?). It has a possible unreadable inscription at the top right corner. And in the bottom left corner it says “April 26^th ‘82″ and signature. All inscriptions and signatures correspond to Francisco de Goya, according to opinion of Doctor Cañellas. Doña Manuela Mena said in its review prior to the exhibition that most likely was an original by Goya (See article on this blog dedicated to Eleanor Axon Sayre in Zaragoza, published on July 2^nd 2013).

Laocoonte (copia del yeso)
Dibujo en punta de plomo sobre papel verjurado blanco. 482 x 344 mm. ¿Francisco de Goya?

The blog of Realgoya, publishing these articles and testimonies about the artistic activity of last few years, aims to contribute to the better dissemination of the figure and the work of Francisco de Goya and, on this occasion, open doors of the Economic Society and its heritage to the digital world, allowing many people who do not have access to these collections may enjoy the valuable benefits offered, and not only for residents in Zaragoza and Spain, but in the wide world of the Internet. And in any case, keep his memory alive and accessible for all.

Let’s look now at the other reason that concerns us: announced exhibition on the Royal Society Economic Aragon to be inaugurated “around April 23^rd“, in fact, as María Teresa Fernández says, “…its heritage and history are also poorly known” and, as mention the curator of the exhibition, Domingo Buesa, “the funds that holds the institution are very unknown to the general public”. Not in vain have passed more than 30 years since those first exhibitions that we have been relating, and clearly it has arrive the time to close this chapter in the best possible way.

“So much of art has never spoken and has never felt less than now” Anselm Feuerbach sorrowed in 1882. He expressed this way a discomfort that had begun to be felt in the second half of the 18^th century, with considerable impulse of academic exhibitions. The art began to become a public affair and with it appeared the figure of the critic. But concurrence blurs the look, as reveal Emilio Zola in his criticism to the Parisian salons in 1866. If only medal winners, i.e. those who are already enshrined, make up juries, demand Zola, what protection those who still have no medal to defend themselves will benefit then? Amateurs will precisely be who deal with doing so and since then artists will seek the general public hoping to find in it a positive judgment.

In 1763 Diderot hymned the public exhibition as being, above all, an institution seeking “to all stages of the society, and in particular men of taste, a useful impulse and a pleasant recreation”. Always the compulsion to representation of the State, the monarchy, the individual, has been an important invitation to be surrounded by art works. The diffusion of the Academies in the 18^th century owes much to the pride of the courts seeking to be dazzled by the splendour of art. Napoleon was receiving ambassadors and foreign diplomats among the artistic collections of the Louvre, in order to show them, almost in contact with the acquired works in his conquests, the unity of Europe under the domination of France. Power is served of the art exhibition as a mean of giving abroad a representation of their aspirations and their models, its policy and identity.

In such a way that exhibitions have acquired a political status, they form part of the privileged means by which document and illustrate the agreement, the alliance and international cooperation, the national and regional identity, historical continuity, self-awareness and love to the culture of a State. For this reason and despite the tremendous actual economic crisis, are still justifiable such displays. Thus, since its origins, exhibitions have experienced the discrepancy between what their visitors expect from them and what they were proposing, or intended to propose. Perfectly aware of its prerogatives and its new responsibility, the growing bourgeoisie of some European countries in the 19^th century will assume, certainly with natural and amazing efficiency, the patronage of artists replacing the role that until then had first played the Church and then the Palace.

(To be continued…)

Gonzalo de Diego

“Science has its protocols and scientific protocol requires that there is a method to investigate and, precisely, the ‘eye’ is the denial of the same, and here it is consensus” (sic).

Against the eye as a gift, the method is discussion and consensus, sensibly argued by Jesusa Vega and Julián Vidal in the ‘Proceedings of the Conference Memory and Meaning. The use and receipt of vestiges from the past’, published by the department of History of Art of the University of Valencia (Spain).

Specialists complain that it has been revitalizing myths that were believed to be overmatched in the science of art as the ‘good eye’. “This method to practice attributions, based on praise of the eye which observes and certifies what sees, has left a noxious imprint. Those who practice call it visual experience; others, ‘good eye’ or ‘clinical eye’, and for those who do not have it, ‘glass eye’, and was the justification appeared in the middle of the 19^th century”. The eye prioritizes even over the documentation of painting which is under investigation. And is used either to challenge authorship as to discover new authorship… of Goya. The fixed one since the beginning, who is always in the ‘eye’ of a hurricane, is… Goya.

In my opinion, another thing that should be very different is the attribution. For such, it will be necessary, even though not essential, something more than a trained look. I mean. ‘Fled to Egypt’ and ‘Death of San Alberto of Jerusalem’, two canvases that have been allegedly hidden in a convent of the Carmelites in Cuenca (Spain), have been awarded last month to the early work of Francisco de Goya. What method has been followed in this case?

The paintings are displayed in an exhibition organized by the nuns of Cuenca and it is recklessly affirmed that remained hidden. So if hidden, how are in exhibition? And, coinciding with this – despite of being hidden – they are discovered and showed. But how can this be? How does it explain? Cuenca is just 160 km away from the Prado Museum, the largest collection of Goya’s in the world… or from the Museum of the Academy of San Fernando and the National Chalcography, and no one were aware of this.

Indeed yes, there is an expert who attributes them to Goya “although has not done any scientific study to verify the authorship of both canvases” but, to add even something missing, “has not consulted any expert of the Prado Museum in the desire of owning his own opinion”.

On the other hand, the director of the magazine that publishes the news of the discovery and attribution, has said that normally when someone attributes a work to some classic of art always ask for second opinions, although on this occasion it has not done so to the first ‘criteria’ of the expert that concerns us, “who has shown on many occasions that it is a good researcher”.

As we see, this figure of the expert, inevitably, is present also in the world of arts and not even say in the vicinity of Goya and his work. This title of expert I do not truly know how can get access, because it includes conditions that I suspect inscrutable even for the own experts, who eager to learn, deep down, it would say that even suspect of their weakness as experts.

It is known that the artist draws a feeling and slight dress up in a wall at good looking. Or that the internist medical, not mentioning the classic general practitioner, diagnosed in a way that today practically is not exercised in the West. And what is clear today is that issued the opinion of the expert automatically comes near or far another expert who believes radically opposite, because like in this case can argue that still scientific data has not demonstrate the new attribution. And because so few objective arguments are given, and everything is so light and hurried, anyone with a minimum common sense is authorized to question what we have been told, and to think that if we will not be at another bizarre vision of Goya, because one suspects if it will not be many of these expert assessments what in the rich Spanish continues to be a more or less sudden hunch, a nose stinging or, simply, appetite to take position before another expert overtakes and publish it first. Because the arguments put forward in this case may give rise to this and other interpretations possibly as pilgrims as the expert’s.

Perhaps due to all this is the reason why the impact has been limited and like “about what is not documented we cannot talk”, the academic world has received it in its usual line, dedicating a charity silence. Possibly because they are no longer the times for these things, more or less unusual and seemingly improvised, but instead today are used up to the limit rigorous work systems that treats, usually successfully, to meet exactly all of the favourable and unfavourable aspects of each question, assaying up to details and most trivial strokes.

Then well, this comprehensive way of working is also the regularly use for the most prestigious cultural institutions in the world. Reason why I do personally, and as an interesting method to build an opinion about a picture, take the super Decalogue -which actually comprising twelve sections- of ‘L’affaire Velázquez’, the attractive novel by Thomas Hoving, former Conservative Chief of the Metropolitan in New York, published 25 years ago (French Edition by Silvie Messinger. Paris, 1989).

It reads as follows:

1. – Write down the first impression.

2. – Describe the work in its minor details, to force you to see it all.

3. – To determine the condition of the object, its flaws, its age.

4. – Does it have a specific use?

5. – The style.

6. – The subject, the matter, the topic.

7. – The iconography.

8. – What is historic.

9. – The bibliography.

10. – Ask for an outside opinion.

11. – Scientific analysis. Write down the results of all investigations (microscope, chemical test, x-ray, infrared, ultraviolet, spectrograph, thermo luminescence, etc.).

12. – Back to the first impression, and if still held, say therein.

In regard with what is said above, is not less interesting point 10 of this method. To me, both that point as the full Dodecalogue seems to me to be more honest, what does the reader want me to tell. Especially at a time in which advanced techniques of scanners, microscopes and touch screens are used, codes are decoded and at some universities, such as Dartmouth, are seeking all kind of compelling evidences and digital images and complex statistical calculations are used to authenticate works of art.

Gonzalo de Diego