Selecting Furniture & Sculpture Part I

Today’s post has been prompted by a comment from Robert Thornhill on a previous entry.

Robert asked for more information on how and why choices were made in selecting furniture and sculpture objects for the new galleries. I previously described the overall process of selecting objects back in the early days of the blog, but this topic is one worth revisiting and so today I’d like to elaborate a bit more on this process.

The decision of which objects we should include was informed by a variety of aims, requirements and research. Our over-riding aim was to select objects from our collections that will help to provide the best narrative of European design and art during the 17^th and 18^th centuries. To quickly crib from my previous post:

‘We revisited all of the Museum’s collections to ascertain which objects could be suitable for inclusion. At the same time, we identified which events, personalities and other elements of the period we considered to be fundamental, significant or desirable for inclusion in the galleries. Bringing the findings of these two activities together, allowed us to see how the objects in our collections could support the historical and intellectual stories that we felt should be presented and vice-versa.’

The guidelines for initially deciding whether a piece of furniture (or sculpture) is ‘suitable for inclusion’ is the same as for other objects. Some may be unique or ‘stand-out’ pieces which are a priority to have on public display. Others may be exemplary demonstrations of particular manufacturing techniques. Others may clearly reflect or help to inform us of the social and political landscape outside of the furniture workshop. For most objects their selection was influenced by a combination of their different factors.

Working with the collecting departments we drew up lists of the objects we felt it was most important to display – the ‘A list’ objects. We also put together ‘B list objects’ – those which are high quality objects but that it would not be so much of a loss if they were not included. Not all of the objects we have selected were on these A and B lists, but the lists provided a useful guide in identifying priority objects.

In the process of whittling down our long list of possible objects, we gave lots of thought about how to integrate objects into possible display subjects. We need to be sure that we are creating a clear narrative and that an object’s inclusion makes sense and adds to the stories we are trying to convey. At times, we may have wanted primarily to include an object for one of its qualities, but the display in which it finally finds itself may focus on another of its facets.

We also needed to consider what is already on display in the Museum as a whole and avoid duplicating what is in other galleries. This last point is particularly pertinent for furniture objects due to the recent opening of the Furniture Galleries.

Furniture

Pieces of furniture will feature throughout the galleries, in a variety contexts. As we are not including any loaned objects, the selection is made from what we already have in our collections. Due to the large bequest of John Jones in 1882 our 18^th century furniture collection is particularly strong. Consequently, many Jones’ objects will be appearing in the galleries. Jones’ personal penchant for the French decorative arts means that our collection has a rather high ‘French content’.

CURATORIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

Art & Design History

Does the object demonstrate a particular: Style, Material, Technique, Craftsmanship, Technology, Maker or Factory which forms a notable element of 17^th or 18^th-century art & design history?

This pier table is a clear example of an object selected because it demonstrates key features of a major design style of the 17^th century. It will feature in our Baroque display as its richly carved and lavishly gilded dramatic scrolls and grotesque masks represent the exuberance of late Roman Baroque design.

The carved and gilded wood stool shown below, with its frame designed as four crossed swords in scabbards, reflects design features that were fashionable in the Empire period. The crossed sword motif was particularly appropriate to express Napoleon’s power, which had been founded on military success.

Designed by the architect Bernard Poyet, this stool has additional interest because it was part of a set used by the French emperor Napoleon I for his reception by the corps législatif after his coronation. It will be displayed in our Fashion display in Gallery 1, helping to demonstrate notable changes in French fashion and design that took place from the Revolution to the Empire period (1789-1815). The decision to place the stool within this display was partially guided by its conservation requirements – as it has its original upholstery it needs to be displayed cased and (as it contains other delicate textiles) the Fashion display has been designed as a fully cased display.

The work of ébénistes in the 18th century is an important topic for us to include. Ébénistes were cabinetmakers, responsible for veneered and marquetry case furniture such as tables, cabinets, and commodes (chests of drawers). Ébéniste André-CharlesBoulle (1642-1732), was the master of a distinctive (and much imitated) style of furniture, for which his name has become a synonym.

Boulle’s style is characterized by elaborate adornment with brass (occasionally engraved) and turtleshell marquetry. In my personal experience, if you’ve ever visited a National Trust stately home you’ve almost definitely seen apiece of Boulle (or ‘Boulle-inspired’) furniture!

Our collections include a number of high quality examples of ‘boulle furniture’ and so a number of pieces have been selected to form a display focused entirely on Boulle’s technique, style and influence. These two small tables and this imposing writing table will feature in this display.

Court and city workshops played an important role in the manufacture of many objects, including furniture. A display in Gallery 3 will look in particular at city workshops operating in the 18^th century. The development of this display provides a place for us to show off two impressive examples of workmanship from the Russian Imperial Arms Factory of Tula. (NB: In terms of the Museum’s collections, these are technically both Metalwork objects, but I hope I can get away with referring to them as furniture here!).

We knew that we really wanted these two pieces to feature in the galleries but had to figure out the most suitable display for them. At one point they were to be the star objects of a display focused on Russia but, despite our best efforts, we weren’t able to bring together a strong enough selection of Russian objects to support this display and so they were integrated into the display on City Workshops specifically to highlight the factory at Tula.

Trends & Fashions in Social & Domestic Life

Can the object demonstrate or help to inform us about notable elements of 17^th or 18^th-century social and domestic life?

Certain objects can really help us to imagine some of the activities (or at least the aspirations!) of daily life and the environments they took place in. Those which evoke the interiors and objects related to daily activities are particularly effective for this.

This combined music stand and writing table will be in the section of our ‘At Home’ display concerned with ‘entertainments in the home’. Here it will help to encourage consideration of how polite accomplishments (such as music, gaming, needlework and drawing) could play an essential part in a person’s education and be key to participation in elite polite society.

Another object that will feature in the At Home display is the dressing table below. Dressing tables were essential pieces of furniture for fashionable 18^th-century ladies who spent much time at their toilette preparing for an endless series of entertainments and social appearances. A series of drawers, which could be secured by lock and key, rendered such furniture appropriate for storing personal effects and, especially, private correspondence.

This particular table was selected because it clearly demonstrates the key features of a dressing table, with multiple drawers fitted with compartments and silver containers for storing writing materials and articles of the toilette such as bottles, pots and brushes. It also features a small leather covered pull-out writing desk and ink-pots. Of additional importance is the fact that it was created by Pierre Migeon, who belonged to one of the most important Parisian Protestant families of cabinet-makers.

Personalities

Some objects have an additional historical and social importance because they can be linked to key personalities of the time.

This recently reupholstered armchair bears all the hallmarks of neoclassical style, with its straight, tapering legs and decorative elements which include classical columns with Ionic capitals and acanthus leaf motifs. It will be displayed in our Neoclassicism display, but what makes it particularly significant is that the top of it is carved the monogram MA for Marie-Antoinette, queen to Louis XVI of France. It was probably part of a suite delivered in 1788 to the Château de Saint-Cloud, Sené supplied similar suites of chairs to Versailles and the Tuileries.

Contemporary Events

The selection of some objects may be influenced by their link to particular notable occasions, as they depict events and/or reflect contemporary reactions to them. An example is this pier table with a veneered top with an ebony ground. The central subject of the decoration is a galley sailing away from a port city, which is based on a print published in Florence in 1608.

It is one of a series of etchings by Remigio  Cantagallina after Giulio Parigi, published as a record of a  mock-battle held on the River Arno as part of the  celebrations for the wedding of Cosimo II de’ Medici and  Maria Magdalena of Austria. The table is one of a group of six that are thought to relate to the wars between Venice and the Ottoman Empire in the Peloponnese in the 1680s-90s. They seem to celebrate the Venetian conquest of the Morea (as the Peleponnese was then known) in 1685-88.

‘Star Objects’

Is it a particularly extraordinary or striking object?

These objects fit into at least one of the categories above but are notably exceptional or perhaps extravagant. Essentially, they have an intrinsic ‘wow factor’ that pretty much demands their inclusion!

 To be continued …