Note: The signature and date are inscribed at lower left.
Production Description
Production Date: 1876-1877
Exhibition History: R.A., 1883 (no.332); Manchester 1911 (no.220); Institute of
Contemporary Art August 1951; R.A., 1973 (no.363);
RotterdamâParis 1975-76 (no.308); Tate 1984 (no.147)
Patron: Clarence Fry
Date Commissioned: 1877
Original Cost: £2100
Note: This was the largest price ever paid to DGR for a picture. He
apparently gave Fry at the same time a collection of studies for the
work.
Model: Jane Morris
Note: Jane Morris was the model for the principal figure.
Model: May Morris
Note: May Morris, the daughter of William and Jane Morris, was the model for the
left attendant.
Provenance
Current Location: Manchester City Art Gallery
Catalog Number: 1891. 5
Archival History: Clarence E. Fry; Manchester City Art Gallery
Scholarly Commentary
Introduction
DGR's friend Theodore WattsâDunton suggests that he was (by
chance) responsible for the development of this painting out of the
chalk drawing of Jane Morris that DGR made in
1875. He told DGR that the drawing âexpressed exactly the
idea of one of the Oriental Venusesâ(Al Husa,
perhapsâor else the Syrian Venus) who, growing less and less
mystical as she travelled, became the Aphrodite of Western
poetry.â Watts goes on to say that DGR made two efforts
at the painting because he thought the British public might not be able to
appreciate his âexperiments in
flesh-paintingâ in which âthe corporeal
part of man seemed more and more to be the symbol of the
spiritualâ (see WattsâDunton's essay on DGR
in
The Nineteenth Century, March 1883, pages 412-413).
Production History
DGR accepted Clarence Fry's commission for the picture in August 1875 after
Fry had seen DGR's composition studies that he had made during the summer.
DGR told Fry that the picture âhas been some time in my
mind, and some time even in preparatory progressâ
(Doughty and Wahl,
Letters, vol. III, 1344). He worked at the picture in the fall and winter of
1875-1876, but abandoned this early work around March, when he
âbegan the
Astarte a second time, as the first beginning had not satisfied
meâ (Doughty and Wahl,
Letters, vol. III, 1418). It was all but finished in December 1876, when he
was much concerned about the frame; it was âjust
finishedâ by 31 January 1877 (Doughty and Wahl,
Letters, vol. IV, 1473).
Pictorial
Venus stands in a traditional âpudicaâ
pose, and distinctly recalls Botticelli's famous Venus, though DGR's treatment is more imposing than graceful.
Faxon acutely notes the effectiveness of DGR's glazing of the picture, a
technique he developed after studying Titian's remarkable use of
âsuccessive glazes to create rich, glowing
colorâ (Faxon 193). Another important technical aspect of the work was
pointed out by WattsâDunton: that in this picture and a number of
his other late works DGR followed a âmethod . . . of
laying in his heads in genuine âultramarineâ and
white . . . to give . . . his afterpainting that dreamy suggestiveness
to the flesh which his mysterious conceptions
requiredâ (âThe Truth about Rossetti,â 412).
Alastair Grieve
compares the attendant figures in this painting with Blake's angels in
several of his engravings for the Book of Job. Perhaps even more notable is
the striking echo of traditional representations of the enthroned Madonna.
The painting also recalls DGR's earlier work
Dantis Amor, in which the figure of Love (gendered male) stands between the sun
and the moon.
Literary
DGR wrote a
sonnet for the picture which
was first published in 1877 as part of F. G. Stephens' notice of the
painting in the
Athenaeum (p. 487). The sonnet was written in 1877, sometime before 10 March
(Doughty and Wahl,
Letters, vol. IV, 1481).
Autobiographical
The fact that Jane Morris was the model for Venus (and May Morris for the
left attendant figure) is surely relevant to an appreciation of the picture.
So is the fact that one of DGR's studies for the painting, the
ink drawing originally owned by Clarence Fry,
formed part of DGR's
Perlascura series, which he projected as an elaborate act of homage to Mrs.
Morris.
Scholarly Commentary
Introduction
DGR's friend Theodore WattsâDunton suggests that he was (by chance) responsible for the development of this painting out of the chalk drawing of Jane Morris that DGR made in 1875. He told DGR that the drawing âexpressed exactly the idea of one of the Oriental Venusesâ(Al Husa, perhapsâor else the Syrian Venus) who, growing less and less mystical as she travelled, became the Aphrodite of Western poetry.â Watts goes on to say that DGR made two efforts at the painting because he thought the British public might not be able to appreciate his âexperiments in flesh-paintingâ in which âthe corporeal part of man seemed more and more to be the symbol of the spiritualâ (see WattsâDunton's essay on DGR in The Nineteenth Century, March 1883, pages 412-413).
Production History
DGR accepted Clarence Fry's commission for the picture in August 1875 after Fry had seen DGR's composition studies that he had made during the summer. DGR told Fry that the picture âhas been some time in my mind, and some time even in preparatory progressâ (Doughty and Wahl, Letters, vol. III, 1344). He worked at the picture in the fall and winter of 1875-1876, but abandoned this early work around March, when he âbegan the Astarte a second time, as the first beginning had not satisfied meâ (Doughty and Wahl, Letters, vol. III, 1418). It was all but finished in December 1876, when he was much concerned about the frame; it was âjust finishedâ by 31 January 1877 (Doughty and Wahl, Letters, vol. IV, 1473).
Pictorial
Venus stands in a traditional âpudicaâ pose, and distinctly recalls Botticelli's famous Venus, though DGR's treatment is more imposing than graceful.
Faxon acutely notes the effectiveness of DGR's glazing of the picture, a technique he developed after studying Titian's remarkable use of âsuccessive glazes to create rich, glowing colorâ (Faxon 193). Another important technical aspect of the work was pointed out by WattsâDunton: that in this picture and a number of his other late works DGR followed a âmethod . . . of laying in his heads in genuine âultramarineâ and white . . . to give . . . his afterpainting that dreamy suggestiveness to the flesh which his mysterious conceptions requiredâ (âThe Truth about Rossetti,â 412).
Alastair Grieve compares the attendant figures in this painting with Blake's angels in several of his engravings for the Book of Job. Perhaps even more notable is the striking echo of traditional representations of the enthroned Madonna. The painting also recalls DGR's earlier work Dantis Amor , in which the figure of Love (gendered male) stands between the sun and the moon.
Literary
DGR wrote a sonnet for the picture which was first published in 1877 as part of F. G. Stephens' notice of the painting in the Athenaeum (p. 487). The sonnet was written in 1877, sometime before 10 March (Doughty and Wahl, Letters, vol. IV, 1481).
Autobiographical
The fact that Jane Morris was the model for Venus (and May Morris for the left attendant figure) is surely relevant to an appreciation of the picture. So is the fact that one of DGR's studies for the painting, the ink drawing originally owned by Clarence Fry, formed part of DGR's Perlascura series, which he projected as an elaborate act of homage to Mrs. Morris.
Bibliography