A Guide to Eighteenth Century Art

(Marvins-Underground-K-12) #1

  1. had trained initially in goldsmithing and miniatures (Macmillan, 1986, 74). Angelica Kauffman
    practiced through to the later part of the century the “noble” and “heroic” pursuit of history painting while
    adapting her designs to fashionable domestic items such as porcelain, tea trays, fans, ceiling and wall
    decoration, and watch cases (Forbes Adam, Malise and Mauchline, 1992, 113–140).


In spite of the discourses of high art, the fact that London was a hub of artists’ associations made
isolationist policies difficult to achieve in practice. Hierarchical divisions between, on the one hand, the
“mechanical” and “decorative” and, on the other, the “liberal,” were highly problematic. The advent of
more formal fine arts academies created divisions where previously a creative fluidity had existed. Saint
Martin’ s Lane Academy had provided until the midcentury forms of training and tuition that were useful
to furniture designers, illustrators, engravers and painters of theatre scenery, as well as to those producing
portraits and other genres of painting and sculpture later recognized by the Royal Academy. Once the
latter had been established, Saint Martin’s lost many of its formal membership to the new institution, as
members of the Royal Academy were allowed simultaneous membership only of general literary or
cultural societies. Saint Martin’s became less active as an institution, but its members continued to
influence fine art practitioners and did not necessarily see these interests as contradictory.


The painter and illustrator Francis Hayman (1708–1776), one of the Directors of Saint Martin’s Lane,
later became one of the founding members of the Royal Academy. Hayman also belonged, like Hogarth, to
the Society of Artists, the first formal exhibiting society in England. This society collaborated with and
grew out of the Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufacture and Commerce, an institution that
awarded prizes encouraging designers for industry as well as novice artists (see Chapter 3; Bindman,
2008, 198; Saumarez Smith, 2012, 173–176). Gainsborough, who is thought to have frequented Saint
Martin’s, did not travel abroad but later exhibited with the Society of Artists before becoming a founder
member of the Royal Academy. The latter institution was built on the shoulders of artists whose work had
previously, and necessarily, evolved in associations and institutions that had treated craftwork seriously.
On the other hand, members of Saint Martin’s had included, in spite of Hogarth’s misgivings, those
interested in developments in continental high art. George Knapton (1698–1778), a painter, draughtsman
and connoisseur at Saint Martin’s, went on the Grand Tour and was keen to study art in Rome. Knapton
was a member of the Roman Club (for artists and literary men aspiring to connoisseurship) founded in
1723; he was also a member of the aristocratic Society of Dilettanti. Also at Saint Martin’s, the designer,
engraver and illustrator HubertFrançois Gravelot (1699–1773) and the “high art” sculptor Louis
François Roubiliac (1702–1762) taught students there. They helped to establish in Britain the French
rococo style, even influencing Hogarth, demonstrating that firsthand interaction with continental high
art traditions could be productive in manufacture, publishing, trade and commerce (Colley, 1984, 10–17).


Some academies tried to accommodate in significant ways the needs of industry and design. The Academy
of Fine Arts in St Petersburg, founded in 1757 and directed initially by French masters, trained craftsmen
alongside fine artists. The two groups shared the early stages of their training; those who failed tests in
classical drawing at the end of the first year either returning home or transferring to workshops inside the
Academy. The Academy trained craftsmen in ornamental engraving, gilding, mosaic, lacquer work and
ironwork. Students studying these skills boarded at the Academy alongside their fine arts colleagues and
could compete for similar (if slightly less prestigious) prizes. Their masters had fewer privileges than
their fine arts peers and no pensions. This institution formed part of Russia’s ambition to share in the
modernity and high culture of academies further west, while developing the skills necessary for industry.
There were at this stage no commercial workshops in Russia for applied arts such as textiles, tapestry or
porcelain, although there were some staterun enterprises. Craft students at the Academy were often ex
soldiers or slaves, their education seen as a sign of the country’s potential for progress. Many artists
however had “serf” status, in spite of the social pretensions of the Academy (Craske, 1997, 77). The

Free download pdf