Figure 5. Detail from Cicely Alexander,
showing areas scraped down to the canvas.
5). There are many such examples of scraped down paint that have not been
entirely painted over (i.e., Cicely Alexander) and there must be even more that
are no longer visible. Although tiresome fo r the sitter, this approach was
essential to the artist. The harmony would not survive if the pigments were
not all mixed in a single operation on the same palette. His paint is essentially
opaque with little or no deliberate glazing. Discolored glazes would also de
stroy the harmony. Therefore, as a rule, all his transparent pigments were
mixed with opaque.A further constraint in the studio is described by Walter Sickert (8):Whistler was a great portrait painter, and prided himself on the precision
oj his portraiture. Whistler also had extensive knowledge, and knew that
the eye could only see at a glance an object which in size is one-third oj
the distance between the eye and that object. In other words, if you are
painting a man six Jeet high you should be 18 Jeet away Jr om him.
Whistler had a very long studio, and he was accustomed to place his model
against a black velvet background, and alongside his model he placed his
canvas. His painting table was 18 Jeet away. He would stand at the
painting table, carifully survey the model, then charging his brush with the
requisite pigment he ran at Jull tilt up to the canvas and dropped it on the
spot.This unlikely scenario is consistent with the small scale of much of his work
and the flatness of the space around and behind his models.In his nocturnes, Whistler's paint was extremely dilute. He mixed his oil paint
with large amounts of turpentine and also added mastic varnish to produce
a paint that could be brushed freely and did not dry too matte. He called it
his "sauce" and analyses at the Institute fo r Atomic and Molecular Physics in
Amsterdam confirm its fo rmulation from mastic and a drying oil. In his later
work he may have used newly available petroleum oil, as recommended to
him by Sickert in 1885. In portraits such as Arrangement in Yellow and Grey:
Effie Deans (1876-1878), he has allowed paint to run down the canvas, in
dicating just how diluted it was. His nocturnes were painted quite quickly
(in a day) with minor modifications the next day, as Whistler fr eely admitted
in his libel trial with Ruskin. The dark passages were first brushed in umber
and black, or were simply the part of the imprimatura left exposed. Then a
layer of "sauce" was applied using a large brush to scumble over the shadows
and develop the lighter parts. The color and tone were controlled mainly by
the thickness of application. The paint was worked wet-in-wet, scraped,
rubbed, and even dragged across the wet surface, as in the reflections in Noc
turne: Blue and Silver (1872) (Plate 38). Finally, details such as highlights were
applied, after which the nocturne was put outside to dry in the sun. When
it was dry, perhaps the next day, fu rther details could be applied, preferably
from the same palette, but reworking was not possible at this stage.Condition and changes with timeChanges in appearance have occurred on many of his works and, despite his
frequent scraping down, minor adjustments to compositions-such as the
positions of arms and fe et-are now evident. Most significantly, many works
have become darker and cooler as the thin paint has increased in transparency
over the dark ground. Similarly, the small sketches with medium-toned
grounds have lost contrast in the mid-tones. His earlier, more decoratively
colorful work on light grounds or thickly painted work, although flawed in
detail, has preserved its appearance much better and is more readily appre
ciated. The darkness of much of Whistler's later work is due, in part, to
changes resulting from dark grounds and also possibly from the darkening of
medium, but to some extent the effect was intended.Whistler appears to have always varnished his work and now many of his
varnishes are excessively darkened and yellowed. In particular the discolora-Hackney 189