James McNeill Whistler

James McNeill Whistler Prints, 1859/1894

Layout

Artist: James McNeill Whistler
Title: James McNeill Whistler Prints
Date: 1859/1894
Condition: See description

Medium: Print
Dimensions:
See description
Estimated Value:
$2,450
Signature/Markings: See description

Left:
James McNeill Whistler
La Vielle Aux Loques (The Old Rag Woman), 1859
Etching
Sight: 8 ⅝ x 6 ¼ in.
Framed: 17 x 13 ⅞ in.
Signed in plate
Edition of 3,000

Provenance: Dalia’s Gallery (2019)

Condition: Some foxing (not examined outside of frame)

Value: $1,450

Right:
James McNeill Whistler (attributed)
Nursemaids: "Les Bonnes du Luxembourg", 1894
Transfer lithograph
Sight: 10 x 7 in.
Framed: 19 x 15 ½ x 1 ¼ in.

Provenance: Private New York Collection

Condition: Good (not examined outside of frame)

Value: $1,000

About this print from the Art Institute of Chicago:
Approximately 3,000 second-state impressions printed by Way and issued in The Art Journal 46, no. 120 (December 1894); image size: 202 × 158 mm; full sheet size: approximately 335 × 255 mm
Posthumous edition: 48 impressions printed by Goulding on 19 April 1904
"David Croal Thomson, the newly appointed editor of The Art Journal, wrote to Whistler in early December of 1892 with the suggestion of publishing one of the artist’s lithographs in the periodical. The two men entered into a protracted negotiation, and a full two years passed before their discussions finally concluded with The Art Journal’s inclusion of Whistler’s transfer lithograph Nursemaids: “Les Bonnes du Luxembourg” in the December 1894 issue. Initially, Whistler rejected Thomson’s invitation because the fee of a “ten pound note” offered by the editor for “the use of the transfer” was too low.1 When their negotiations resumed in the fall of 1893, their correspondence was devoted instead to the selection of an appropriate image, with Thomson suggesting first a recent Brittany lithograph (cat. 63) and then one of the new Luxembourg Gardens subjects (cat. 69).2

Prompted by Thomson’s positive response to the Luxembourg image, Whistler asked the Ways if Conversation under the Statue, Luxembourg Gardens (cat. 69) would transfer successfully to supplementary stones for a large machine-printed edition. When the results of their experiment proved “a little coarse,” with the delicate stump work appearing too heavy, Whistler wrote to his printers that he should “appear with something else to greater advantage in the Art Journal—and so . . . had better draw something with the chalk alone—for it is . . . evident that the stump can only do itself justice in the hand printing of proofs” (letter 73).

Finally, on 9 February 1894 Whistler sent the Ways a new Luxembourg drawing, made only the day before. He seemed convinced from the outset that Nursemaids: “Les Bonnes du Luxembourg” was a candidate for periodical publication because it was drawn entirely in crayon without any stumping. Furthermore, as Whistler wrote to T. R. Way, he had purposely used the German lithographic crayons recommended by Thomas Way for lithographs intended for printing in large editions (letter 81). Although Whistler was concerned that the lines produced by these crayons on the grained transfer paper might print too pale, he was pleased with the results when the first proofs arrived in Paris a few days later. He wrote back to the Ways asking them to “clean a little about the off leg and foot of the boy” and said that he hoped the figure of a nurse holding a child in the foreground could be made “a little brighter.” He made corrections in white on a proof and enclosed it with his letter (letter 83). Two surviving impressions of the first state bear the small marks that were subsequently removed from around the boy’s legs, but there is no evidence that the printers actually attempted to “brighten” the figure of the nurse.

There was a long delay between Whistler’s execution of the image and its eventual publication in The Art Journal in December 1894. In July Whistler suggested several alternative subjects to Thomson (cat. 76, cat. 82, and cat. 83), but the publisher still preferred Nursemaids.3 In the same month, there seems to have been some hesitation on the part of the owners of The Art Journal, Messrs. Virtue and Son, about using the Way firm to print the edition for the journal. Whistler dismissed the question in an eloquent letter to Thomson, insisting that he would not allow another printer to handle his work.4 When the edition was finally printed, the artist received fifteen guineas rather than the ten pounds he had originally been offered. The lithograph was identified on the cover of the December issue of The Art Journal and in an accompanying article, “Art and Mr. Whistler,” as Les Bébés du Luxembourg.

There was a long delay between Whistler’s execution of the image and its eventual publication in The Art Journal in December 1894. In July Whistler suggested several alternative subjects to Thomson (cat. 76, cat. 82, and cat. 83), but the publisher still preferred Nursemaids.3 In the same month, there seems to have been some hesitation on the part of the owners of The Art Journal, Messrs. Virtue and Son, about using the Way firm to print the edition for the journal. Whistler dismissed the question in an eloquent letter to Thomson, insisting that he would not allow another printer to handle his work.4 When the edition was finally printed, the artist received fifteen guineas rather than the ten pounds he had originally been offered. The lithograph was identified on the cover of the December issue of The Art Journal and in an accompanying article, “Art and Mr. Whistler,” as Les Bébés du Luxembourg."

Provenance:

Both works from a Private New York Collection

Exhibition History:

Publication History:

Nursemaids: Les Bonnes du Luxembourg published in "The Lithographs of James McNeill Whistler," 1998, Edited by Harriet K. Stratis and Martha Tedeschi, published by the Art Institute of Chicago, catalog no. 81.