Provenance

• Unknown.

Exhibitions

• 1882: VI Summer Exhibition, Grosvenor Gallery, London, 1882 (cat. no. 67) as 'Scherzo in Blue – "The Blue Girl" '.
• 1884: 'Notes' - 'Harmonies' - 'Nocturnes', Messrs Dowdeswell, London, 1884 (cat. no. 31).

1882: Grosvenor Gallery. The sitter's uncle, Pickford Robert Waller (1849-1930), remembered that 'when the portrait was halfway through it was put aside, but it was sent to the Grosvenor Gallery for the private view and taken away directly after.' 1 Edith Emma Marzetti (1865-1924) also thought that it was taken away 'the same night or next morning' of the private view. 2 This may have been an exaggeration.

However, press reactions were not very flattering. The Era on 5 May 1882 enquired if Whistler painted 'with a sponge and a scrubbing brush' and the St James's Gazette objected to the title: 'why does not Mr. Whistler paint a gavotte or a barcarolle for a change?' 3 And the Pall Mall Gazette on 6 June described it as 'a sketch of a scarecrow in a blue dress, which is absolutely without form and void.'

Whistler complained to Edmund Hodgson Yates (1831-1894) of The World that when 'Arry – the art critic Henry Quilter (1851-1907) – had visited the Grosvenor Gallery:

'he stood under one of my own "harmonies" - already with difficulty gasping its gentle breath - himself an amazing "arrangement" in strong mustard-and-cress, with birds-eye belcher of Reckitt's blue; and then and there destroyed absolutely, unintentionally, and once for all, my year's work!' 4

In the Illustrated London News, 22 July 1882, a wood engraving by R. Hallward, wrongly entitled 'The Blue Girl', actually shows Harmony in Black and Red [YMSM 236], the other Whistler painting in the show: 'here we have the blind led by the Color blind' commented Whistler. 5

1884: Dowdeswell's. Reviews of the Dowdeswell exhibition varied very considerably. Several were ambivalent: the Builder on 24 May wrote: ' "The Blue Girl" is admirable in its way, both in colour and drawing, except (in regard of colour) the shaded side of the face, which looks as if not clean.' The Globe also criticized Whistler's handling of the face:

'The large portrait called, with unnecessary tautology, "Scherzo in Blue - The Blue Girl," would be more satisfactory if the girl's right eye were more nearly on a level with her left, and if her feet appeared to touch the ground on which she is supposed to stand; but the modulations of colour in the dress are managed with subtle skill, and the general tone of the picture is agreeable.' 6

The Sunday Times critic had mixed feelings, being enthusiastic about the colour mixed with dislike of Whistler's depiction of the figure itself:

'There is poetry really in some of them, as in the "Note in Red," or the "Scherzo in Blue," both of which are striking in colour, although they are marred with great ugliness of form. Mr. Whistler does but little justice to his sitters, or he must be singularly unfortunate in his models. Surely such long-legged children, such elephantine-footed females were never seen before. Their costumes seem to have been purchased, too, at that Rag shop in Chelsea, a picture of which, taken seemingly in the middle of the night, Mr. Whistler obligingly christens a "Nocturne in black and gold.” ' 7

A journalist writing under the name 'Cigarette' disliked most of Whistler's works, including this:

'The one big picture, "The Blue Girl," is to me impossible. "Scherzo, indeed!" said one Philistine critic, glancing at his catalogue, "she never wore anything of the sort!" and other people, associating her with a "girl" of another colour that hung in the Grosvenor some years ago, made even still ruder remarks.' 8

The Kensington News described it as 'only fairly satisfactory.' 9 The Whitehall Review on 29 June 1884 was more enthusiastic: 'a child in a marvellous arrangement of blues will take its place among the most brilliant of Mr. Whistler's colour triumphs.' 10 Whistler's friend, the architect Edward William Godwin (1833-1886), wrote that the show consisted of 'sixty-six small paintings, drawings, pastels – stars of different magnitudes, grouped around a blue moon – a life size, full length portrait called by the artist 'Scherzo in Blue – The Blue Girl.' 11 An equally enthusiastic review appeared in the Liverpool Mercury:

'The piece de résistance of the Whistler exhibition is a full length portrait of a young girl dressed in blue, and is called a scherzo in that colour. This is a dignified canvas, fine in execution, and marked by a more thoughtful insight into the problem of portraiture than has characterised come of his pictures of this class. It might make a pendant for Gainsborough’s "Blue Boy".' 12

But the silliest comment was that of 'Aunt Towzer', writing in a mocking approximation of cockney:

'There was one that I did think was inipropriate – a schertzo in blue – a girl in a blue gownd though why he couldn’t call it a skirt in blue, come o’ them derangements wasn’t good; but lor, when you have to back and back till you can’t nearly not see ‘em, why, it’s orkard, and the number o’ times as I apologised to puffeck strangers – well, my brain was in that distemper, I never felt madder.' 13