Arrangement in White and Black is a portrait of Maud Franklin (1857-1939), fashionably dressed in a costume that can be dated between 1876 and 1878. 1
Arrangement in White and Black, Freer Gallery of Art
It was first exhibited in II Summer Exhibition, Grosvenor Gallery, London, 1878 (cat. no. 55) as 'Arrangement in White and Black'.
Arrangement in White and Black, Freer Gallery of Art
Arrangement in White and Black, Freer Gallery of Art
Arrangement in White and Black, Blackburn, 1878
Maud Franklin, photograph, Library of Congress
Several possible titles have been suggested:
According to Théodore Duret (1838-1927), the title of 'L'Américaine' was given to the picture in Germany, possibly due to a misunderstanding, since it was the artist, and not his sitter, who was American. 7
This might be considered the last of Whistler's 'White Girls' (see Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl y038). 8
'Arrangement in White and Black' is the preferred title.
Arrangement in White and Black, Freer Gallery of Art
A full-length portrait of a woman in vertical format. She stands against a black background. She wears a close-fitting white dress, the train gathered and held at left in her right hand. She has a white bonnet and a black scarf. She stands with hands on hips, arms akimbo, and looks as if she is walking forward on her right leg.
Maud Franklin, photograph, Library of Congress
Whistler's mistress and chief model, Maud Franklin (1857-1939), posed for several major portraits, including Arrangement in Black and Brown: The Fur Jacket y181, and many smaller drawings, paintings and prints.
A discussion of Maud's dress appears in Whistler, Women and Fashion:
'In Arrangement in White and Black, Maud fairly sizzled with youth and vigour. The close-fitting dress was the height of fashion. Contemporary cartoons mocked the fashionable woman’s inability to bend, climb stairs, and so on. “Shall we – a – sit down?” invites a gentleman at a dress party; “I should like to; but my Dressmaker says I mustn’t!” replies the young lady who must have been sewn into her dress. The Graphic for 4 May 1878 described a hat with delicate plumes curling over the brim just like Maud’s, and recommended similar costumes: “white sateen will be much worn, more or less trimmed with coloured ribbons … those whose features are irregular … can disguise their high foreheads with light curls, fringes etc … Bonnets and hats are very graceful … White or black, whether in silk, satin or tulle, form dress-bonnets and hats.” The figure-hugging satin dress was downright sexy and she strode out in a way that signalled sexual liberation. Her confrontational pose, hands on hips, offended the critics: the Magazine of Art considered it “vulgar in action”. The various elements that contributed to the image, including beauty and self-confidence, colour and costume, were analysed by an audience that was highly attuned to nuances of caste and class.' 9
Arrangement in White and Black, Freer Gallery of Art
It was painted on coarse weave canvas. There are few signs of alterations except to the left of the bust and waist, which have been reduced in size, and her right shoulder, which has been lowered. The butterfly, on the left of the figure, is now practically invisible. Though thinly painted, with soft brushstrokes and extensive rubbing down of layers of paint, merging and blurring the outlines of the figure, it is rich and dark in colour. 10
According to Freer Gallery of Art conservation files, in 1921 the canvas was rotten and the painted surface uneven, so it was relined, but not fully restored. It was cleaned in 1922, 1935, and 1951, and was 'surfaced' in 1935 and 1951. Ben Johnson commented that in 1965 it showed signs of 'disturbing retouches' and the varnish was dirty and discoloured, and it was therefore cleaned and the varnish was partially removed.
Arrangement in White and Black, Freer Gallery of Art
It has a single panel of basket-weave pattern, between narrow bands with a running irregular design of indented dashes. The styling of the frame and decoration differs greatly from the incised frames used by Whistler, such as the portrait of Mrs Leyland (her frame has a flat reeded outer edge, whereas this one is much more rounded). Also there are incised lines on the reeds and not just on the frieze, which is not a practice seen on other Whistler frames. 12
It was bought as 'An Arrangement in black and white' from H. O. Meithke by Colnaghi's in December 1896, and sold by them to an important collector, the opthalmologist Dr Linde of Lübeck, on 22 March 1897 for £900, under the title 'Damenbildniss', according to Colnaghi's stock books (a/c no. 580). According to Emil Heilbut (1861-1921), 'Amerikanerin' was still in Dr Linde's collection in 1903. 13 It was sold through art dealers in Paris, according to the Pennells. 14 Indeed, on 9 April 1904 Théodore Duret (1838-1927) wrote to Charles Lang Freer (1856-1919) of Detroit that he could get the portrait for him from some people in Paris. 15 Duret hung it in his apartment in the rue Vignon, Paris, and Freer bought it in June 1904 for 62,500 francs. 16
One newspaper reported in 1878 that Whistler had asked a visitor to his studio whether he should send the 'arrangement in white and black' to the Grosvenor, and this 'art cynic of the Whistler school' advised him to do so! 17
Arrangement in White and Black, Blackburn, 1878
Whistler made a pen drawing of the portrait, Arrangement in White and Black m0691, for reproduction by Blackburn in 1878. 18 The critic of The Times on 2 May 1878 described Whistler's two portraits of Maud Franklin as: 'two of those vaporous full lengths – of young ladies in this case – it pleases him to call "arrangements" ... as if the colour of the dress imported more than the face; and as if young ladies had no right to feel aggrieved at being converted into "arrangements".' 19 The Evening Mail on the following day asserted that 'Mr. Whistler's "arrangements" in blue and green, in black and white, in blue and yellow, flesh-colour and green, once more puzzle the uninitiated.'
The Sheffield Daily Telegraph, on 28 May 1878, contrasted Whistler's work with that of Edward Coley Burne-Jones (1833-1898), whose paintings Laus Veneris (Laing Art Gallery), Chant d'Amour (Metropolitan Museum of Art) and Pan and Psyche (Harvard Art Museums) were in the Grosvenor that year:
'[Mr. Whistler] … out-heroded Herod by his unspeakable "arrangements," "symphonies," "harmonies," and the like … If Mr. Whistler's theories of art be true, if it is right to sketch in the rudest fashion some figure which looks as if it was lost in a London fog, then one fails to see how Mr. Burne Jones' ideas of art can be true.'
It is true, however, that Whistler's portraits of women in contemporary dress were an enormous contrast to Burne-Jones's trio of classical and literary figures.
By the terms of C. L. Freer's bequest to the Freer Gallery of Art, the painting cannot be lent.
COLLECTION:
EXHIBITION:
1: MacDonald 2003 [more], p. 135, fig. 126. See also YMSM 1980 [more] (cat. no. 184).
2: II Summer Exhibition, Grosvenor Gallery, London, 1878 (cat. no. 55).
3: Colnaghi's stock books.
4: Heilbut 1903 [more], repr. p. 19.
5: Duret 1904 [more], pp. 34, 36-37, repr. p. 114.
6: YMSM 1980 [more] (cat. no. 185).
7: Duret 1904, op. cit.
8: Curry 1984 [more], p. 116, plate 19.
9: MacDonald 2003 [more], pp. 135, 137, 146, 220.
10: MacDonald 2003 [more], pp. 135, 137, 146, 220.
11: Dr Sarah L. Parkerson Day, Report on frames, 2017; see also Parkerson 2007 [more].
12: Ibid.
13: Heilbut 1903 [more], repr. p. 19.
14: Pennell 1908 [more], vol. 1, pp. 217-18.
15: Freer Gallery Archives.
16: Freer to R. Birnie Philip, 26 June 1904, GUL Whistler BP III 4/49.
17: Sheffield Independent, Sheffield, 4 May 1878, p. 6.
18: Blackburn 1878 [more], drawing repr. p. 20.
19: 'The Grosvenor Gallery,' The Times, London, 2 May 1878, p. 7.